Wheels/tires for my Bel Air

My 57 Bel Air is nearing completion and we are down to wheel and tire choices. I want to run the old school Torque Thrust, gray spoke type mags. The guy who owns the shop is suggesting 17"x8" with 50 series tires. I think there will be a clearance problem and do not want to deal with spacers, etc.
My choice is 15x7 with 70 or 75 series tires and I know they will clear. He has also suggested going up as far as 20 inch wheels with 30 or 40 series tires. Go ahead and throw your opinions out on this one please. Of course my choice is bolt on and go with no modifications.

Why do you think there's a clearance problem? You can put just about any diameter wheel on the car with no clearance problems, if the tire OD is the same. In fact, larger wheels make it easier to take them off the car in the rear. I don't understand why you think you'd need to make modifications.

Your choice depends on whether you want an "old school" look or a more modern look. I think 17s look great and 15s look like "fat" tires but that's my personal opinion. My Nomad will probably end up with 18s all around because I think they provide a nice balance and a more modern match to the theme of my car.

One problem with 15 inch tires is there are no good ones out there anymore. You could always just step it up a little bit to like a 16 x 7 wheel, with a popular sized 215/65-16 tire, which is the stock diameter at 27 inches.

The selection of 16" tires is worse than 15" IMO.

The tire diameter, width, and wheel offset determines the clearance - along with the front suspension/brake package, and the rear axle width. You can get a tire/wheel setup anywhere from 14" to 20" that will clear, as well as some in the same diameters that won't.

I have my preferences. Why would you let your builder determine the wheels? Decide what you want, then figure out what exact tire size and wheel width/offset clears. You can get assistance with that part here and from your builder.

For reference this is 17s (245/45-17 tires) on the front and 18s (295/35-18 tires) on the rear of my Nomad. The front has a 3" suspension drop and the rear about 2". I personally think that the bigger the wheel is, the lower the car should sit. A stock height car looks stupid with 20" wheels imo.

Attachment 10095

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick_L

The selection of 16" tires is worse than 15" IMO.

The tire diameter, width, and wheel offset determines the clearance - along with the front suspension/brake package, and the rear axle width. You can get a tire/wheel setup anywhere from 14" to 20" that will clear, as well as some in the same diameters that won't.

I have my preferences. Why would you let your builder determine the wheels? Decide what you want, then figure out what exact tire size and wheel width/offset clears. You can get assistance with that part here and from your builder.

---

Going off the tirerack choices for example, a 215/70-15 has 36 choices, and the 215/65-16 has 64 different tires.

What if I don't want a 215? You want selection of width vs. diameter (aspect ratio) and it's just not there for the 16" in the bigger widths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick_L

What if I don't want a 215? You want selection of width vs. diameter (aspect ratio) and it's just not there for the 16" in the bigger widths.

---

Yeah I know. Try and find a 255/60-15, or 275/60-15 which used be a popular size, and now there are only like 3 choices, which are not that exciting. I would love to find some sticky performance tires in those sizes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chevynut

For reference this is 17s (245/45-17 tires) on the front and 18s (295/35-18 tires) on the rear of my Nomad. The front has a 3" suspension drop and the rear about 2". I personally think that the bigger the wheel is, the lower the car should sit. A stock height car looks stupid with 20" wheels imo.

Attachment 10095

---

No offence, but to me those tires look too short for the wheel opening size, no matter how wide they might be.

Cooper and BFG still have all the 15 inch sizes mentioned so far, in my 15 or so cars and tucks I use them all,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hevychevy

My 57 Bel Air is nearing completion and we are down to wheel and tire choices. I want to run the old school Torque Thrust, gray spoke type mags. The guy who owns the shop is suggesting 17"x8" with 50 series tires. I think there will be a clearance problem and do not want to deal with spacers, etc.
My choice is 15x7 with 70 or 75 series tires and I know they will clear. He has also suggested going up as far as 20 inch wheels with 30 or 40 series tires. Go ahead and throw your opinions out on this one please. Of course my choice is bolt on and go with no modifications.

---

I don't think you will have a problem wtih 17x8's if you get the offset right for your car. that's what I have on my '57 Nomad (2.45-45 series tires) and they seem to sit OK and clear both inside and out, but I haven't driven it yet, so turning is the only thing I haven't had opportunity to verify.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 55 Rescue Dog

No offence, but to me those tires look too short for the wheel opening size, no matter how wide they might be.

---

No offense, but I don't care what you think.

Here's another Nomad with 245/45-17 in front and 275/45-17 in the rear.

Attachment 10096

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hevychevy

My 57 Bel Air is nearing completion and we are down to wheel and tire choices. I want to run the old school Torque Thrust, gray spoke type mags. The guy who owns the shop is suggesting 17"x8" with 50 series tires. I think there will be a clearance problem and do not want to deal with spacers, etc.
My choice is 15x7 with 70 or 75 series tires and I know they will clear. He has also suggested going up as far as 20 inch wheels with 30 or 40 series tires. Go ahead and throw your opinions out on this one please. Of course my choice is bolt on and go with no modifications.

---

Go with the style and size wheel that you like best. It's a personal decision. Getting wheels and tires to fit regardless of the size you choose is a matter of getting the backspace / offset correct to fit your car. Larger and wider wheels will not need any other modifications with the correct backspace. You can have clearance problems with a narrow wheel also if the backspace is not right. My son recently put custom wheels and tires on his 59 Mercury and they look great with no modifications to the car everything clears good and he has had no rubbing issues. We did a lot of measuring before he ordered them. In the rear the wheels are 18 x 10 with 285/40/18 tires and the front is 18 x 8 with 245/45/18 tires.
Brian

For some reason I am not able to add the photos.
I will try in another post

Still not able to upload any photos. Will try again later.

I don’t care for it when the tires and wheels are not centered in the fender opening. It makes it look like the springs are broke or went south. Not a look that is appealing on the vintage rides, but it’s your car do what you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gmvette

I don’t care for it when the tires and wheels are not centered in the fender opening. It makes it look like the springs are broke or went south. Not a look that is appealing on the vintage rides, but it’s your car do what you want.

---

Who are you talking to? Nobody said anything about wheels not being centered so where are you getting that?

Thanks for all of the opinions and information. 17x8 torque thrusts with 245/45 narrow whites! Some old school, some new.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chevynut

Who are you talking to? Nobody said anything about wheels not being centered so where are you getting that?

---

Posts #5 and #9 talk about wheels/tires in wheel openings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gmvette

Posts #5 and #9 talk about wheels/tires in wheel openings.

---

In other words, you don't care for lowered cars that almost everyone today has and the resulting improvement in handling. I get it now. I thought you meant wheels not centered fore and aft. Most of us lower our cars on purpose because stock height looks stupid with larger than the old school stock wheels and handling sucks. But it's your car, so do what you like. ;)

And once again the message is Chevynut's way or the highway.

Isn't it time for you to go shoot some defenseless animals?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick_L

And once again the message is Chevynut's way or the highway.

Isn't it time for you to go shoot some defenseless animals?

---

And once again Ricky starts his typical bullshit. GMvette started the crap by saying the wheels should be "centered", whatever the hell that means. How the hell do you "center" a wheel in a non-symetrical wheelwell? It's always okay with you when someone else says it should be this way or that way and you never challenge them. The fact is, most tri5s are lowered these days, and the wheels are not "centered" in the wheelwell. Even you might know why they do that. Even yours, if you still have it, is probably lowered with the wheels not "centered". By the way, is that LS engine out of the crate yet? :D

And you show your total ignorance about hunting too. Fool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Custer55

Still not able to upload any photos. Will try again later.

---

https://www.trifive.com/forums/pictu...342678&thumb=1

https://www.trifive.com/forums/pictu...342678&thumb=1

A couple pictures of my son's 59 Mercury with his new wheels and tires. They still wouldn't load to the site from my computer. I had to copy from a different site.

I sure get a lot of positive comments from people about the look and overall stance of my cars. I always wonder who this everyone Cnut refers and where he gets his BS stats that are never cited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chevynut

In other words, you don't care for lowered cars that almost everyone today has and the resulting improvement in handling. I get it now. I thought you meant wheels not centered fore and aft. Most of us lower our cars on purpose because stock height looks stupid with larger than the old school stock wheels and handling sucks. But it's your car, so do what you like. ;)

---

Lower is ok with a wheel/tire size that fits the vintage car with a look that don’t make it look as if they were shoved in there without the over all vintage design and look of the car violated. That’s IMHO. A trifive is not a C7 corvette and I would not expect it to have those characteristics. Extreme visual reengineering on vintage cars can cause their character to be lost. Again one can do what ever they want to their car no matter what others voice. Sharing likes and dislikes can be done without descent between posters.

And stock height does not look stupid, it is just as relevant as lowered. Neither do stock wheels and tires suck. They were in past years quite appealing in retaining originality or period look. As for handling, some like the vintage ride as it is the “old feel”. A lot can be done to improve it if one desires and still retain a vintage 50’s look. Again IMHO.

I agree it’s your car do as you like.

Well said Gmv. As far as handling, a stock shoebox could comfortably fly right on by a C7 Corvette on a rough road in a cloud of dust, which is what these cars were good at, and looked good doing it.

Agree... well stated by GMvette.

I would guess that 95% or better of us fell in love with these cars way before the current trend of making them LOW. I loved the first ones I ever saw, and they were all at 'stock height'... I PREFER them to retain the original look, but one can do that and use a lower profile radial tire which will lower the car some and greatly improve handling/braking/steering without drastically changing the character of the car.

Strap your 'low rider' to a trailer and haul it to/from a show once or twice, then let us know how much fun it is trying to tie onto something to strap it down when there is barely enough room for your arm to get under there, and NO room to see what you are doing!

Well put guys, no use for in the weeds look.