Pro-Touring charger guys (autodynamic/Mike etc)

[G-man]

What size wheels you guys run in Diameter?

They seem bigger than 17" wheels and last I seen when you go to 18+ handling performance is sacrificed. 17" are ideal in handling department so I wondered why the wheels you guys use are bigger? (is it tire options or mainly the look or what? Maybe they are not bigger but thats how it seems in the pics so yeah just curious)

guys

George

[69bronzeT5]

According to Mike's Cardomain he runs Front: 265/40/18 Rear: 285/40/18 on Angrier (the Daytona) and 18x10 rear and 17x9 front on Mr. Angry (the '68). I'm going pro-touring with my '69 and I wrote down my ideal wheel/tire sizes but I'm not sure where I put the info....

[mikesbbody]

Cody is right, usually it's either: 17 front 18 rear or 18's all around handling can can down to Tire size among other things.

[dodgey68]

im running 18x8.5 front and 19x10 rear, and kcederwall08 has 18's
255f
295 r

[bill440rt]

I'm very close to dodgey's setup.

19x10's rear with a 5.5" backspace. 295/35 tire
18x8's front with a 4" backspace. 245/40 tire

I looked at many cars both in-person and in photos prior to making a decision on wheel size. I feel on a big car like a Charger, a 19" wheel in the rear fills nicely without being too big. That extra step to a 20" wheel does make a difference appearance-wise. A 19" wheel also gives me a rear tire with some sidewall without looking too rubber-band.

[noff57]

Whenever I get to that point I've thought 20's in the rear and 18's in the front on a 3rd gen.

[suntech]

I am going 275/35-18, on 9,5 wheels up front, and 335/30-18 on 12´s rear.

[elanmars]

anybody got photos of a car with 19s in the back?

don't have time to do a search right now but will later.

going to upgrade my wheels down the road, was thinking of all 17s but then i've seen some Chargers with the 17 front and 18 combo that looked nice too. I'm just curious if 19 is too much or just right.

[super_dave]

Here's a car with 18"-7" and 20"-10's

http://www.bilgalleri.dk/html/gal_visbil.asp?ID=88688&ipc=278409

[Rolling_Thunder]

Have 18 x 8 and 18 x 10 on order...      couldn't run 17" on the front ---  won't clear the brakes   

[Charger74]

Whenever I get to that point I've thought 20's in the rear and 18's in the front on a 3rd gen.

Good luck with that.  Unless your going to tub or mini-tub the rear wells, there is a lot of room without rubbing, especially if you are going to try to run 10 inch wide wheels.  If you can do it, please post some pics.

[WHITE AND RED 69]

I run 18x8 front and 18x10 rear. There are more options to run bigger brakes with the 18s than with the 17s. I am hoping to run 14" wilwoods up front and they need a 18" rim to clear. If I was to redo them I might have gone with 19s in the back but I am pretty happy with how mine look.

[motorcitydak]

Mine will run 18x10 front and rear with 315 30 or 35's (I cannot remember rite now) on all 4 corners. Check the build thread for some pics

[G-man]

Thanks for that.

I asked about the whole 17" all-round with 13" brakes verse 18" all-round with 14" brakes and apparantelly that has been tested on the same car by a proffessional race car driver and the 17" wheels would always have faster circuit times than it did with 18" wheels. It seems that anything below 17" is a compromise in handling and anything above 17" starts being a compromise also. So I wondered why 'nobody' seems to go 17's when for performance they are the ideal.

So the whole reason I gather everyone seems to go larger is

A: the way it looks
B: they like big brakes to stop quick (though it doesnt make car faster around a track, more so for street use/looks I guess?)
C: More tire options.
D: The owners of these Pro-Touring cars are not concerned about a slight advantage in performance of a 17" wheel and would rather go with the look of the vehicle than the slight increase in cornering speed.

Is there anything around 335-345 wide for 17" wheels in tire options? High end quality - even if it is expensive... like something lambos would use etc.

G-

[dodgey68]

I'm very close to dodgey's setup.

19x10's rear with a 5.5" backspace. 295/35 tire
18x8's front with a 4" backspace. 245/40 tire

I looked at many cars both in-person and in photos prior to making a decision on wheel size. I feel on a big car like a Charger, a 19" wheel in the rear fills nicely without being too big. That extra step to a 20" wheel does make a difference appearance-wise. A 19" wheel also gives me a rear tire with some sidewall without looking too rubber-band.




EXACTLY,, what he said:cheers:

[chargerboy69]

On my white 69 I put 17X8 up front with a 4.5" backspace.  The rears are 18X10 with 5.5" backspace.  The tires are Nitto tires.  Sure Michelins are a nice tire, but man those things are pricey.  Of course I don't think twice about dropping $2000.00 on wheels, but tires, lets see what is on sale. . . . .    Seriously though, I have run a couple sets of Nitto tires without complaints.

[elanmars]

Here's a car with 18"-7" and 20"-10's

http://www.bilgalleri.dk/html/gal_visbil.asp?ID=88688&ipc=278409

thats a nice ride, seen it before...theres more pics of it somewhere, unless im confusing it with a similar car-which is also in europe.

[KWS]

My '72 has 19's on the rear.

[69bronzeT5]

Hey Kenny.....on the Duster what size rear tire do you have? I assume you have a bit of a wheel tub? I'm running 255/60/15's on mine and I got some room to spare....

[suntech]

I asked about the whole 17" all-round with 13" brakes verse 18" all-round with 14" brakes and apparantelly that has been tested on the same car by a proffessional race car driver and the 17" wheels would always have faster circuit times than it did with 18" wheels. It seems that anything below 17" is a compromise in handling and anything above 17" starts being a compromise also. So I wondered why 'nobody' seems to go 17's when for performance they are the ideal.

I am not sure that this is right G-man!! On one given car maybe, but not as a rule! The charger is a big car, and it does need more diameter than a mini cooper! Also IMO the tire industry makes what the car industry and market wants, and i think the reason why there are less dimentions available in smaller diameters, is simply due to lack of demand on them. I dont think a new "muscle car" manufactor would put on bigger wheels if they would loose out in handling. Just look at corvetts and vipers!

[dodgey68]

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,70808.0.html

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,66157.0.html

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,63191.0.html

try these

[HPP]

Also IMO the tire industry makes what the car industry and market wants, and i think the reason why there are less dimentions available in smaller diameters, is simply due to lack of demand on them. I dont think a new "muscle car" manufactor would put on bigger wheels if they would loose out in handling. Just look at corvetts and vipers!

This tends to be a chicken or egg situation. Are consumers demanding them or are manufacturers pushing them? Just because either of these entities is pushing it doesn't mean it is the best wheel for the application. However, because car manufacturers are pushing the ever increasing diameter market, that is where the tire manufacturers are putting more and more development and those tires are tending to be the best gripping options available at the lowest price.

  Of course I don't think twice about dropping $2000.00 on wheels, but tires, lets see what is on sale.

Case in point, and even if this comment is tongue in check, many other buy tires this way. Especially after they dump $2000 in wheels.

Seriously though, despite manufacturers choices and consumer dollars, physics can't be overcome by beauty or money. Fact; the more weight you move away from the axis, the greater effect that weight has on accelleration, braking, and turning. Its called Moment Of Inertia and as wheels get bigger, that weight moves further away from center.This is why a 17" wheel is optimal; the material forming the wheel hoop is still light enough to provide a benefit to the MOI while allowing a large enough brake rotor and a light enough tire that is still available in decent compounds that don't cost an arm and leg. Anything bigger than that is adding so much material it begins to impact MOI.

Since most Pro-Touring cars are not built to a specific set of rules, it typically matters very little to the builder if they giving up 10 horsepower because you power steering pump is dragging down the engine on sharp turns because of the gyroscope the large wheels have created. However, if you are a class racer with a set of strictly define rules, you aren't willing to give up anything you don't have to in order to gain an edge. This is why so many dedicated race wheels are still available in 15, 16 and 17 inch diameters and the selection of race rubber in these diameters is extensive. It is only out on the street that these requirements change and logic is overridden by appearence and cost.

A good example of this is what can be found in wide, Z rated tires. A z rated 15" tire is as rare as hen's teeth, and when you do find them, they are $400+ per tire. The same thing in a 16 is $250, a 17 is $200 and an 18 can be found for as low as $150.

I'd also say that with 275/40x17 and 335/35x17 being factory sizes on a large number of vettes and vipers, these sizes won't disappear very soon, but the selection of tires for them may continue to shrink. But these are two commonly available, very wide 17" tires that are out there. These are big enough to push the practical limits on almost any muscle car. But, these tires won't readily turn up in a quick search of tirerack.com or dicouttntire.com. You have to search them out and be willing to pay for them.

[dodgey68]

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,47491.0.html

another with 19rear x18 front

[Mike DC]

I asked about the whole 17" all-round with 13" brakes verse 18" all-round with 14" brakes and apparantelly that has been tested on the same car by a proffessional race car driver and the 17" wheels would always have faster circuit times than it did with 18" wheels. It seems that anything below 17" is a compromise in handling and anything above 17" starts being a compromise also. So I wondered why 'nobody' seems to go 17's when for performance they are the ideal.

The biggest problem with the larger diameter rims is the reciprocating weight being farther & farther out from the center of the wheel.  It's a flywheel problem.  It's not an ultimate speed limiter but it makes it harder to speed up and slow down on a dime. 



This would be more of an issue on a lightweight car than a heavier car.  So the pro testing that favored a 17" wheel (which I have also read about at one time or another) may be a reflection of the type of car being tested as well as the wheels/tires themselves. 

Stretching the example out to the extreme to understand it - would an 18" wheel really be a handling loss compared to a 17" wheel on a military-spec Humvee?  I doubt it. 

[suntech]

Stretching the example out to the extreme to understand it - would an 18" wheel really be a handling loss compared to a 17" wheel on a military-spec Humvee?  I doubt it.

Exactly what i ment with saying that a charger NEEDS more wheels than a mini cooper! A Cooper looks nice with 19´s thoug!hehe

There are many theorys flying in the air here now, and there is no doubt that to set up a car for your need/ desire, it is just a bunch of gives and takes, to get you there. I am quite involved in rallycross, there i am mostly working on engine modifications and suspention setup. The suspention is ajustable EVERYTHING!!! ( 3 way adjustable shocks, adjustable 4 link/wattslink/ pinionangle, rideheight, springrates, adjustable swaybars etc). This has been really interresting and learnfull.

This test that has been done and reffered to can be explained with 2 theories:

1. They ran both wheel diameters with the same tire diameter, and lost a lot of tire height and tire flex, and got a very unforgiving ride, and got slower lap times that way.

2. Ther ran same tire height, and like that had 1 inch more tire diameter, and suddenly their gear ratio did not fit the track anymore.

This is just a guess, since i have no idea of what kind of car this was done with, and what was done to compensate.

I am not a big fan of very big wheels, but i have decided to go 18 on my 68 charger. The flywheel effect i have strong doubts that will play a factor here, as time you spend on braking down is quite long( on a 26" tire 200mph is just 2590 rpm). If it has an effect, it could be in your favor, allowing some reaction time for brake feel, like on ice, and no ABS.( BTW we have played around with flywheel weight to make it fit engine torque/ gear ratio etc, and got some very interresting results)  On thing that is just a fact, is that braking 4000 pounds of iron down from straightaway speed to cornering speed takes power, and power creates heat! bigger diameter brakes needs less clamping power, but has higher brake pad speed, but also increased cooling. Overall i think we can trust the racecar brake manufactors that bigger brakes are better.
The MOI theory, and the powersteering that steals extra horsepower while janking the wheel will not have any effect at all, simply because turning IN to a turn, you are not on the power anyway, and if you need a "rapid correction" coming out of the turn while beeing on the hammer, your front weels will (or should) have the same direction, as this will just be compensating for ass beeing all over the place, and if it is not, you have bigger problems than wheel diameters.

I think it comes down to what is best tire diameter for the car, and what tire side height do you need to get a nice ride. Find your rim diameter from there, and fit biggest possible brakes inside them