Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum
jamesG

Low profile tires and big wheels, Like or dislike?

Recommended Posts

Hate them as well. Again, it depends on the classic car or truck. Mostly they look ridiculous overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a beautiful 67 wildcat today with big wheels and rubber band tires. Sad waste of classic iron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2020 at 12:44 PM, styromaniac said:

Hate them. Absolutely hate them...friggin wagon wheels.  But I'm just an aging old curmudgeon Baby Boomer who loved the look of Bigs and Littles w/ wide whites.

couldn't have said it any better. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I can appreciate a muscle or pony car that has a big brake kit and modified suspension. That pretty much necessitates at least a 17 inch wheel and a 50-series tire. It's pretty hard to fit a 14 inch wheel over a 13 inch brake rotor. In many cases, a 17 fits older cars better than a 16 due to interference with the upper ball joint/control arm. I don't consider something like a 245/50-17 a rubber band, but that is just my opinion. I gravitate more to the nostalgic-looking wheels like Torque-Thrusts of some of the OE style wheels like on this Chevelle than the pro-touring styles that some favor. Again, that's just my opinion.

My daily driver is factory equipped with 215/45-18s and I really like how it rides and handles. I am 60, BTW. I have always liked cars that handle well. I was the only kid in my high school with aftermarket sway bars and Konis on a Mustang. If I still had an older car, it would probably be equipped like the Chevelle in the picture.

otb chevelle A.JPG

Edited by Rodent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it all depends on the vehicle and build style. I do love me some 15" wheels and some meaty tires on a muscle car, or the same size wheels and some 44's on a truck. However, 16-18" wheels do look good on many vehicles including the aformentioned vehicles. I'm not a fan of wheels larger than 20", except on a select few vehicles. The one downside about how tall vehicles are getting today is that larger wheels are needed to help make the vehicle not look like it's on stilts. Even 17" wheels look small on some vehicles nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My above mentioned opinion is definitely jaded from 10 years of having to service 22 plus inch rims and tires on vehicles never designed for them. Wood grain insert chrome spinners on 24s on an escalade still makes my back and shoulders ache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SfanGoch said:

Isn't that precisely the state of affairs today? Your choice of cookie cutter cars in black, dark blue, silver or white with black, gray or tan interiors? Oh, let's not forget the clown car rims. :P :)

That was my exact thought! :D

 

 

 

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Daddyfink said:

Nice to see the "Get Off My Lawn!" crowd is alive and well! 

Maybe they should put those 14" wheels back on this thing...

Or maybe for the "teeny bopper" crowd, these would be more to their liking.

49872d1218913408-why-brothers-sisters-should-not-marry-ugly-donk-65.jpg

 

 

 

But wait!

There's more!

uKx0kD4.jpg

maxresdefault.jpg

01-ugly-wheels-mustang.jpg

 

 

Yeah, I vote 14s! ;)

 

 

 

 

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan on muscle cars, but Pro Touring and road racing is another story. Up to a certain point, they serve a purpose, after that, it's just for looks. Some people have different definitions of big. 

Just put new tires on my truck yesterday. 275/45/20. I like the looks of 22" wheels on the truck better, but it's built for handling, so I stuck with 20's. I have a decent size sidewall since I drive it all over, including 700+ round trips, so it has to be practical and not blow a tire on stupid dips. 

It served it's purpose as a work truck for 10 years, now it's my DD and it's fun. Rear 3 link with coilovers all the way around, front and rear sway bar, upper and lower control arms, built tranny, higher stall converter, 4.11 gear, Posi, intake, headers, tune. etc. Still a long way to go, but I can enjoy it how it is right now. 

If I was going to spend serious money on a set of forged wheels, I would likely go with 18s and more meat. 

20201005_171600.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

 

Yeah, I vote 14s! ;)

 

Steve

 

Yeah, I'm not

 

Ever dream about building your own pro-touring masterpiece with the help of  your dad? Brandon DeFazio's gorge… | Pro touring cars, Mustang cars,  Classic cars trucks

1969 Mustang GT Pro Touring Goolsby Customs SEMA 2015 - YouTube

1969 Ford Mustang Convertible Street Rod Ctuiser Pro Touring Blue USA -02  wallpaper | 2048x1360 | 761637 | WallpaperUP

1964.5-1970 Ford Mustang Archives - Total Cost Involved Engineering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one enjoys the similarity to driving on bare rims, experiencing every teeth chattering bump and pothole on the road, big goofy wheels and low profile tires are just the thing. I've seen plenty of bent rims and blown out lo-pros here. If that happens, what do you see the driver putting on........a steel wheeled donut spare because a bozo rim won't fit in the trunk. :D When it comes to either form or function, form loses every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, bobthehobbyguy said:

The bottom line is that this is the look that the owners of these cars wanted on THEIR cars. If would build a car the look would be what I wanted for my money. I'm the one that needs to be happy with the look.

Thankfully everyone has a different taste .Otherwise everyone would be driving exactly the same car all the same color and type, what a boring world.

  Again, this thread is not intended to discourage anyone from doing what THEY want with THEIR cars. In fact i believe all here encourage it.

We realize everyone has different tastes, we also realize not everyone will like our choices, be it wheels, paint, graphics etc. If someone doesn't like your choices so what. We build to bring our dreams and visions to life not someone else's. We are on this forum to share those ideas, inspire ourselves and others, get new idea, and most importantly have fun. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Daddyfink said:

Yeah, I'm not

That's fine.

Everybody has their own tastes.

If that's your thing, go for it.

It's just my feeling that when Ford produced the Mustang, it was designed to look good, and be driven,.......a lot.

Those examples might look great sitting on a show floor or on a trailer, but if any of them see more than a couple of hundred miles a year, I would be really surprised.

 

As Joe stated in the above post, I have to imagine some of these cars pictured must ride like a lumber truck with virtually no rubber and almost no suspension travel.

Believe me, I know.

I have a 2005 Honda S-2000 with 17" wheels and low profile tires, and the suspension is very tight as you would expect for a sports car.

It looks great, but it rides like my kid's Radio Flyer wagon.

 

It reminds me of my motorcycling days when we would take long road trips which would occasionally include a stop at the Sturgis motorcycle rally.

We would put over 3,000 miles on our bikes in around a week's time and see great swaths of our country on those trips.

The guys with the custom hard tails would unload them from the trailers every morning, wipe them down with a diaper, and ride them up and down main street a few times before returning them to the trailer to be dragged home again.

They looked nice, but that's about all that they were good for.

 

 

 

 

Steve

 

 

Edited by StevenGuthmiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

That's fine.

Everybody has their own tastes.

If that's your thing, go for it.

It's just my feeling that when Ford produced the Mustang, it was designed to look good, and be driven,.......a lot.

Those examples might look great sitting on a show floor or on a trailer, but if any of them see more than a couple of hundred miles a year, I would be really surprised.

Not necessarily, there have been loads of advances in suspension since 1964 and many of the cars that look impossibly low ride much better than they look due to the advances. I've riden in cars with both air and coilovers that are much more comfortable than their appearance would suggest. Its really down to how much you spend on the suspension. The cheap set ups (just for looks) will ride like a radio flyer but a good set up wont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My DD have had factory 19-20’s since ‘05. Well over 100k miles on them total. Ride great, empty car or full. I drive very hard, so tire mileage isn’t representative, but properly set up suspension is important, as are light wheels. 1# of unsprung weight (wheel +tire) = 5# sprung weight. So reason why cars ride poorly is they’re not set up properly. 
Current daily running 35/30 profile, wife’s car has factory 21’s with 30’s. It’s more about how tire fits rim than actual profile. 
lowest factory profile I’ve run was a 335/20yr 21. Rode better than it’s predecessor on 335/30yr 20’s

17-18’s about right for restomod 60’s cars. 
Huge cars updated need proportionate wheels. 19-20 probably. 60’s Lincoln’s look great on 19/20 staggered. Bigger looks like a roller skate 

Lots of opinions, many vituperative. Sad. 
Like Snake says, model on.  Be well and try to be happy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One's experiences in a particular locale doesn't mean the same, or similar, elsewhere. It's a documented fact that vehicles driven on the streets of New York City are subjected to more damage due to the poor condition of the roads compared to anything encountered in Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. In addition to damaged rims and suspensions, the low ride heights account for not a few torn up front and rear fascias caused by said vehicles bottoming out in large potholes or hitting loose boiler plates covering street excavations. The repair shop near me has a lot full of cars exhibiting these types of damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Our opinions are what were asked for by the OP.

 

 

 

Steve

Edited by StevenGuthmiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a formality, like asking somebody "How're you doin?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 50s thru 70s cars nothing bigger than a 15 inch wheel looks good to me.

Wish they would put big and littles in the kits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SfanGoch said:

That's a formality, like asking somebody "How're you doin?"

Doing well.

Thank you Joe! ;)

 

 

 

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

Our opinions are what were asked for by the OP.

 

 

 

Steve

Obviously commenting on the vituperativeness, Steve. Opinions in life seem to be fine unless one differs. 

I’m ok, how’s the rest of y’all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, keyser said:

Obviously commenting on the vituperativeness, Steve. Opinions in life seem to be fine unless one differs.

Everyone has differing opinions on nearly everything in life.

It doesn't mean that discussions have to become petulant.

That's up to the individual.

 

 

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vituperativeness.......indeed. There are so many new alleged and quirky new takes on classic offenses to some people's hypersensitive sensibilities today that it's impossible to keep track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watch a lot of Iron Resurrection on tv and these guys know how to use the right stance for these low profile tires and their builds. Every single one of them are phenomenal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

That's fine.

Everybody has their own tastes.

If that's your thing, go for it.

It's just my feeling that when Ford produced the Mustang, it was designed to look good, and be driven,.......a lot.

Those examples might look great sitting on a show floor or on a trailer, but if any of them see more than a couple of hundred miles a year, I would be really surprised.

 

As Joe stated in the above post, I have to imagine some of these cars pictured must ride like a lumber truck with virtually no rubber and almost no suspension travel.

Believe me, I know.

I have a 2005 Honda S-2000 with 17" wheels and low profile tires, and the suspension is very tight as you would expect for a sports car.

It looks great, but it rides like my kid's Radio Flyer wagon.

 

It reminds me of my motorcycling days when we would take long road trips which would occasionally include a stop at the Sturgis motorcycle rally.

We would put over 3,000 miles on our bikes in around a week's time and see great swaths of our country on those trips.

The guys with the custom hard tails would unload them from the trailers every morning, wipe them down with a diaper, and ride them up and down main street a few times before returning them to the trailer to be dragged home again.

They looked nice, but that's about all that they were good for.

 

 

 

 

Steve

 

 

I don't doubt you know, but, then again, so do I. 

I have owned cars with regular style wheels and tires and High Performance types. And yes, they can ride a bit rougher, but is mostly due to the suspension set up. Stock on Stock is, well, stock. Modified wheels and tires on stock is a bad idea, and even worse on cobbled together suspensions, like the cars you posted. 

Well thought out and engineered suspensions usually handle most driving and can be set up for street or track. The days of cutting or heating coils, air shocks and long shackles are dead, unless that is your thing. 

But to compare what you posted to what I posted is like comparing rocks to feathers, not the same. 

No photo description available. | Mustang, Classic cars, Classic mustang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...