Nice size wheels

malcons66

New Member

Dec 20, 2005

141

0

0

Fort Lauderdale FL

Jan 3, 2006

#1

• Jan 3, 2006

• #1

whats up everybody. just wondering whats a nice size wheel that will fill up the fender nicly with a low profile tire (not tucking the tire). anyway i have stock 66 suspension. i would like to get some bigger/wider wheels...thanks

 

65 fastback

Founding Member

Mar 17, 2002

1,347

0

37

Northern VA

Jan 3, 2006

#2

• Jan 3, 2006

• #2

I think 225/50/16 front and 245/50/16 rear is the ideal set up for '65-'66's.

Tim

 

malcons66

New Member

Dec 20, 2005

141

0

0

Fort Lauderdale FL

Jan 3, 2006

#3

• Jan 3, 2006

• #3

hmm...i was thinkg about going with a 17 inch wheel though. do you have any pictures of this? right now i have 15" cragar ss all around. i want a little more maddern look. i may get a cragar reb to come over and measure the biggers wheel tire combo i can fit nicly. thats what me and my dad did for the gto.
but yeah if you have any pictures please post them

 

65 fastback

Founding Member

Mar 17, 2002

1,347

0

37

Northern VA

Jan 3, 2006

#4

• Jan 3, 2006

• #4

Here's a link to a classic Mustang wheel and tire fitment chart that DodgeStang put together - http://www.dodgestang.com/mustang.htm - It should answer all of your fitment questions.


And here's a link to another classic Mustang wheel chart that includes pictures, that 66MoneyPit put together - http://stanginfo.com/Wheels/WheelOptions_view.php

Tim

 

T

tylerrocks

New Member

Oct 13, 2005

514

0

0

Big Spring, TX

Jan 3, 2006

#5

• Jan 3, 2006

• #5

17's should fit. Actually they will fit better than 16's in the front. On 16's the upper control arm will be pointed strait at the edge of the rim which could cause rim to UCA clearence issues. I believe 255's can be fit out back stock, but I would sitck with 245's. You can get a wider rim on the front with the shelby drop.

In case you didnt know 245/45/17: 245= width in MM (25.4mm =1 inch), 45= sidewall height in % of width (245X.45= sidewall height in MM),17= height of rim.

Tyler

 

iskwezm

10 Year Member

May 24, 2005

4,159

20

79

Rowland Heights,California

Jan 3, 2006

#6

• Jan 3, 2006

• #6

if its not lowered and your not going to lower it,then maybe a 235/45/17 all 4 corners on 17X8's?

 

malcons66

New Member

Dec 20, 2005

141

0

0

Fort Lauderdale FL

Jan 3, 2006

#7

• Jan 3, 2006

• #7

yeah i was thinking 17x8 maybe...because i dont think im going to lower it because the headers already scrape to often as it is. its low enough for me anyway.
thanks for the links by the way. hmm ill check into this.

 

red65

Member

Apr 12, 2003

411

0

17

Ann Arbor, MI

Jan 4, 2006

#8

• Jan 4, 2006

• #8

iskwezm said:

if its not lowered and your not going to lower it,then maybe a 235/45/17 all 4 corners on 17X8's?

Click to expand...

This combo came out just about perfect on my '65, which is lowered. It looks right and cornering and braking are outstanding.

 

G

GNN60GT500

Founding Member

Jun 18, 2002

1,218

26

48

5 car lengths in front of you!

Jan 4, 2006

#9

• Jan 4, 2006

• #9

I am running 225/45/17s on all 4 corners on my 66- have been very happy-

 

red65

Member

Apr 12, 2003

411

0

17

Ann Arbor, MI

Jan 4, 2006

#10

• Jan 4, 2006

• #10

GNN60GT500 - I sent you a PM!

 

geostang351

Member

Mar 30, 2005

946

0

17

Danb., CT

Jan 4, 2006

#11

• Jan 4, 2006

• #11

Don't forget to mention the backspacing to him so that he doen't order rims that he cannot use.

 

70vert

New Member

Dec 31, 2004

722

0

0

Bay Area, CA

Jan 4, 2006

#12

• Jan 4, 2006

• #12

4.75 front for a 17x8 with stock suspension

seems there is some agreement on this, 4.75bs front for a 17x8 with stock suspension is about as far back as you can go.

not sure on the rear . . .

geostang351 said:

Don't forget to mention the backspacing to him so that he doen't order rims that he cannot use.

Click to expand...

 

mdjay

Premium Sponsor

Dec 9, 2003

896

0

16

Las Vegas, NV

Jan 4, 2006

#13

• Jan 4, 2006

• #13

4.75 if you want to run the larger 235 on the front. A 4.5 bs you can run the 225 up front and up to a 245 on the rear.

 

M

MDinDestin

New Member

Jul 16, 2005

58

0

0

Jan 5, 2006

#14

• Jan 5, 2006

• #14

red65 said:

This combo came out just about perfect on my '65, which is lowered. It looks right and cornering and braking are outstanding.

Click to expand...

That size looks outstanding on a 65-66. Is the ride acceptable for a daily driver or is it really hard?

 

red65

Member

Apr 12, 2003

411

0

17

Ann Arbor, MI

Jan 5, 2006

#15

• Jan 5, 2006

• #15

MDinDestin said:

That size looks outstanding on a 65-66. Is the ride acceptable for a daily driver or is it really hard?

Click to expand...

The ride was actually OK, even with 620 lb/in coils on the front, before I swapped the rear leafs. I swapped the stock rears for Maier racing springs (200 lb/in if memory serves), and now it rides like a truck. Handles like a race car, rides like a truck. I love it.

 

mdjay

Premium Sponsor

Dec 9, 2003

896

0

16

Las Vegas, NV

Jan 5, 2006

#16

• Jan 5, 2006

• #16

red65 said:

The ride was actually OK, even with 620 lb/in coils on the front, before I swapped the rear leafs. I swapped the stock rears for Maier racing springs (200 lb/in if memory serves), and now it rides like a truck. Handles like a race car, rides like a truck. I love it.

Click to expand...

I did the same thing because I have about 300#'s of stereo equipment in the trunk. Mine rides pretty nice with the extra weight.

One of the things people don't realize about mr springs is they are linear progressive (ex 200#'s per inch). This is the same on the 160-165's they offer as well. They are agressive in the rate increase. Far more than anything I've seen on the market. What this means is the ride generally nice down the road, but when you get into them, they are very responsive.