Looks berkeleying awesome!
Looks berkeleying awesome!
Chubarriffic
Best thing I'll see all day
yeah congrats - BIG DAY!
If this was on craigslist you'd say "the hard part is done" knowing full well the hard work hasn't begun yet
Wow, that stance is the bomb! Looking really sweet, great to see that the narrowed suspension will work as intended. Now that you got the "hard" part done, rest of it will be a piece of cake.
Great milestone!
Killer!
It's so meaty!
Now I absolutely have to finish my car just so I can see your car in person in October. Looks tasty.
Now that is some serious stance!
AngryCorvair said:
- should have narrowed the rear 2" more than we did. Then could rock pinched 315's on current rims. As it is, gonna have to step to C5 18" rears to package additional width inboard.
I have a pair of 18" C5 wagon wheels (no tires) in Novi if you need some for fitment. Have the fronts, too (also bare).
Signed: Guy who's 318ti you test drove for a dude in CO before Patrick bought it then sold it to another GRMer who's making it a track car now.
BAM! Looks great Patrick.
In reply to JMcD :
rears are 18x9.5 ET65, yes?
EDIT: ah yes, the red 318ti. neat little car. i bought a '95 M3 just a couple days later. there's one i should have kept.
About eight years ago, I scrapped the convertible twin to your car. But a 1967, I think. Not much worth saving, body wise, on this one, but it ran and drove when parked in the heated garage in 1991. I think we have most of the interior, but it's not in great shape. Not worth much, and priced accordingly if you need anything. In Ohio, near Dayton.
I used to live in Novi and work in Canton. If I still did, I'd offer to help.
AngryCorvair said:In reply to JMcD :
rears are 18x9.5 ET65, yes?
EDIT: ah yes, the red 318ti. neat little car. i bought a '95 M3 just a couple days later. there's one i should have kept.
They are 18x9.5 +61. They're labeled 61 and measure that when I checked just now. I've read +65 on the internet, but maybe there were changes or replicas are different. AFAIK these are OEM.
Goes without saying, but this thing is awesome. I thought I did a bunch of welding building a CAM-T car...not compared to this!
In reply to JMcD :
I've got a line on a set of the thin-spoke C5 rims at a budget-friendly price, going to check them out tomorrow.
Junkyard pix show +65 cast into the spoke. I'm taking the right rear knuckle and brake assembly with me. Who knew putting a C4 rear wheel on a C5 rear suspension with a C5 front brake might lead to packaging issues?
The bad: it forces me into a pair of 18" tires
The good: they'll be 315s
The bad: they're $414 apiece
The good: they're 315s
The bad: they're not sawblades
The good: 315s, ninja!
I love sawbaldes / salad shooters but if I was searching it would be for magnesium corvette wheels. 110%. like what Ram50Ron has.
I love the C5 mag wheels but C4 ZR1 wheels are a great way to get wide 17s. Like these. Even close you.
the magnesium wheels would be cool, but they seem to sell for about $750+ for a set of four, not so Challenge-friendly.
now i'm going to ramble a bit, feel free to jump in with your thoughts. i'm hoping to do some tire and wheel juggling this weekend. i currently have in-house:
Original plan was for those tires to go on 9.5s, and i'd get a pair of 245/40 A7s to go on 8.5s on the front. Now i'm thinking the 275 A7s may go on the front, since the 18s force me to buy a pair of tires anyway. so i'm going to mount one on an 8.5 (yes, it will be pinched a bit) and one on a 9.5, and check clearance to bodywork. i'm pretty sure i have to trim a little at the lower front of the front wheel openings for the current street tires (245/45 on 8.5). the drag radials will still go on 9.5 sawblades, although i'm not really married to them either. i bought because they were budget-friendly $50 for the pair. their clearance to quarter will be better than the currently-mounted 285/40s, and i think i have a plan to gain brake clearance which might make the 9.5 sawblades package OK, albeit limited to a 275 max. the 18s would gain +9 offset +6 spacer removal, so +15 clearance to quarter. i have about 75 mm clearance inboard, so a 315 squeezed onto a 9.5 ET65 would have the same quarter clearance as the current 285 on 9.5 ET56. plus or minus actual section width variation versus size designations.
[/brain vomit]
In reply to AngryCorvair :
What are your goals? Best possible challenge performance?
I'm not up on my challenge rules in terms of tires, but if you can run sticker A7s, run the widest wheels and tires you can fit. 315 on 9.5 can work in the back and I'd do that over the 17x9.5 with 275, but I'd work to find higher offset 18x10.5's instead.
I'd put the 17x9.5 + 275 A7's on the front (what's your expected F/R weight bias?), balance with springs/bars/ride height.
Agreed the sawblades look cool. They're a good size to run 255/40/17 tires, possibly square or run 245/40/17 on the 17x8.5's up front. That's what I'd do for local autox, track days, tooling around on the street, etc.17" tires are cheap and easy to find used. Could make for a nice rain setup too (maybe another set of staggered sawblades for a decided rain set).
In reply to JMcD :
goal is indeed best possible challenge performance. four tires are allowed at zero budget hit, so yeah four sticker A7s are happening. car will be light enough that 315s are not required but would be baller.
won't need a rain setup.
in theory we balance with springs bars alignment and ride height. in challenge reality we balance with inflation pressure and alignment. expected F/R is about 40/60. front spring is OE C4 base convertible. bar will either be OE C4 base convertible or none at all. probably won't need it, given how much less weight my front is carrying.
You'll need to log in to post.
