Straight Scoop on Disc Brakes

[chevynut]

Want the "straight scoop"? Here's a car with the old-school Chevelle disc brakes on stock spindles.

http://www.trifive.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170216

Notice how far out the tires are relative to the fender opening. If it was lowered much at all, or if the suspension compressed on a tight turn, I'm pretty darn sure the tire would rub the fender. I've dealt with these tire questions for years on Trifive and lots of guys say they have rubbing problems if the tires are much over 67.5" outside to outside. That's why I developed the tire calculator that lots of guys use. And I still think this looks bad even with only 205 tires in front and worse if they're bigger. Notice markm has never provided frontal pics of his car? And he says my pics are "wrong"? lol.



Rocky, why don't you tell us how much room you need between the tire and fender when pointed straight, since you seem to know so much about it? That pic you posted is the other extreme, with the tires too far inboard and way too small, imo.

[rockytopper R.I.P 5-13-2017]

I say that looks perfect to me nut I really don't under stand your beef with it.

[55 Rescue Dog]

I say that looks perfect to me nut I really don't under stand your beef with it.

I agree, regardless of tire/wheel size, this is the perfect height and stance for a 55. Looks totally natural, as they should. Not too high, not too low, but functional.

[chevynut]

The tires stick way too far out toward the fender. I think it looks like shit, and that's my opinion....yours may differ. They look further out than the rear tires. The real issue is that if you dropped that car or if the suspension compressed significantly in a turn, the tire would rub the fender. I don't know why that's so hard for you guys to understand. It might not rub with normal easy driving.

As far as stance, most guys like their cars lowered....I've made it clear in this thread and others that IF THE CAR IS LOWERED the tires are more likely to rub and the Chevelle rotors/calipers are a bad choice for disc brakes for that reason, unless you offset the wheels to compensate. That car has stock spindles on it and I think it would look better dropped. I think most guys wanting a more modern car stance would agree. Obviously those who are stuck on the 60's look think it's cool up near stock height. They sell a lot of 2" dropped spindles and 1" dropped springs...that should tell you something. I just think it's irresponsible to suggest someone use the Chevelle setup as if there's no problems with it when there are much better choices.

And Rocky, since you think you know so much about wheel fitment and calculators, what's the outside tire width on that Nomad you posted? What leads you to believe my recommendation would lead to what that guy has on his car? I'm betting it's under what I recommend and the front tire choice is bad imo.

I put the wheel and tire spreadsheet together years ago to help myself and others with their tire fitment. There were hundreds of guys asking about it and the spreadsheet has been used successfully by probably thousands of guys. That's one of my contributions to the hobby...what have YOU contributed? Hell, you even had to restrict your steering travel to keep your tires from rubbing.

Here' my Nomad with the tires about as far out as I recommend....they're a little over 67.5" wide and they'd be close to the limit with a stock suspension on a car dropped that much. If they were out much further they would rub the fender. I checked the clearances at full suspension travel at full lock. I don't EVER want the tire to touch the fender, so I set it up so it can't. Of course, some guys just start hacking sheetmetal when it interferes.

20120325_0015.JPG

[55 Rescue Dog]

The tires stick way too far out toward the fender. I think it looks like shit, and that's my opinion....yours may differ. They look further out than the rear tires. The real issue is that if you dropped that car or if the suspension compressed significantly in a turn, the tire would rub the fender. I don't know why that's so hard for you guys to understand. It might not rub with normal easy driving.

As far as stance, most guys like their cars lowered....I've made it clear in this thread and others that IF THE CAR IS LOWERED the tires are more likely to rub and the Chevelle rotors/calipers are a bad choice for disc brakes for that reason, unless you offset the wheels to compensate. That car has stock spindles on it and I think it would look better dropped. I think most guys wanting a more modern car stance would agree. Obviously those who are stuck on the 60's look think it's cool up near stock height. They sell a lot of 2" dropped spindles and 1" dropped springs...that should tell you something. I just think it's irresponsible to suggest someone use the Chevelle setup as if there's no problems with it when there are much better choices.

And Rocky, since you think you know so much about wheel fitment and calculators, what's the outside tire width on that Nomad you posted? What leads you to believe my recommendation would lead to what that guy has on his car? I'm betting it's under what I recommend and the front tire choice is bad imo.

I put the wheel and tire spreadsheet together years ago to help myself and others with their tire fitment. There were hundreds of guys asking about it and the spreadsheet has been used successfully by probably thousands of guys. That's one of my contributions to the hobby...what have YOU contributed? Hell, you even had to restrict your steering travel to keep your tires from rubbing.

Here' my Nomad with the tires about as far out as I recommend....they're a little over 67.5" wide and they'd be close to the limit with a stock suspension on a car dropped that much. If they were out much further they would rub the fender. I checked the clearances at full suspension travel at full lock. I don't EVER want the tire to touch the fender, so I set it up so it can't. Of course, some guys just start hacking sheetmetal when it interferes.

20120325_0015.JPG

Well, that even looks like shit set inboard, and too low.

[chevynut]

RD, it's obvious you don't have a clue about tire fitment or much of anything else and your opinion is worth nothing to me. You don't even know how much suspension drop your C4 setup has ...mine is 3", similar to what a lot of guys do with dropped spindles and cut springs. The rear is dropped 2", just like a lot of guys do with springs or blocks. A C4 setup set at near stock height like yours defeats much of the purpose of the conversion.

My tires are set just inboard of where they would rub. I did a lot of fitting and measuring to get things right. You have two choices with a car with a stance like mine if you don't like the tires inboard so much. One, you can raise the car and use less wheel offset, but the tires could still rub if the suspension compresses a lot. Two, you can hack the fenderwells out. Looking at your POS "Camaro" I can see you'd prefer the latter.

And yes, I think my 295/35-18 rear tires are too far inboard. That's from using a C5 ZO6 wheel on a narrowed (to stock tri5 width) rearend. I plan to address that with new custom wheels in the future and maybe go larger since I can fit a 345 tire.

Here's another example of a car that probably has Chevelle rotors on it. What do you think would happen if you tried to drop it, and/or turned sharply into a steep driveway or over some obstacle?





Here's a couple with the correct tire fitment, and are pretty close to what I have. You don't have squat, so who are you to talk anyhow? LOL! I can't wait to see what you come up with.....if anything. Maybe your little bogus torch will work for cutting the wheelwells out so the tires "fit" like they do on your so-called "Camaro" hack job.

[chevynut]

Here's some more info for you to chew on, RD....

Stock Tri5 track width = 58.0"......outside stock tires 66.46".

Stock Tri5 with zero offset wheels and 225 tires track width = 59.125"....outside tires 67.97"

C4 with 50mm offset wheels and 245 tires track width = 58.06"...... outside tires 67.66".

Some guys have problems with a dropped car with stock suspension, zero offset wheels, and 225 tires. Most go with a slight positive offset, especially with disc brakes. The point is, mine isn't unlike a stock tri5 or what most guys do to their cars. But it's clear you don't know anything about that.

[55 Rescue Dog]

I guess I'll be making good use of that torch, because I will try and make the car fit the tires I want to run, NOT make the tires fit the car. I don't think you will even find a 245/345 wide tire combination in any wheel diameter, which would be more pro-street, than pro-touring. For one a 245/45-17 is the same as what is on the much lighter C5 front which is way too short, and small for a tri5. I don't see how it would be possible to get a fast, neutral handling car running a "mid-engine" tire stagger. It's not a Ferrari. It will plow like a John Deere tractor in the corners. These cars need a big sticky front tire in order too get higher cornering speeds, and the rears need to match. The C4 is much smaller,lighter, and it ran matching 255 wide tire front and rear. I mounted the tires on my boss's 05 Ferrari Superamerica which ran a 255/35-19 front, and 305/30-19 rears. Although I would like to go bigger, I'm going to try and make 255/45-18's fit front and rear, which shouldn't be too much hacking with the torch.
1955-chevrolet-side-view.jpg1955-chevrolet-drivers-side-view.jpg

[WagonWonder]

My, my. You two are a hoot. Opinions..................................oh, right I remember, something about everyone has one. You two fight like an old divorced couple.

[55 Rescue Dog]

My, my. You two are a hoot. Opinions..................................oh, right I remember, something about everyone has one. You two fight like an old divorced couple.

Actually it's not a fight. It's the definition of the word "discussion" which is what forums are about, which makes them interesting, and thought provoking learning experiences, without name calling of course, or in this case, not just taking everything CN says as gospel, but looking at alternative ideas that might be better.