Hey guys, as the topic states does anyone run 245/50/16 out back? I have 8" fuchs, and i understand that 245/45's would be a better option but i have an oppertunity to get the 50's for pennies right now, so i'm wondering if anyones running them with no clearance issues?
Thanks!
-Joe

 

I think you COULD run them but the side wall would be larger. That will knock off your speedo as well as effect your suspension/handling.

 

I just picked up a pair of new 245/45/16 BF Goodrich Comp TAs for $115 including shipping
to NY, that's $115 for the pair brand new and no sales tax.

 

Forget that, you can get the new Hankook Ventus RS-2 Z212, which is the tire in my avatar in that size for less than $100 a tire and they are superior to the Comp TA's....

 

My 951 had 245/50 R16 on the rear when I first got it back in '97. Ran fine, but I prefer the stock 245/45 size as balances the front better.

 

The 88 S' I just picked up had 245/45 - 16 Comp t/a's on the rear and I thought they looked too small. They were shorter than the 225/50 s on the front. I switched to my 996 wheels with 255/45?-17s which I like the look of much better.

 

I have a set of the hankooks and they are nice and very grippy tires.

 

I had Hankook K104s on my WRX, didn't thrill me. Better than the Bridgestone RE91s it came with
though. I like the deep rain groves on the Comp TAs, my rear tires are so bad in the rain I
won't even drive the car. Have mounted them yet so we'll have to see. Some Corvette guys
swear buy them, maybe I'll be swearing at them

 

im talking about the new hankook tire the ventus rs2, they are like a equivelant to the azenis but cheaper and better rain grooves

 

I'm running 245/50/16s without any problems. My club sports are 9" IIRC.

 

They are better than the Falkens, they even beat the Kumho Ecsta MX in Tirerack roadtests

 

I had a set of Kumho Ecta MXs, cheap but not great.

 

I run that size because it's cheaper than the 45 sidewall.