• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Help me get my stance right (lots of pics)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gellpak
  • Start date Start date Apr 28, 2006
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Gellpak

Member
Nov 28, 2003
147
0
16
Raleigh, NC
Apr 28, 2006
#1
  • Apr 28, 2006
  • #1
My plans are for 17x8 Smoothie II's, but I want to make sure I get the right look. I like a slightly higher riding car, more muscular looking. I like the wheel/tires to almost exactly match the vertical lines of the car (where fender flare ends, drop down a bit and wheel should be on the same vertical line, if not a bit further out from the car)

I don't want to end up with wheels that are very much tucked towards the center of the car with a lot of fender overhang, but I realize I'll have to - to an extent - to get good clearance and prevent rubbing. I'm planning 4.5 backspacing.

Here's some pics of what I like (a lot of which are from members here)... any advice? I want 17s to fit my planned 13 inch cobra brakes, but I'd rather tweak the wheel size to get the right look than use 17s just to fit the brakes.

<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance01.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance02.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance03.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance04.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance05.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance06.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance07.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance08.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance09.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance10.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance11.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance12.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance13.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance14.jpg">
 
G

grego37

New Member
May 12, 2004
576
0
0
Fresno CA
Apr 28, 2006
#2
  • Apr 28, 2006
  • #2
Im assuming you have a 65/66 ?

Id go to some car shows, or find a car on this website of a members that your happy with and ask him/her what size wheels/tires/backspace they're running.

If you do have a 65/66, then look at 65/66.
Dont compare to 67/68 or 69/70 Mustangs , They can afford much bigger sizes and different backspacing.

Then if you're not happy with your ride height,
either lower / raise the car to your preference
good luck
 
O

Opentracker

20+ Year Stangneter
Feb 4, 2004
516
0
16
Apr 29, 2006
#3
  • Apr 29, 2006
  • #3




It takes a while to cut the front springs 1/4 coil or less each step to get the front to sit right. The rear takes time with lowering blocks or new/rebuilt leaf springs to get that right. I spend a lot of time getting the cars to sit right, though you can put them together and hit the front or rear stance on the first try.

John
 
G

gsxrken

Member
Sep 12, 2005
206
1
18
Weschester County, NY
Apr 29, 2006
#4
  • Apr 29, 2006
  • #4
Yep, stance is important, and backspacing gets expensive if you want something non-standard.

John, everytime I see those wheels I try to remember why I didn't get them. Future brake plans, I guess. I may just go out and get them anyway next year until I do/if I get the brakes.
 

Gellpak

Member
Nov 28, 2003
147
0
16
Raleigh, NC
May 1, 2006
#5
  • May 1, 2006
  • #5
Does anyone know who the owners of any of the cars below are, or what setup they're running?

<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance11.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance13.jpg">
<img src="http://www.gellpak.com/images/mustangs/stance/goodstance14.jpg">
 

2bav8

Founding Member
Nov 30, 1998
2,511
1
47
Mesa, AZ
May 1, 2006
#6
  • May 1, 2006
  • #6
Opentracker, that's by far the best stance out of all the other cars on this thread!
 
M

MDinDestin

New Member
Jul 16, 2005
58
0
0
May 1, 2006
#7
  • May 1, 2006
  • #7
2bav8 said:
Opentracker, that's by far the best stance out of all the other cars on this thread!
Click to expand...

I agree that where the tire is sitting inside the fenderwell is damn near perfect. Also, the ride height is excellent.

Even so, this set-up would look far better if it had 17s or 18s.
 

dodgestang

Active Member
Dec 15, 2003
1,360
0
37
Cecil County, MD
May 1, 2006
#8
  • May 1, 2006
  • #8



Just as an FYI the vast majority of the 17 inch wheels pictured in this thread so far have 4.75 backspacing. Only using a wheel with 4.5 BS will restrict the tire choice a bit (translation, you can fit a wider tire with the larger backspacing)
 

latamud

Founding Member
Oct 22, 2002
791
2
19
Tampa, FL
May 1, 2006
#9
  • May 1, 2006
  • #9

This photo was taken the day after John painted it. Never looked as good. I cut the stock coils and used the opentracker rear leaf mod to get that stance, no lowering blocks. Those are the ever so popular 17x8 toqur thrust IIs with 4.75 bs and 245/40zr17 tires all around. No rubbing, not even when turning and hit a bump or dip. Fender lips tightly rolled.

This is my other car befor I finished it. Same suspension as above. The rims are a set of Moon Eyes(never seen them before) 17x7s, rear has 3 bs 235/40-17, fronts are 3.75 bs 205/40-17s.
 

Gellpak

Member
Nov 28, 2003
147
0
16
Raleigh, NC
May 1, 2006
#10
  • May 1, 2006
  • #10
dodgestang said:
Just as an FYI the vast majority of the 17 inch wheels pictured in this thread so far have 4.75 backspacing. Only using a wheel with 4.5 BS will restrict the tire choice a bit (translation, you can fit a wider tire with the larger backspacing)
Click to expand...

I like the setup you have, but if only the front wheels would push a small bit farther out to match the rears.

I was going to go with the 4.5bs since - as I understand it - that would push the wheels that extra quarter inch outward. Plus, 4.5bs is much easier to find (and cheaper)... are you saying this won't work out so well? I will be rolling my fenders for this, just to be safe.
 

2bav8

Founding Member
Nov 30, 1998
2,511
1
47
Mesa, AZ
May 2, 2006
#11
  • May 2, 2006
  • #11
Even so, this set-up would look far better if it had 17s or 18s.
Click to expand...
It would also handle worse and be slower at the track
 

dodgestang

Active Member
Dec 15, 2003
1,360
0
37
Cecil County, MD
May 2, 2006
#12
  • May 2, 2006
  • #12
Gellpak said:
I like the setup you have, but if only the front wheels would push a small bit farther out to match the rears.

I was going to go with the 4.5bs since - as I understand it - that would push the wheels that extra quarter inch outward. Plus, 4.5bs is much easier to find (and cheaper)... are you saying this won't work out so well? I will be rolling my fenders for this, just to be safe.
Click to expand...

uhhhh...I have 245 40 17 on the front. I have a road course supension and alignment setup on the car. In pic one the car is at full launch on the drag strip and you are seeing my blistering 1 - 2 inches of lift Pic 2 shows how the car sits during standard driving conditions

If I put a less agreesive alignment on the front the tops would be much closer to the lips of the fender. Here are better 'everyday' shots

 

Gellpak

Member
Nov 28, 2003
147
0
16
Raleigh, NC
May 2, 2006
#13
  • May 2, 2006
  • #13
It looks like I'll be going with the 4.75 bs then if it allows the larger tires... your setup looks about as close to perfect as I could hope to get.

What about 7" width on the front? Is there any benefit to that?
 

dodgestang

Active Member
Dec 15, 2003
1,360
0
37
Cecil County, MD
May 2, 2006
#14
  • May 2, 2006
  • #14
Gellpak said:
What about 7" width on the front? Is there any benefit to that?
Click to expand...

Not IMO when you are looking at 17s
 

Vinyl66

Member
Mar 21, 2004
398
0
16
May 3, 2006
#15
  • May 3, 2006
  • #15
I've also got the Torq Thrust 17 x 8's with 4.75 BS all around. I have 225/45 in front and 245/45 in the rear. They fit perfectly with no rubbing anywhere. Fender lips are not rolled. Stock sagging leafs in the rear and 1" lowering springs in the front. I get lots of compliments on the stance.

 

Attachments

  • rodneys.webp
    47.5 KB · Views: 232

DarkoStoj

Founding Member
Sep 4, 2002
929
13
39
Detroit
May 3, 2006
#16
  • May 3, 2006
  • #16
Dodgestang said:
Click to expand...



I want THIS on my 66

so you have

620lb springs
shelby drop
open tracker roller perches
5 leaf mid eye rear springs?
4.75" bs 17.8 TT2's
245/40/17 front tires

what size on the rear tire?

This is the exact same stance I want, except I don't want to go as aggressive on the front alignment
 

dodgestang

Active Member
Dec 15, 2003
1,360
0
37
Cecil County, MD
May 3, 2006
#17
  • May 3, 2006
  • #17
rear tires are 255 40 17

And the shelby a arm mod
 
M

MDinDestin

New Member
Jul 16, 2005
58
0
0
May 3, 2006
#18
  • May 3, 2006
  • #18
2bav8 said:
It would also handle worse
Click to expand...

I've got an open mind, but it would be hard to convince me that 17" low profile tires makes a lowered and modified stang handle worse.
 
O

Opentracker

20+ Year Stangneter
Feb 4, 2004
516
0
16
May 3, 2006
#19
  • May 3, 2006
  • #19
I think what 2bav8 was getting at is that the 17" wheels are a lot heavier than the 14" or 15" wheels. That weight alone will hurt the cars performance. The wheels I'm using on my '64 Falcon weigh 11lbs each up front and 13lbs each out back. The 17" wheels can weigh 25lbs each or more. A low profile tire will help on any size wheel, even a 14".

John
 

DukeGnarley

Member
Apr 2, 2003
597
2
19
Auburn/Ellensburg, Wa
May 3, 2006
#20
  • May 3, 2006
  • #20
people who actually know can correct me if i'm wrong here... but low profile tires reduce the ammount of power oversteer, which would slow you down on a twisty track.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New to me 98 Cobra
  • bird_dog0347
  • Feb 25, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
26
Views
1K
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Mar 24, 2026
FastDriver
F
Getting my old autocrosser running again
  • flightops
  • Aug 28, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
6
Views
282
The Welcome Wagon Aug 28, 2025
Noobz347
G
1983 GLX Convertible 5.0 5-Speed 4BBL 'Barn Find' - 82,000 original miles - Restoration Motivation Needed
  • Grande Luxe X-Factor
  • Oct 7, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 31, 2024
Mac131
A
Looking for Help to Fix My Dad’s 96 Mustang GT Convertible in Central Florida
  • Auspicious Angmo
  • Oct 28, 2024
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
1
Views
173
The Welcome Wagon Oct 28, 2024
89ripper
SN Mustang Magnum T56 swap
  • revhead347
  • May 24, 2024
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
15
Views
6K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Jun 28, 2026
GearHeadGuy
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?