Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

anyone with 17's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    anyone with 17's

    Any first gen guys have 17" rims? What size tire are you running? Pics would be apriciated. I'm looking at getting 16's or 17's for street use, I would like the 17's but refuse to run under a 45 series tire. I'd also like them to be rather wide so I was wondering if anyone has ran an 8" wide wheel on a BG chassis? You would probbly have to run a pretty low offset to make it work but I'm just wondering if anyone has tried.

    Thanks in advance for any help.
    1992 Mazda Protege LX w/Primer spots
    Plus new
    1991 Mazda Protege LX w/138,000mi


    #2
    16" with a 45 series tire is very close to the oem tire diameter so it won't offset your speedometer that much. My tires are an inch wider than the oem 14"s and I have no scrapage issues at all.

    1994 Protege BP-Turbo.....1994 Miata Supercharged.....2003 Protege5 stock DD.....1988 323 GT Turbo
    On the road soon: 2003 Protege5 V6 swap
    My vB Gallery - Full Information and Photos of My Mazdas

    Comment


      #3
      Alright here are some tire sizes that I'm looking at.

      16"
      215/55-16=25.3in
      225/50-16=24.9in
      245/45-16=24.7in(7.5in min width)

      17"
      215/45-17=24.6
      235/40-17=24.4(8.0in min width)
      255/55-17=28.0(just for fun)

      please note that stock 185/60-14's are 22.7in

      The number next to each are their diameterand that all these tires can fit on a 7.0in wide rim unless it says otherwise(for min rim fitment I used Kumho 711's)


      Here is my delema, I want the big wheel look of 17" for the street BUT I don't want under a 4.0 inch sidewall AND I want them to be wide 235/245 is prefered.

      To fit a 245/45-17 I would only need a 7.5in wheel but my outside diameter whould be far to large at 25.7in(note I'm not concerned about the speedometer but the car will be slightly lowered) So to lower outside diameter I would run a say 235/40-17(sorry for the width change 711's don't come in a 245/40-17) but then the minimum width for the wheel expands to 8.0in also the sidwall drops to 3.7in which is still ok but on the small side.

      All this leads me to beleve that I will have to compramise on a 16" rim to keep the sidewall and the width. 245/45/ or 245/40-16 looks like the best size depending on how wide of a rim I can run.

      Sorry for the long post just had to work out some ideas. Any feedback will be appreciated.
      1992 Mazda Protege LX w/Primer spots
      Plus new
      1991 Mazda Protege LX w/138,000mi

      Comment


        #4
        17x7's 3" drop, no width issues. had to roll fenders though

        Here's a couple pics
        Attached Files

        Comment


          #5
          When you say you had to roll the fenders, what exactly do you mean? Got any pics? Thanks. Looks nice
          Tricks get applause... Style gets respect.

          Comment


            #6
            here are some pictures I took when I did mine...
            the tire shop used to use a wooden baseball bat and some guys standing in the back to get the car to drop ever so slightly so they could 'roll' the bat down the fender but this tool is much easier on the eyes to watch and makes a better bend.

            -Dean
            Attached Files
            Last edited by DeanSweetP5; 07-21-2005, 06:30 AM.
            'I did nothing... I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be!?'
            -Dean
            2003.5 Vivid Yellow Protege5

            Mods:
            18" G-Racing Kirins - hyper black
            Eibach Pro-Line lowering springs
            MazdaSpeed Axelback Exhaust
            Injen CAI - Polished
            Tinted windows. Llumar 35front 2&hatch glass/25middle roll down glass/18backside4
            DaveB trim rings
            Painted Calipers - G2

            Stereo:
            Alpine CVA-1005 - 6.5" LCD Reciever.
            Alpine DVA-5210 - DVD/WMA/CD/MP3 Player
            Alpine ERA-G320 - EQ/Surround processor.
            Kicker IX-405D 5 Channel Amp
            Kicker 12" L5's in bandpass enclosure (2 of them)
            Kicker K-57.2 Components up front
            Kicker K-65 in back.


            Future Mods?

            Turbo?

            Comment


              #7
              Thanks dean sweet. the arrow you marked is identifying what? Where might i find a device similar to that? You gave me an example of a pro5 jumping from a 15 to 18 correct? if so it's the same then for a first gen going from a 14 to 17. Where would the "rolling" take place on a first gen? I assume only where you have contact. errrrr. Thanks again!
              Tricks get applause... Style gets respect.

              Comment


                #8
                Sorry, the arrows are showing where I was rubbing. Only pictures I had here on my laptop from rolling fenders. It has been fixed since I swapped out springs.
                Ask your local tire seller i.e. TireDiscounters? or local aftermarket wheel shop. The tool is like $500 if you wanted to buy one. I borrowed that one from the Wheel Source here in Dayton, Ohio
                It only takes a couple minutes once the wheel is off.
                Stock wheels on the pr5 are 16", so that is a 2" jump. If you aren't lowering your car or have a totally wrong offset you should have to worry about rolling your fenders. the +45 offset I have on the wheels are a bit tight. The wheels worked w/no problem until I lowered my car last Fall. And also, remember, for every inch bigger rim you get it is recommended you bump the air pressure from stock 2 psi.
                'I did nothing... I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be!?'
                -Dean
                2003.5 Vivid Yellow Protege5

                Mods:
                18" G-Racing Kirins - hyper black
                Eibach Pro-Line lowering springs
                MazdaSpeed Axelback Exhaust
                Injen CAI - Polished
                Tinted windows. Llumar 35front 2&hatch glass/25middle roll down glass/18backside4
                DaveB trim rings
                Painted Calipers - G2

                Stereo:
                Alpine CVA-1005 - 6.5" LCD Reciever.
                Alpine DVA-5210 - DVD/WMA/CD/MP3 Player
                Alpine ERA-G320 - EQ/Surround processor.
                Kicker IX-405D 5 Channel Amp
                Kicker 12" L5's in bandpass enclosure (2 of them)
                Kicker K-57.2 Components up front
                Kicker K-65 in back.


                Future Mods?

                Turbo?

                Comment


                  #9
                  17's on a 1st gen is pretty dumb. Why?!? For looks? It is one of the big mistakes I made on my Protege LX when I owned it....but i didn't know any better.

                  Putting 17's means you are destroying your fuel economy, acceleration and braking by installing those heavy-ass wheels on your car. even lightweight 17's will still weigh significantly more b/c of the weight of a 17" tire.

                  Get some lightweight 15x7's and decent tires. Same benefits of a wider wheel with the added benefit of better accel, handling & braking b/c of less rotational mass.
                  93' Noble Green MX-ZE (sold )
                  02' Graphite Grey WRX Stage 4, 286whp
                  05' Pontiac Vibe daily driver, lowered/tinted/rims

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Gro Harlem
                    17's on a 1st gen is pretty dumb. Why?!? For looks? It is one of the big mistakes I made on my Protege LX when I owned it....but i didn't know any better.

                    Putting 17's means you are destroying your fuel economy, acceleration and braking by installing those heavy-ass wheels on your car. even lightweight 17's will still weigh significantly more b/c of the weight of a 17" tire.

                    Get some lightweight 15x7's and decent tires. Same benefits of a wider wheel with the added benefit of better accel, handling & braking b/c of less rotational mass.
                    Couldn't say it any better myself. I had 17"s on my 323 and my LX when I had them and even though they were lightweight (15lbs), they were just too much. If I ever get rims for the 323 again they'll be light 15x7 or 14x6. You'll regret the 17s if you're performance oriented.
                    Dan
                    dreesemonkey

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I posted this before I made my other thread, The only reason I wanted to run 17" wheels was that I dont think the multi-spoke type wheel I like is going to look good in a 15"(it might look good in 16"). Now I'm going with 15's, kosei K1 racing, Konig Network, or Team Dynamics Pro Race One's w/205/50-15 Dunlop SP sport 9000's I found at the junkyard with damn near full tread for $9 a piece .
                      1992 Mazda Protege LX w/Primer spots
                      Plus new
                      1991 Mazda Protege LX w/138,000mi

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Now I'm going with 15's, kosei K1 racing, Konig Network, or Team Dynamics Pro Race One's w/205/50-15 Dunlop SP sport 9000's I found at the junkyard with damn near full tread for $9 a piece
                        I would definately say that is a better way to go than the 17's Gro is right.

                        17's on a 1st gen is pretty dumb. Why?!? For looks? It is one of the big mistakes I made on my Protege LX when I owned it....but i didn't know any better.

                        Putting 17's means you are destroying your fuel economy, acceleration and braking by installing those heavy-ass wheels on your car. even lightweight 17's will still weigh significantly more b/c of the weight of a 17" tire.
                        I didn't realize the huge detrimental effect the 17's would have on my car. As an example, I get 320-380mi per tank with the 14's 91oct, I get 260-300mi per tank with the 17's. I usually always run the stock 14's but I need new tires on them right now. I didn't even consider the weight vs. power problem, I put 17's on my camaro, and 18's on my truck and couldn't feel an ounce of difference. I'm looking to get a set of those 15X7 Kosei's as well, good grip, and still enough of a comfy ride w/o the massive added weight.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Ya i didn't mean to insult anyone or anything, but I finally came to my senses after years of thinkin 17 or 18's were "bling lookin y0!"

                          On a car that makes no torque like our little four bangers, putting heavy wheels on the car will REALLY **** its performance up.

                          On your camaro or truck it still will have an effect on performance but they are already making ****loads of torque to get the wheels up to speed anyways.

                          Wheels = rotational mass & unsprung mass. Getting lighter wheels is like getting a lightweight flywheel, quicker acceleration, but even braking is improved. Light wheels are easier to stop, and since the car is attached to it, braking is improved substantially.

                          Same for handling...the tires are the only contact to the road...during turns & ****, the lighter wheels are easier to throw around the track, less effort, less weight transfer (although not much a diff), but still SOME benefits result, but probably not noticeable in the handling dept.

                          I currently have 16x7" rota subzeros on my MX3 (well currently on the protege, but not meant for that car). They are 14.8 lbs each. Tires in 205/50 size are about 20 lbs each so I'm still around the 34-35 lb area which isn't that great.

                          I weighed my stock 15x6 "honeycomb" MX-3 rims and they weighed a hefty 37.5 lbs with tires. My Protege's stock 13" steel wheels with tires weighed only 28 lbs.

                          If you pick a 10-13 lb 15x7" wheel (there are quite a few for decent prices), you are looking at under 30 lb combo since tires typically weigh 17-21 lbs in 15" sizes.

                          I still laugh when I see idiots driving escalades with 20's or 24's or 26's with STOCK BRAKES. If Motor Trend or a similar mag were to do a test on what just adding those ghetto **** rims do to the car you'd be surprised. This is just a guess, but from what I've researched in the past, the stock braking of one of those SUV's would probably go from 70-0 in 165 feet to something like 250+ feet just b/c of those wheels. I wouldn't really be able to tell the diff in accel but it'd be affected quite significantly too.
                          93' Noble Green MX-ZE (sold )
                          02' Graphite Grey WRX Stage 4, 286whp
                          05' Pontiac Vibe daily driver, lowered/tinted/rims

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Gro Harlem
                            Ya i didn't mean to insult anyone or anything, but I finally came to my senses after years of thinkin 17 or 18's were "bling lookin y0!"

                            On a car that makes no torque like our little four bangers, putting heavy wheels on the car will REALLY **** its performance up.

                            On your camaro or truck it still will have an effect on performance but they are already making ****loads of torque to get the wheels up to speed anyways.

                            Wheels = rotational mass & unsprung mass. Getting lighter wheels is like getting a lightweight flywheel, quicker acceleration, but even braking is improved. Light wheels are easier to stop, and since the car is attached to it, braking is improved substantially.

                            Same for handling...the tires are the only contact to the road...during turns & ****, the lighter wheels are easier to throw around the track, less effort, less weight transfer (although not much a diff), but still SOME benefits result, but probably not noticeable in the handling dept.

                            I currently have 16x7" rota subzeros on my MX3 (well currently on the protege, but not meant for that car). They are 14.8 lbs each. Tires in 205/50 size are about 20 lbs each so I'm still around the 34-35 lb area which isn't that great.

                            I weighed my stock 15x6 "honeycomb" MX-3 rims and they weighed a hefty 37.5 lbs with tires. My Protege's stock 13" steel wheels with tires weighed only 28 lbs.

                            If you pick a 10-13 lb 15x7" wheel (there are quite a few for decent prices), you are looking at under 30 lb combo since tires typically weigh 17-21 lbs in 15" sizes.

                            I still laugh when I see idiots driving escalades with 20's or 24's or 26's with STOCK BRAKES. If Motor Trend or a similar mag were to do a test on what just adding those ghetto **** rims do to the car you'd be surprised. This is just a guess, but from what I've researched in the past, the stock braking of one of those SUV's would probably go from 70-0 in 165 feet to something like 250+ feet just b/c of those wheels. I wouldn't really be able to tell the diff in accel but it'd be affected quite significantly too.
                            roughly how much did those rotas run u? i was thinking of doing the same set up, or some similar for my protege
                            94 Protege DX... A work in progress.
                            Spring Tech Springs
                            Cross Drilled and Slotted Rotors
                            Cone Filter
                            17" Rotas
                            More to Come......

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Gro Harlem
                              Putting 17's means you are destroying your fuel economy, acceleration and braking by installing those heavy-ass wheels on your car. even lightweight 17's will still weigh significantly more b/c of the weight of a 17" tire.
                              I think your over exaggerating the weight of the 17" tires.

                              Take Kumho 712's as an example

                              205/50-vr15=20lbs
                              205/40-wr17=21lbs

                              I think it's any drastic change in outside diameter that makes gas milage so bad because I put on some EGT fan blades w/ 195/60-15's and noticed lower MPG during city driving(highway is much better) because the outside diameter is 1.5in larger(24.2 vs 22.7)

                              take the konig helium's Funkdaddysmack mentioned on his 323 and protege.

                              205/50-15=20
                              15x6.5 Helium=10.9
                              TOTAL=30.9lb

                              205/40-17=21
                              17x7 Helium=15.2
                              TOTAL=36.2lb

                              A 5.3lb difference per corner. but since I'm going with a 7" wide wheel here is what i'd get.

                              Pro Race One 15x7=13.2=33.2
                              Konig Network 15x7=13.4=33.4
                              Kosei K1 Racing 15x7=13.5=33.5

                              The lightest of which makes only a 3lb difference. But it goes to show that you can run a 17" setup that is "lightweight".

                              Just for fun heres my imaginary 17" setup

                              ASA AR1 17x7=20.7
                              Kuhmo 711(205/40-17)=19
                              TOTAL=39.7lb

                              Not bad for bling bling
                              1992 Mazda Protege LX w/Primer spots
                              Plus new
                              1991 Mazda Protege LX w/138,000mi

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X