When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There are very nice wheels - definitely an appearance upgrade.
A few questions:
1. If these are routinely being bent when shipped, how are they going to hold up on the road when one encounters a small pot-hole? Are they going to bend pretty easy? The roads these days have more hazards that DHL.
2. If these rims are somewhat fragile, is it wise to have a spare 5th rim to avoid downtime.
1. If these are routinely being bent when shipped, how are they going to hold up on the road when one encounters a small pot-hole? Are they going to bend pretty easy? The roads these days have more hazards that DHL.
.
A direct concentrated blow to the edge of an unmounted wheel is always going to cause damage no matter who manufactured the wheel.
Jarring from a pothole to a rotating wheel is likely to be distributed over a wider area, by the tire and further cushioned by what ever pressure you've pumped the tire up to. Not to say that it cant bend, but less likely from a small pot hole
There are very nice wheels - definitely an appearance upgrade.
A few questions:
1. If these are routinely being bent when shipped, how are they going to hold up on the road when one encounters a small pot-hole? Are they going to bend pretty easy? The roads these days have more hazards that DHL.
2. If these rims are somewhat fragile, is it wise to have a spare 5th rim to avoid downtime.
Good point but there is no tire on an unmounted rim.. obviously. And remember these wheels are in being tossed around in shipping containers as they come from Europe. Like I said earlier, this is partially exacerbated on Tramont not using the best packaging.
I do not think these wheels are fragile, the damage on which one member reported was on the actual barrel, so it would most likely come from an impact during shipping.
Originally Posted by listnner
A direct concentrated blow to the edge of an unmounted wheel is always going to cause damage no matter who manufactured the wheel.
Jarring from a pothole to a rotating wheel is likely to be distributed over a wider area, by the tire and further cushioned by what ever pressure you've pumped the tire up to. Not to say that it cant bend, but less likely from a small pot hole
I agree.. very different than having a tire mounted to help disperse the impact from a pothole.
With folk questioning about poor packing/shipping, it got me thinking.
Back in the day was the USA not the biggest market for Porsche ?
Logic dictates that America should then have the biggest demand for all things air cooled .
If so how come there aren't enough cottage industries within the USA servicing the needs of these older cars ?
Personally seen cars that have been shipped across the Atlantic to European specialist outfits for restoration work/conversions, let alone buying a set of wheels from France.
18x8.5 ET 42 235/40. This looks better IMO than a 225/40 on a 8.5” rim.
18x10.5 ET 50 295/30
anyone interested in running this size, I recommend a 225/40 and 285/30. This will give you more space if you want to lower the car a bit. This is also not a set up for those that are more performance oriented. I’m not rubbing (none so far at least) but I plan to step down to a 285/30 as it gives you another 1/4” of height difference and over 1/2” section width but still won’t look stretched on a 10.5. Car was still dirty when I took these picks as I just picked it up from the shop. If the stretch look doesn’t bother you then a 275/35 or 265/35 will yield even more section width to play with although technically it’s a slightly taller tire. Anyways on to the pics. The 3” lip in the rear is totally worth it. It is for me least. I know it’s subjective when it comes to aggressive set ups.
Last edited by Astro_Train; 04-07-2023 at 09:42 PM.
18x8.5 ET 42 235/40. This looks better IMO than a 225/40 on a 8.5” rim.
18x10.5 ET 50 295/30
anyone interested in running this size, I recommend a 225/40 and 285/30. This will give you more space if you want to lower the car a bit. This is also not a set up for those that are more performance oriented. I’m not rubbing (none so far at least) but I plan to step down to a 285/30 as it gives you another 1/4” of height difference and over 1/2” section width but still won’t look stretched on a 10.5. Car was still dirty when I took these picks as I just picked it up from the shop. If the stretch look doesn’t bother you then a 275/35 or 265/35 will yield even more section width to play with although technically it’s a slightly taller tire. Anyways on to the pics. The 3” lip in the rear is totally worth it. It is for me least. I know it’s subjective when it comes to aggressive set ups.
Nice Astro! Thanks for sharing. I agree the 295 rear is a touch wide if you want to be at a lower ride height. I do like the wheel offset in the rear. I would have gone with the 10.5" +50 rear if I had to do it over again.
18x8.5 ET 42 235/40. This looks better IMO than a 225/40 on a 8.5” rim.
18x10.5 ET 50 295/30
anyone interested in running this size, I recommend a 225/40 and 285/30. This will give you more space if you want to lower the car a bit. This is also not a set up for those that are more performance oriented. I’m not rubbing (none so far at least) but I plan to step down to a 285/30 as it gives you another 1/4” of height difference and over 1/2” section width but still won’t look stretched on a 10.5. Car was still dirty when I took these picks as I just picked it up from the shop. If the stretch look doesn’t bother you then a 275/35 or 265/35 will yield even more section width to play with although technically it’s a slightly taller tire. Anyways on to the pics. The 3” lip in the rear is totally worth it. It is for me least. I know it’s subjective when it comes to aggressive set ups.
18x8.5 ET 42 235/40. This looks better IMO than a 225/40 on a 8.5” rim.
18x10.5 ET 50 295/30
anyone interested in running this size, I recommend a 225/40 and 285/30. This will give you more space if you want to lower the car a bit. This is also not a set up for those that are more performance oriented. I’m not rubbing (none so far at least) but I plan to step down to a 285/30 as it gives you another 1/4” of height difference and over 1/2” section width but still won’t look stretched on a 10.5. Car was still dirty when I took these picks as I just picked it up from the shop. If the stretch look doesn’t bother you then a 275/35 or 265/35 will yield even more section width to play with although technically it’s a slightly taller tire. Anyways on to the pics. The 3” lip in the rear is totally worth it. It is for me least. I know it’s subjective when it comes to aggressive set ups.
That's pretty aggressive. Do you experience any rubbing over large compression bumps at speed?
The fenders were not rolled as it would not of accomplished much of a difference at the current ride height. I also did not want to go beyond -1.5 of negative camber. A 265 or 275 would stretch (more and less respectively) so if you wanted a "tucked" look, then rolling would be beneficial. In other words the stretch will matter or should I say help more in that scenario.
Originally Posted by 95_993
That's pretty aggressive. Do you experience any rubbing over large compression bumps at speed?
i am running 18x10 ET58 w/265s in the rear.
I know this shop pretty well and we played around with compressing the suspension to see if rolling would make a difference with the current 295s. It did not and rubbing would occur very slightly but I would have to compress the strut completely. Unfortunately I did not want to buy another set of tires at the moment and the full compression is rare so I opted to leave it be. I am satisfied with the current ride height as well.
Like I mentioned earlier, if anyone decides to go with this size and offset in the rear, I would recommend sticking with a 225/40 up front and a 265/35 as the rear difference side width on average will be 1.25 inches. A 285/30 would also achieve similar results but keep in mind that although it is a shorter tire, it is the section width that makes the most difference here. That is the overall width to include the sidewalls which is what create the rubbing on the fender edges (lips)... that is what gets rolled during fender rolling. When combined together, it yields the most beneficial results and you will get the aggressive look and still retain enough performance. It's a balance of both. And we get the nice 3 inch lip in the rears.
One last thing to keep in mind, tire brand will make a difference. The Toyo R888s are not helping my cause as they run super wide and have thick sidewalls. They are thicker than Michelins for sure, so if anyone runs Michelins they will have more room to play with.
I hope this helps everyone if they are considering this offset and widths. You will definitely be pleased though. The 2 inch front and 3 inch rear combo is the best I found that is after researching other wheel brands like BBS and Rotiform in similar spec sizes for the NB 993. For the money the Tramonts cannot be beat.
Looks great and thanks for sharing.
Based on your offsets, I could get away with just changing my outer barrel to 3".
Whats your suspension set up?
that is a great option for you since you already have the wheels. My car is on Bilstein PSS9s.
One thing to add from what I mentioned above regarding the fronts. A 235/40 to me looks better on a 8.5" rim but a 225 will sit about half of an inch lower overall. This is important if you are trying to have an even rake on the car or slightly front lower rake if you want a more tucked looked across the board. The 225 will allow you to get away with the car sitting lower.
Post some pics if you do swap to different rear barrels!
Retail on lips from Tramont is about 200 euro a piece by the way
I am also probably switching my hardware to gold. I don’t know if this was an option from Tramont but it’s a pretty easy DIY swap. Just a little tedious.
that is a great option for you since you already have the wheels. My car is on Bilstein PSS9s.
One thing to add from what I mentioned above regarding the fronts. A 235/40 to me looks better on a 8.5" rim but a 225 will sit about half of an inch lower overall. This is important if you are trying to have an even rake on the car or slightly front lower rake if you want a more tucked looked across the board. The 225 will allow you to get away with the car sitting lower.
Post some pics if you do swap to different rear barrels!
Originally Posted by acr89
Retail on lips from Tramont is about 200 euro a piece by the way
I am also probably switching my hardware to gold. I don’t know if this was an option from Tramont but it’s a pretty easy DIY swap. Just a little tedious.
I agree the 235 looks nice. I'm a little below ROW height and I can probably go another 1/2" lower without rubbing with the +42 offset in the front.
I think the 3" rear lip would look great with 285/30 Sumitomos since they are not as wide and tall as the Toyos.
As much as I would like the additional poke in the rear, it's not worth it for me to go the extra $500+ to switch outer barrels and do the work to put the wheels together. At least not for now
Regardless, thanks again for sharing. Kudos to testing the limits with the fitment!
04-05-2023, 11:03 AM
