RacerX1166

Update on this thread in the interest of fairness:

Tramont shipped the wheels I ordered. They appeared to be incorrect because my measurements were taken from the original 18" wheels on my car. What I didn't know was that at some point during its life, the original wheels were swapped for Boxster wheels. These were identical except instead of being 8's and 10's (width), they were 7.5's and 9's.

So again, no issue with Tramont, just the rubbing issue from having a very aggressive offset.


Looking for a bit of input from the board. As I mentioned on the 'Coolest Wheels' thread, I received 11" wide back wheels from Tramont, instead of the 10" they confirmed and swear they made.

To make thing right, they said:

If we have made a mistake we will send you the pieces to obtain 10".

I responded that I shouldn't incur any additional cost in time or money to fix their error. I ordered complete 10" wide wheels and that's what I should receive; not parts. That they should ship a new set of wheels to me and arrange for pickup of the wrong set.

Having spent a decade working for a French company, I have a very low expectation of them agreeing. But I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised.

So, here's the question for the board: If Tramont refuses to properly make good on their mistake, how difficult is it to rebuild a set of wheels? My gut tells me not so easy, otherwise Jim Dorociak would be out of a job.

AdaptecSpeedware

As a person who deals in selling wheel parts and rebuilding wheels, it's a very simple process.

Bill Verburg

How did you measure the wheel to be 11"? Overall? or bead?


When a wheel is spec'd the bead width is used.
When ET is calculated overall width is used.

It is typical for a modern 10" wheel to measure 11" overall. The exception is BBS and older Fuchs

RacerX1166

How about to a person who doesn't do those things?

I measured at the rim (tire was already mounted) and it was >11". Plus, it's clear by looking at how the same tires fit on the stock wheels and the Tramonts. Compare exact same tires on the two wheels and how they fit relative to the rim. Those wheels are not the same width.

RacerX1166

Boy, am I embarrassed.

I would have thought for the life of me that the factory back wheels were 10" wide. They're listed as 10's in the sources I checked before ordering. However, I just looked and they're 9" wide. I feel like a complete moron on a number of levels. But that's what's great about the internet; I can be a complete moron in relative anonymity.

So, the actual question is what to do with the current situation. The new wheels are in fact 10" wide and the tires rub when I hit any decent size bumps or even corner aggressively.

I see three options:
- Spend the $1500 for a new set of rears with a less aggressive offset, then sell the ones that are on the car
- Increase the ride height
- Order components to change the offset and rebuild

Personally, I'm leaning toward the first option. I don't know how much further I'll need to increase the ride height, so it's a trial and error thing. Plus, I don't really want the car any higher. And I don't feel comfortable rebuilding wheels.

Time to go kick myself around the block. Now I have a headache...

nile13

Wait a second. You seem to be extremely confused.

How did you measure the factory wheels to be 9" wide (I can give you 10:1 odd on a bet that they are not)? What two raised numbers do you see around the valve stem of the facory rear wheels?

What offset is on Tramont wheels and what size tires are you running?

What your picture of Tramont shows doesn't mean that they are 11". And your measurements sound like they are not 11" either. So, take a deep breath, start with answering teh questions above and I'm sure all of us here have enough brainpower and experience to figure things out.

P-daddy

I would try a little more negative camber to tuck the top in.

AOW162435

Andreas

suban

Increasing negative camber would probably be the best route. I'm running 11" rears with et60 on 285s and no rub

RacerX1166

I'm not sure I can dial enough camber into the rears to guarantee no rubbing. I think I'll take a stab at raising the ride height on my own, to see where I eliminate the rub, then have some additional camber thrown in for good measure, when I get it realigned.

Hopefully, I can find some time to make the attempt this weekend.

nile13

Start with answering the questions first. That would be my suggestions.

RacerX1166

Okay...

I measured bead to bead. The wheels have 9Jx18 ET52 cast in them.

Tramonts are 18x10 with a 55mm offset.
I'm running 265/35/18 Pilot SS tires.

As noted, I screwed up. Tramont sent the right wheels; I thought I had 10" wide rears from the factory. Since the new Tramonts were wider than my factory rims, it followed that they were 11" wide.

Also I used the factory wheels as the basis for determining fit and proper ride height. Since they were 9" wide, it threw things out of whack when I mounted the 10" wheels.

fivelitre

Have you thought about a gentle roll of the rear arch. Surely this would be the simplest and most cost effective option whilst maintaining the ride height you're at?

C.

P-daddy

Don't you have some holes to drill or fan to bead blast?

A 10" et 55 is very aggressive for a C2. Do you know your rear camber setting? You can definitely dial in more neg camber to tuck the top inside enough to clear the fenders.
Here's a C2 with 10 et 58 with 265 Michelin Pilot. No rubbing with stock camber ~ -1.2 degrees.

nile13

As noted, 55 offset is pretty aggressive for a 10" wheel on a narrow body. 65 is the standard offset. So you are 10mm out. Which could still work. Do you know _exactly_ where the rubbing is? Possibly more camber, possibly fender rolling. I'm not at all sure that any reasonable height adjustment would do the trick here

That is understood. However, 9" with 55 offset is a strange wheel. I'm curious where it was used, it's pretty uncommon. 986 Boxsters?