Finally threw the new shoes on
#18
11-08-2007 | 05:02 PM
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
From: Tejas
Originally Posted by Thinkdiesel
You mind telling me how high the bumper is from the ground after lowering with 350z H-techs? @stock it measures 6.5"...cus I'm having a little driveway issue, so havent taken the plunge.
Nice wheels, very clean.
Nice wheels, very clean.
#19
11-08-2007 | 05:05 PM
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
From: Tejas
#20
11-08-2007 | 05:11 PM
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX
#22
11-08-2007 | 07:59 PM
Literally only like a .67 drop. Not sure what your driveway issue is but this is the smallest drop that I could find yet still satisfying in looks
I have same springs and mine have fully settled. I don't have very many issues unless I come across something pretty steep. As long as the roads are decent where you live you wont have any problems.
, a lil bumpy in socal.
Last edited by Thinkdiesel; 11-11-2007 at 12:35 AM.
#28
05-07-2008 | 09:48 AM
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: Northern VA, DC Area
Originally Posted by g35redline
Personal preference then. Im not sure why you would want a smaller sidewall height in front. I like fronts and rears to be symetrical. Same size / height
With his current setup the height difference between front (3.51" sidewall) and rear (3.36" sidewall) is only .15 of an inch. I am pretty sure you would not notice that small of a difference.
Showing the math... Geek stuff follows:
20x9 Front 255/35/20
20x10 Rear 285/30/20
255mm convert to inches (255 / 25.4) = 10.039"
10.039" multiplied to the ratio 35% (10.039 * .35) = 3.51" sidewall
285mm convert to inches (285 / 25.4) = 11.220"
11.220" multiplied to the ratio 30% (11.220 * .30) = 3.36" sidewall
#29
05-07-2008 | 12:42 PM
Originally Posted by 1dannyboy
With his current setup the height difference between front (3.51" sidewall) and rear (3.36" sidewall) is only .15 of an inch. I am pretty sure you would not notice that small of a difference.
Showing the math... Geek stuff follows:
20x9 Front 255/35/20
20x10 Rear 285/30/20
255mm convert to inches (255 / 25.4) = 10.039"
10.039" multiplied to the ratio 35% (10.039 * .35) = 3.51" sidewall
285mm convert to inches (285 / 25.4) = 11.220"
11.220" multiplied to the ratio 30% (11.220 * .30) = 3.36" sidewall
Showing the math... Geek stuff follows:
20x9 Front 255/35/20
20x10 Rear 285/30/20
255mm convert to inches (255 / 25.4) = 10.039"
10.039" multiplied to the ratio 35% (10.039 * .35) = 3.51" sidewall
285mm convert to inches (285 / 25.4) = 11.220"
11.220" multiplied to the ratio 30% (11.220 * .30) = 3.36" sidewall
#30
05-07-2008 | 04:39 PM
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: Northern VA, DC Area
Originally Posted by redlude97
This means that the total diameter is 0.3" taller than the rear, and 1" taller than the stock 225/40/19 size which effectively raised the front of the car 1/2". Not what I would want to achieve by installing those tire sizes on a coupe
Well that is what you get when you go with a 20 inch rim... you are automatically going to gain a half inch (the radius increase of the RIM) Because the difference between the front sidewall of the tire from the stock was only a .03" difference... so the total was .53" higher from the ground... I believe earlier he said he lowered it .67"
... so his total gain in height was ... I mean reduction in height from stock was .14"
Then again that is why you lower it...
I think his ride looks really nice on those rims...