Re: Wheel Backspacing & Offset (1973 Satellite)
[Re: 2ndopp]
#1066719
09/01/11 02:45 PM
09/01/11 02:45 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,168 Vancouver, WA
MoparMarq
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,168
Vancouver, WA
|
It's only an opinion, but 18s for the front and 20s for the back won't look good. I have 17x8s on the front of my '72 RR, and 18s on the back, and even THAT is bit of a stretch, as far as looks and proportionality, on the car.
On mine, BS on the front is 4.25, but 4.00 or perhaps even 3.75 would look better. BS on the back (they're 18x9.5s, BTW) is 5.5 and fits perfect between spring and fender lip. 5.00 BS would fit also, still with plenty of clearance on the fender, but the fenders on yours, of course might have slightly different lips than the 71-72 bodies.
Also, I think the 73-74 rear end is slightly different than 71-72, but I don't remember if it's the total width or the spring perch width. I believe the tech archives has that info, though.
|
|
|
Re: Wheel Backspacing & Offset (1973 Satellite)
[Re: 2ndopp]
#1066721
09/02/11 12:31 AM
09/02/11 12:31 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,168 Vancouver, WA
MoparMarq
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,168
Vancouver, WA
|
I guess I said it poorly. I didn't mean that different sizes wouldn't look good. In fact, I think on our cars, slightly different sizes improves the look, due to the huge size of the rear wheel wells. It's just that 18 front and 20 rear is too much. 17 front, 18 rear, or 16 front, 17 rear would be better. And different widths, front to rear is better also.
I had 245/50-15s with 15x8s at all four corners of my car for the longest time, and it just seemed that the fronts fit the wheel wells nicely, but the backs just didn't fill out the wheel wells enough.
Good luck in your quest.
Here's a pic of the rear with the 245/50-15s and AR 200S 15x8s...
|
|
|
|
|