Backspace on a 610 ?

[datsfun]

Hi,does anyone know the wheel backspace on a 610? Jus trying to establish if a 9J wheel will fit ( Zero offset). Not worried if with that combo the tyre fouls the wheel arch/fender as that can be massaged/rolled. However not sure about clearance near the shock absorber/inner wing ?

[ggzilla]

The stock wheel backspace is about 3 inches. But that doesn't tell us the maximum backspace that will fit. If you have the car, just go ahead and measure it.

[bonvo]

its also like a 510 the bigger diamiter the wider wheels you can clear

[INDY510]

.

I had 16x9 +15's with tires so streched the metal lip of the rim hit 510 rear trailing arms,,,, so I cut a 8-10mm notch in the rear trailing arms

 

..... . if the 610 is the same as a 510, they should fit with 225/40 tires .. 225/45 maybe not .. never run >8" wide fronts

[bonvo]

indy the 610 can fit more wheel the a 510

[datsfun]

.

I had 16x9 +15's with tires so streched the metal lip of the rim hit 510 rear trailing arms,,,, so I cut a 8-10mm notch in the rear trailing arms

 

..... . if the 610 is the same as a 510, they should fit with 225/40 tires .. 225/45 maybe not .. never run >8" wide fronts

 

using the above as a benchmark (albeit on a 510), if a 9J +15 can be made to fit, then 9J zero offset should be ok (without having to trim the trailing arms) as there is 15mm less of backspace. Coupled with the fact the tyres will be 195/50, then at least on paper this looks like it may fit...

[ggzilla]

Except the the tire will stock out of the fenders. Offset is just how the wheel is centered over the hub mounting flange. You can fit stretched tires, but who want skinny tires?

[datsfun]

You can fit stretched tires, but who want skinny tires?

 

I do...

 

 

 

 

;;along with heaps of other folk. For a gutless L18 powered 610, loss of traction isnt an issue; by fitting wide tyres contact area and footprint is increased and its an overkill in a 100bhp car ( all IMHO)

[ggzilla]

... yes, unless you are going around a corner. A 2200 pound car needs all the footprint it can get -- if you drive the way we do here in the Pacific Northwest. Lots of winding roads and little traffic. Braking capability also increases (it is surprising how well the stock brakes work with more contact area).

[datzenmike]

My sedan with stock 185 piss-all 13s will pull down and even lockup, well.. easy enough. My goon has 215/60R14s and are impressively different.

[datsfun]

... yes, unless you are going around a corner. A 2200 pound car needs all the footprint it can get -- if you drive the way we do here in the Pacific Northwest. Lots of winding roads and little traffic. Braking capability also increases (it is surprising how well the stock brakes work with more contact area).

 

Well, given that I am in mainland europe, land is premium and we have plenty of beny bits and fewer of the highways and varying altitudes levels so hills, bends,camber challenging corners are plenty and generally the speed limit is higher than many parts of USA . So when you say that skiny stretch tyres are not gonna cut it, I beg to differ from my experiences. I run stretched 185's on a 8J wheel and car has excess of 240bhp/ton and its often driven as if it has been stolen...guess what no dramas when it comes to traction or handling or tyres flying of the wheels !

My sedan with stock 185 piss-all 13s will pull down and even lockup, well.. easy enough. My goon has 215/60R14s and are impressively different.

Many modern rwd like a miata come with 185's as standard - they will not give you lock up or other issues forcing you to upgrade to say 215 rubber. Tyre compound and choice is critical and much more of an influence compared to footprint area ( we are talking about relatively modest power levels and not 300bhp cars )

[datzenmike]

I think the 185s are just tires commonly found. The 215 are softer compound. It may not be the best comparison as the stock sedan sits much higher than the lowered goon which has stiffer coils on front and leafs on the back. Otherwise both are 710s with the goon weighing maybe a 100kg more?

[bonvo]

fuck you phone (double post)

[bonvo]

it may not be a problem but the point is this when it comes to contact patch more is ALWAYS better that being said you should be able to do it im running 14x8 (i think zero offset) in the rear and i have no clearance issues with a 195 i have a slight stretch but not bad if i didnt have the factory camber i would be screwed though

[ggzilla]

Yes, small tires can work well. But usually a larger contact surface is even better. There are condition when larger is worse, such as water puddles.

 

when you say that skiny stretch tyres are not gonna cut it

I never said that. I said "A 2200 pound car needs all the footprint it can get ... Braking capability also increases". Of course the word 'need' is subject to interpretation. What i meant is it helps performance generally speaking. I run 165 tires on my Datsun but it is only 750 kg. I had stretched 175s on it, but changed to non-stretched 165s and it handles and corners better -- probably because it lowered the center of gravity.

 

HP/kw level of the engine has little to do with cornering capability. Although government regulations often tie the KW level to the tyre specification, it's not about cornering potential but about limiting liability at high speeds made possible by high KW.

[shfty]

im not too sure if the 610 back spacing is the same as the 710 but i have 13X8.5 with 3" backspacing and the tires are 175 70 r 13 car is also about 6 inches lower than stock

 

 

i had to roll the inner lip since the car is so low but it was minimal. I hope this helps :thumbup:

[bonvo]

unless that 710 has irs its not comparable