so I found a set of rims that fit mopars that might be around 300 bucks.
17x8 rims with 0 offset, so 4.5 inch back spacing that is correct for mopars.

I had thought if I found cheap enough rims, I could find cheaper tires in the 17's, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I currently run 255 60r15's.
the equivalent 17 is a 255 50 but it is more than the cooper cobra's I would get in 15's instead.

if I go to a smaller tire, 225 45 r17, I could get away with tires I have never heard of for under 100 bucks a tire.
I would have to step up to 120 bucks a tire to get say Dunlop's, which including the cost of rims, again is more than the cobra's.

is it just a wider selection of tires that makes people jump to the bigger rims?
do I really care, just changing tires every 7 years or so?

I have 17's on this

Don't do it!

What the wheels look like and what they are going on would make a huge difference to me. Some stuff the larger diameter wheels just don't look right, but others are OK. Bigger diameter wheels has almost always included higher priced tires, the two seem to go hand in hand.

Without seeing the wheels and the vehicle, the answer is: NO its probably going to look like crap, and its going to ride rougher.

What are the overall goals for the car?
My Charger does not ride rough. It handles quite well too.

The only way personally that I would put larger wheels on is if I could fill the back side with LARGER BRAKES. To me there's something ugly about little tiny brake discs and brake drums showing behind BIG wheels. One of the things I remember was Audi coming out with a big, fast V8 and the largest wheels and tires that were commonly available were 15". That restricted them from putting bigger brake rotors on because they wouldn't fit inside of a 15" wheel. What the did was flip the caliper to the inside of the disc and make the disc larger. That said to me that larger 16", 17", 18" and 19" wheels were developed to accommodate LARGER BRAKES(discs) and not just for style. Look at feets' MB and the size of the brakes that fill up the entire inside/backside of those big wheel, looks purpose built when you have brakes that match the wheel size. Anything else to me just doesn't look right. One of my cars came with 15" wheels, I put 16" wheels with snow tires on them and it looked okay, not too out of sort but 16" were an OEM option. I decided I would put another new set of summer (not all season) tires on and ordered 17". Got them, put them on the car, the brake discs looked tiny and the car looked PIMP. Off they came didn't even drive 10 feet with them my wife just about threw up and I sent them back and got 16" wheels and tires. Hey just my opinion, everyone has their own taste and your car. Hey get the big wheels and big brakes much safer with good working big brakes. Here's the inverted caliper Audi V8 brake system.

What car and what wheels? To be honest - to me these days 15" wheels look puny on rides in a lot of circumstances. I'm 53 so not into donks but i really appreciate a bit larger with proper tires.

Best point yet,

this rim on this car


just a fair weather cruiser.
it has the 11 inch disc up front and the tms rear disc kit.
currently wearing 15's.

I guess I started looking because there are only 3 choices in 255 60 r15's now. 160 bucks and up. BFG's look good, but handle poorly in the rain.
cooper got bought out now, and firestone doesn't even carry the firehawk themselves. I supposed MT is a 4th option, but I never really liked the lettering on those.

I saw some inexpensive 16 and 17 inch tires and thought if I could get into wheels cheap enough, why not. but as I tried to find those inexpensive tires, (and maybe it is just right now being bad), I couldn't find any, with manufacture's I knew.
so maybe it isn't worth it.

17's on this. 225-55-17 on front and 255-50-17 on the rear. When I changed the front brakes to disc, I had to up-size from the factory 14's just because they would not fit. It was hard to find anything in tire options (anymore) for 15's. So, with limited 16's out there, jumped to 17's.

get rid of those silly looking 14 or 15" rims and tires and go 17-18" will look much better.

17s on my Barracuda

If the goal is less expensive tires, it probably ain't gonna happen.

The lowest price on modern tires is usually going to be some kind of a take-off, like
police car 18s that required a plug and because of that are no longer fit for police use,
half worn takeoff police car tires, and that type of thing. .....used to be widely available on ebay
if you're into that kind of thing. I looked, but wasn't into it....

my thought was more tires produced for that size, should mean cheaper named brand tires vs the 15's that are produced once or twice a year, I only get to pick 2 or 3 of when I need them.

but yeah seeing that might not be the case.

I suppose I could also argue, that if I ever take it cross country and have a blow out, a common 17 inch tire would be easier to replace where ever I am at, vs a specific size 15 you have to special order.

I switched to 17 inch rims 30 years ago on my Coronet. Better tires than 15 and more room for big brakes. A zero offset wheel might work but typically you need 0.5 inch of negative offset on a Mopar so you would need a 5 inch backspacing on a 8 inch wheel.

well that is bad then. lol.
I understood mopars use 4.5 inch backspacing and a 0 offset wheel on an 8 inch rim was exactly that.
it took me forever to find a "stock" wheel that did that with the right bolt pattern and center register size.

guess I have to dig around some more to see if these will work or not.

Can you buy one and try it or do you need to buy the whole set? Can you buy one and return it if it doesn't fit? Nobody makes a good 17 inch rim that is designed for Mopar musclecars. The Mopar rims used specific backspacings and the center is a different diameter than other makes. Also, the Mopar front hub sticks out farther than most aftermarket caps can cover. A zero offset wheel might work but it might also push the tire out into the fender. Just have to mock it up and see. I always use 1/2 inch of negative (inboard) offset when I build a Mopar.

I'm running 17 x 8" wheels on the back with 255-50-17's and could have actually gone wider on the tires without any issues.

I would have to buy the set, and apparently this company is trash to deal with on returns.
I have to measure my current rims for the back spacing on them.
if I go with the "common" size 17's that places push, it would be a smaller tire anyway than the 255 60's I already run.
using
https://tiresize.com/wheel-offset-calculator/

it says it would be in .55 inches further in anyway.
but that is assuming my current rims are 4.5 inch back spacing too.

I had to scrounge some wheels from my buddies to make some trial fits. I think on the rear I ran an 8mm offset. Fronts were zero.

Its not like the old days when you can go to a tire store and they have tons of stuff in stock. I ended up getting everything from Discount Tire Direct. They mounted, balanced and shipped them right to my house for way less than anyone local would do anything. Was a flawless deal.

I am running 17" rims on the back of my 51 Plymouth. P255/50R17 Hankook Z rated tires, I don't need the Z rating but I do want the improvement in traction and handling. I am using a set of new stock steelies for a 2008 and up Charger, Challenger for the rims. Pretty cheap from RockAuto, Dorman 939137. Probably not cheaper than just new 15" Cooper's, but Coopers aren't really performance tires and in my case 255's were never going to fit the stock 15" rims..

Clearances are good, I came up with a way to sort out how to figure max tire size without having to buy tires, mount them and see.

http://www.yourolddad.com/tires

Comparison between stock tire (middle one) and the replacements I went with.

yeah, I read up on the charger wheels, but the bolt pattern isn't quite the same.
115 vs 114.3
I mean I guess it works for a lot of people.
there are other steelies that dorman makes, that are pretty inexpensive too.

Dorman 939137 are 114.3mm, which is 4.499986".

115 is 4.527545"

Interesting topic since I am debating going to the 17" Rallyes from Year One on my 72 RR.

and the factory wheel stamping process was that accurate.

Im a no, not a big rims fan. They look better on trucks then cars because they usually have bigger wheel wells to fill.

17s on both my old Road Runner and on my current Barracuda. I think 17s work well on old Mopars.

Such a divisive issue.
Old school dudes that never take a corner faster than idle speed cling to their tall sidewall BF Goodrich tires.
Guys that like their cars to steer and stop better are willing to step outside of that narrow mindset.

I love bigger wheels on the cars, certainly not donk wheels but 17's to max 20's depending on the car. 14's and 15's look so small on these big cars. I say go for it.

I went to 17's on my Cuda for more than aesthetic reasons. It was getting hard to find places to balance the old lug centric Road wheels. Most places now a days only know how to balance hub centric wheels. So you might want to consider that too. Many of the aftermarket wheels are hub centric, but you need to check the specs before pulling the trigger.

My wheels have 2.868 inch hubs which are a good fit for Mopar 2.688 inch hub. I use some thin, plastic hub rings and everything fits well.

I whole heartedly agree with your take on it but I don't see my old school GTX being any kind of a "sports car" and the fact is, yes tire performance goes up as the sidewall gets smaller/shorter/lower but ride quality also goes down. I have enough cars in the fleet with 19" and 20" tires but they have much better suspension than a 52+year old muscle car. I don't mind the less performance in a car that has leaf springs and torsion bar suspension, I'll keep the extra sidewall cushion with low 30 psi tire pressure and squirm through the corners thank you. One of the highest performing, no make that the HIGHEST performance cars in the world have been running on 13" wheels for the last four decades up until this year, no problem with steering or braking with really tall sidewalls.

I switched to 17 inch rims on my Coronet back in 1992 and have never regretted it.

hadn't thought about that.
is the ride that much harsher, no other changes? going from 15's to 17's ?

I only have experience with Feet's hot rod as the other car. but his had so many changes, I couldn't attribute his harsh ride to just tires.

It all depends on the look you are hoping to achieve.

i like pizza cutters in the front, and steamrollers in the rear.
not a good combo for handling, but the look i have always liked.
just my opinion. your mileage will vary.

The ride is similar to what you would have in a modern car. Firm, but not harsh. I use a 55 series tire so it isn't super low profile. The key is to use good shocks. I highly recommend the Koni adjustable shocks. A set of Koni shocks will last forever on a muscle car and they'll give you a performance sedan type of ride.

Big wheels on old cars is like taking a young prime John Wayne and Clint Eastwood- and giving them manbuns, tight TIGHT Richard Rawlings blue jeans and a flannel shirt.

I agree...false! Got a couple buddies that did some 18s on a Superbee and 17s on a 65 Coronet. Tastefully done it works fantastic! If you do rubber bands for tires on 22s....not so much!

Most 15" street tires you can actually find now are the farthest thing from sticky. I like 15s fine, but I can do much harder braking with these 17s before I lock the wheels. I do have the later "cop" 11.75" rotors up front now, but the tires were a bigger help. The biggest braking improvement on a few of my cars has been more traction. Of course they do handle better. The ride is no worse, in my opinion, compared to the 15s--I have stock suspension.

That looks good. You got the right size wheel and tire combo on there.

I have never felt that the cars I've owned with low profile tires rode too harsh.

I’m considering a set of second wheels due to the discovery of my factory road wheels being bent. I had to get new tires to even drive the car home since those were ancient. I had them mounted and all four are bent significantly. I love the old redlines, so thinking I’d run them locally and have a bigger set for long drives.

On the hub issue, seems the year one 17s should have the specs we need. Not sure I like those rims for some reason. Holley has a set of 15s or 16s that are road wheel look that I considering.

Tire rack has some 16s from American racing that I like, but want a black center instead of gray. Will probably call them and see if they can get them since AR lists those. Using tirerack would save some hassles with the mount and balance. They list several rims as being for plus 1-2 for our cars.

Or purchase a modern car with suspension and tires designed to compliment one another.

Like a Kia?

One pic below is the equivalent of a Muscle Mopar with 15" wheels . The other is a Muscle Mopar with oversize wheels.

In reality, mopar muscle on 15's

i HATE BIG [insert your favorite description here. i would say mine, but i don't want a vacation. ] WHEELS !!!

Looks good, what size tires are you running? I'm thinking about those wheels for my car.

This kind of undercuts the entire hot rodding philosophy, don't you think?

I look at it as three different styles or tastes. 1. Stock, naturally you know what that is. 2. Appropriately Day-2, with 14" or 15" period style wheels, Torque Thrust, Slots, Keystone, Chrome steel, Crager SS, etc., 3, Resto-Mod look, with low profile tires 55, 45, 40 series sidewall, and 17" or larger rims. I'm a Day-2 Old School DUDE because I bought my first Mopar in 1969 and not within the last 15 or 20 years, I ordered my '69 Road Runner in late March of '69 and got wheel covers knowing I was going to order "mag" wheels as soon as I burned off the redline bias rear tires, which didn't take long with 3.91 Suregrip, street races and trips to the track PID and Keystone Raceway. I grew old and set in my ways and never really liked most of the Resto-Mod looks (yes maybe a few) but it really got old when every "bitchin" type TV show's first order of customizing was to add big freaking low sidewall tires and wheels. EVERYONE OF THEM. I'll take a Day-2 look over anything for a '60's early '70's muscle car or even a non-performance car or truck of that era any day.....2. I'm not going with low profile tires on my Day-2 GTX just wouldn't look right to me, seems there are a few other OLD DUDES here that feel the same. Oh and BTW I hate that OLD SoCal word DUDE it's SoDated SoDude please don't call me DUDE

(I think this is really a GREEN MOPAR thread in disguise.....I like GREEN MOPARS too )

Last one then Ill stop. Any vintage Mopar when one adds bigger wheels.

Meh

I like the white Challenger 2bad360s posted: wheel wells filled, got some sidewall, in-period wheel design.
17" wheels on the old cars doesn't bug me, but getting enough sidewall without going to SUV tires seems an issue.
Been agonizing over a wheel choice for my '69 RR for months, but I'll probably just go with 15" Magnums.
Initially I wanted something rarely seen; but no luck unless I want to spend over 2 grand for some custom race wheels that'd be period-correct.
Finding proper trim rings & even certain wheels has been basically impossible lately, too.

If the goal is handling, get a modern muscle car...if you just wanna cruise and have fun, get a rod or early muscle car.

No.
If the goal is to improve on the handling ability of a classic, shorter sidewall tires in a diameter similar to stock is one way to go. I could run a 295-40-15 if someone made that size but it would be a very short tire with large gaps between the tires and the body.
No thanks.

Before we go any further I have to give you props for your wheels for putting left and right side wheels on the proper side That's one thing I don't like about a lot of wheels both OEM and aftermarket. Hate it when it's a wheel that is correct on the driver's side and backwards on the passenger's side. Worse yet is when one of each ends up on both sides Okay back to it

Thank you. It also means that each wheel is unique to each corner since width and backspacing are different front to rear. If I ever bend a rim, I might have to buy a different set if I can't get a single.

The analogy that I'm tempted to us is "Lipstick on a pig".

Not as worthless as lipstick on a pig. Mopar muscle can be improved substantially with radial tires, lightweight rims, high quality shocks (Koni), bigger torsion bars, anti-sway bars and various chassis stiffening measures. It takes work and money but it isn't impossible.

John knows this. He also knows the OP's goal wasn't to turn vintage iron into something that competes with new iron. He's trolling again. No different than the behavior we saw in the unmoderated section.

[quote=A12]I look at it as three different styles or tastes. 1. Stock, naturally you know what that is. 2. Appropriately Day-2, with 14" or 15" period style wheels, Torque Thrust, Slots, Keystone, Chrome steel, Crager SS, etc., 3, Resto-Mod look, with low profile tires 55, 45, 40 series sidewall, and 17" or larger rims. I'm a Day-2 Old School DUDE because I bought my first Mopar in 1969 and not within the last 15 or 20 years, I ordered my '69 Road Runner in late March of '69 and got wheel covers knowing I was going to order "mag" wheels as soon as I burned off the redline bias rear tires, which didn't take long with 3.91 Suregrip, street races and trips to the track PID and Keystone Raceway. I grew old and set in my ways and never really liked most of the Resto-Mod looks (yes maybe a few) but it really got old when every "bitchin" type TV show's first order of customizing was to add big freaking low sidewall tires and wheels. EVERYONE OF THEM. I'll take a Day-2 look over anything for a '60's early '70's muscle car or even a non-performance car or truck of that era any day.....2. I'm not going with low profile tires on my Day-2 GTX just wouldn't look right to me, seems there are a few other OLD DUDES here that feel the same. Oh and BTW I hate that OLD SoCal word DUDE it's SoDated SoDude please don't call me DUDE

(I think this is really a GREEN MOPAR thread in disguise.....I like GREEN MOPARS too )



Dude! that is a nice GTX

THANKS, (4-speed, console too, and Bro it has a bitchin factory 8-Track player . Funny too it's a California "E" built and sold car, Norwalk, CA, and numbers yada, yada, yada, can't do resto-mod for sure )

One of my favorite Valiants with 17 inch rims and a 427 inch small block. 160 mph on the front straight at PIR (and on the I205 freeway in the Portland area late one night)

Take that, fossils!

Resto-Mod. Look at the size of those front brakes, never fit those inside of a stock or 15" wheel. Trans doesn't look stock either or is it? What about the suspension components, not stock either I'm betting. Apples to mangos, sorry back to you again. What's that engine compartment cross brace for? Isn't that dinosaur tech? Heck I did that back in the early '70's to my econo box sport sedan.

The red brick!

Should be: The red "Flying" brick! Looks GREAT and yes I always liked it too. There was a '68 or '69 Dart that was done for autocross/road race wasn't there??

Was that one of Mopar Action's project cars?

Yes I think that was it? Might have been another one also but I think you're right

It wasn't an official MA project car but Eberg had a green Valiant that was a project car. The red Valiant was owned by my buddy Tim who lives in the Portland area. I helped with with a bunch of the work on the car and I wrote a few mag articles on the car. He sold the car about 10 years ago and it has bounced around to a few different owners on the west coast.

Your mini-mind is showing AGAIN. My point was, when you're done "improving" you still have a torsion bar, live axle pig. On subject, some of us like the appearance of the taller sidewalls, same continuing argument like RWL showing versus no. No winners, just personal opinion.

Then next time lead with details like that instead of making an overly broad statement and declaring it as fact. You're still wrong though as the OP wasn't even remotely asking about taking the chassis to it's limits.

Make a broad general statement, double down after being called out and act smug all the way down. Your SOP in the unmoderated section.

Well I watched Tim blow the doors off lots of Vipers and Corvettes at Portland International with his Valiant. His Valiant had been heavily modified but it still was a torsion bar suspension up front and a 8.75 out back. Transmission was all aluminum but it was still an 833 four speed. Cast iron 340 resto block with Edelbrock heads and a 650 carb. If we were building that car today it would be EFI and have a 5 or 6 speed transmission but 20 years ago those parts didn't really exist.

Facts don't matter to SOME people. They only want to argue because to them, it gives them purpose.

I understand. My posts are always aimed at providing information for people who want to learn. I figure there are at least one hundred people who read a post, learn something and never say anything for every guy who argues and bickers about every last detail. I ignore the one guy who continually argues and talk to the hundreds who appreciate the information.

Thank you. With responses like you get from THAT guy, it reminds me of this.......

In fact, the OP never stated that "handling" was his goal, more like availability and price was his concern; it was the wannabe Stirling Moss types that interjected improved handling into the discussion followed by the predictable personal insults to anybody that disagrees with the herd.

Two questions:

1. Have you ridden in or driven The Red Brick Valiant? If not, you have no basis for calling it a "torsion bar, live axle pig". I can tell you from personal experience that the car is no "pig", it is THE most exciting car I have ever owned.

2. If Mopars are (as you put it) "torsion bar, live axle pigs", why are you on a Mopar-specific forum?

Don't expect a rational response from that guy. He should have been a lawyer for how much he loves to argue.

I don't mind this. I'm not fond of that style of wheel and I think there could be a larger combo to fill the rear wheel opening a little more but all in all, I like it.

1. Apples to oranges comparison...a car purpose built vs. changing wheels (the thread topic) to improve handling. BTW, my misunderstood reference to "pig" merely means, no matter how you doll it up, it's still a pig. How many scratch-built cars employ torsion bars, leaf springs and live axles?

2. For the same reason I'm on orphan car forums, I love 'em but recognize their limitations....IOW, what I like doesn't have to be beyond reproach.

North Dakota.

It doesn't have to be that way. You knowingly alienate people by your abrasive responses. It is as if you get some sense of pleasure from purposely keeping people from liking you.
Those that have read your posts know that you are strong on convictions. That is not a bad thing.
Having friends does not mean that you have to give up your opinions. A real friend respects your right to have an opposing opinion.

those of you running 17's what tire size are you running?

looks like the coopers went up 30 bucks a tire and I can get good years in 17's for 110 bucks plus 60 bucks a rim and it is almost a wash.

P255/50R17's

Depends on the car I'd use 235/55-17 tires on a B or E body car. That should be roughly the same as the biggest tire that the factory put on a B or C body car. For an A body car you might need to go a bit shorter.

Thank you Dr. Freud. If by "abrasive responses" you mean not being like you, “Vive la différence.”





You seem to make a big issue of being liked and having friends...probably because you're so insecure.

You're calling ME Dr Freud ???

Why go with 17's and only be a donk poser? If your going to mess up the looks of a very attractive old Mopar with dorky donky 17" wheels, why not be a REAL donk?

In the case of THOSE cars, I agree...they look terrible.
A large wheel with the right design can look great. I'm quite happy with how my car looks.

it's DORK joel, DORK ! a REAL DORK !
and with forklift tires !.......