Wheel/size/offset and tire/size/profile...can be confusing.

[WildBill]

So 9.5 with 35 offset will fit front and back no poke

Just know that you'll need a 5mm spacer up front to keep from hitting the strut.
I run a 19" x 9.5" +35 square setup with 255/35R19

 

[Thomby]

Just know that you'll need a 5mm spacer up front to keep from hitting the strut.
I run a 19" x 9.5" +35 square setup with 255/35R19

Thank you for this real-world example; it helps set bounds on inner clearance (and is consistent with what the math says for appearance/flushness: same width wheel will poke 6mm more in the rear, ie front offset should be 5mm lower or run 5mm more spacer).

A 9.5" +35 shifts the inside edge 20mm (0.8") inward from stock, vs. 15mm (0.6") with a +30 offset (+35 with 5mm spacer). So inner clearance must be in between there.

This implies a 9" +35 (or +30 of course) would fit but not +40. And the one example I have is a +33 from @SRV.

 

[Seanjenno]

I currently have a staggered set up running 19x8.5 35 front and 19x9.5 40 rear. I love the rear look more just cause of the concave of the wheel. If I order another two 19x9.5 40 offset and run 10mm spacers up front is that too much spacer for the stock lugs? Would I need to runner longer ones

 

[G-310431]

I currently have a staggered set up running 19x8.5 35 front and 19x9.5 40 rear. I love the rear look more just cause of the concave of the wheel. If I order another two 19x9.5 40 offset and run 10mm spacers up front is that too much spacer for the stock lugs? Would I need to runner longer ones

I personally would NOT be comfortable with a 10mm spacer. Not sure what others think.

 

[95oRANGEcRUSH]

Just got my new setup on today:

VMR v801
Hyper Silver
19x8.5 ET35 (square)

Vredestein Hypertrac All Seasons
255/35/R19

 

[Volfy]

I currently have a staggered set up running 19x8.5 35 front and 19x9.5 40 rear. I love the rear look more just cause of the concave of the wheel. If I order another two 19x9.5 40 offset and run 10mm spacers up front is that too much spacer for the stock lugs? Would I need to runner longer ones

Any spacer thicker than 5mm needs longer than OEM studs. If yours id RWD, front studs are not overly difficult to swap out, if you're a seasoned shade tree.

Still though... 9.5" wide up front is rather pointless. Some folks might dig the phat wheel/tire look, but to trained eyes they showcase a lack of understanding of vehicle dynamics. But, if it makes you happy...

 

[DeltaV]

Any spacer thicker than 5mm needs longer than OEM studs. If yours id RWD, front studs are not overly difficult to swap out, if you're a seasoned shade tree.

Still though... 9.5" wide up front is rather pointless. Some folks might dig the phat wheel/tire look, but to trained eyes they showcase a lack of understanding of vehicle dynamics. But, if it makes you happy...

What about using the additional hub face to outer rim distance as a buttress against tucking the front wheels under during cornering since the f’ing MacPherson strut suspension (especially with the electronic adjustable dampers) doesn’t have any g-d camber?!?

I’m sick of understeer and eating the outside edge of those tires. And, yes, I gave enough track time to understand and implement various techniques to alter balance, roll, yaw, and pitch through throttle, brake, (sometimes both), and steering in sufficiently nuanced ways, even with AWD, to change where and how the forces are maximized (or spread more evenly) throughout the multiple phases of cornering.

 

[Volfy]

What about using the additional hub face to outer rim distance as a buttress against tucking the front wheels under during cornering since the f’ing MacPherson strut suspension (especially with the electronic adjustable dampers) doesn’t have any g-d camber?!?

The only thing wider track might help with is less lateral weight transfer. Even pushing out 25mm each side on a smallish car (BRZ), it'll only improve by 1.2%. On a larger car like the Stinger, you'd be lucky to get 1%. I've posted this several times already. Here's a link, if you have not seen it.

If you truly believe more front camber is what would really help, then why not address that directly? Front camber plate is one reason we did Coilovers on ours.

I’m sick of understeer and eating the outside edge of those tires. And, yes, I gave enough track time to understand and implement various techniques to alter balance, roll, yaw, and pitch through throttle, brake, (sometimes both), and steering in sufficiently nuanced ways, even with AWD, to change where and how the forces are maximized (or spread more evenly) throughout the multiple phases of cornering.

You probably don't want to hear this, but most instructors that listen to your description would tell you to go back to the fundamentals of properly cornering.

If you are experiencing sever understeering and scrubbing speed off your front tires, you need to load the front end with trail braking. When I took my son to his first Autocross Novice class, I wasn't exactly a novice, having done it extensively back in the early 90's on my old VW GTI. But the Stinger was new to me and, so was RWD in general. The instructor let me drive the course first a couple/three times, while he critiqued and offered suggestions for improvement. Then he politely asked if we could swap seats and show me a demo lap. Mind you, he had never driven a Stinger or G70 ever, and this was our "slow" basically bone stock 2.0T on crappy stock Bridgestone A/S tires. To say that he whipped that "slow" Stinger around the course way faster than I could drive it - even after all the suspension tuning I've done since - would be a gross understatement. No severe front tire scrubbing, no super loud tire screeches. Just one turn seamlessly stitched into the next, with perfect conservation of momentum.

Take your Stinger to an AutoX or track school and have an instructor drive a demo lap. Not at all saying your car might not benefit from suspension tuning, but a humbling experience like that will show whether it's your car - or you - that really needs improvement.

 

[DeltaV]

The only thing wider track might help with is less lateral weight transfer. Even pushing out 25mm each side on a smallish car (BRZ), it'll only improve by 1.2%. On a larger car like the Stinger, you'd be lucky to get 1%. I've posted this several times already. Here's a link, if you have not seen it.

If you truly believe more front camber is what would really help, then why not address that directly? Front camber plate is one reason we did Coilovers on ours.

You probably don't want to hear this, but most instructors that listen to your description would tell you to go back to the fundamentals of properly cornering.

If you are experiencing sever understeering and scrubbing speed off your front tires, you need to load the front end with trail braking. When I took my son to his first Autocross Novice class, I wasn't exactly a novice, having done it extensively back in the early 90's on my old VW GTI. But the Stinger was new to me and, so was RWD in general. The instructor let me drive the course first a couple/three times, while he critiqued and offered suggestions for improvement. Then he politely asked if we could swap seats and show me a demo lap. Mind you, he had never driven a Stinger or G70 ever, and this was our "slow" basically bone stock 2.0T on crappy stock Bridgestone A/S tires. To say that he whipped that "slow" Stinger around the course way faster than I could drive it - even after all the suspension tuning I've done since - would be a gross understatement. No severe front tire scrubbing, no super loud tire screeches. Just one turn seamlessly stitched into the next, with perfect conservation of momentum.

Take your Stinger to an AutoX or track school and have an instructor drive a demo lap. Not at all saying your car might not benefit from suspension tuning, but a humbling experience like that will show whether it's your car - or you - that really needs improvement.

Just saw this and looking forward to watching the video. If you know of front camber plates for an AWD GT2 (electronic dampers) I’m all ears. I’ve been looking for quite a while with no results…either top or bottom end. Even eccentric bolts just won’t work with our mechanism.

Your direction to revisit instruction is always a good answer and I appreciate the advice. There is never anyone so good they can’t stand input from another perspective, but to the fundamentals of proper cornering, I’ve been one of the HPDE instructors you reference, I’ve taught professional drivers you would know if I could name them, and I’ve run tracks like Sebring (hairpin and safety pin), Road Atlanta (dip and post-dip), Moroso, Homestead, and Summit Point at respectable rates. For instance, I’ve run the full Sebring hairpin course in my daily driver FD RX-7 in times (2:22/2:23) that would have qualified me around 3/4 of the way down the starting order of the next weekend’s 12 Hour. (Where I wrenched on the #87 GT1 Camaro of John Annis. I did so at Sebring, Daytona, St Pete, etc., for John and Pettit Racing’s RX-7 for almost a decade.)

You can always drive around a setup issue, but a steady-state skid pad situation that creates a strong linear temperature gradient across the tread, colder to hotter, inside to outside, definitely points to a lack of camber for the rest of the setup. The wheel is just going positive camber at that body roll. I miss a real suspension, meaning SLA. The Stinger is do good otherwise.

Oh, and, yes, RWD would make things easier since the car rotated completely different on- and off-throttle.

Now, let’s take a look at that video. I’ve never run spacers. Always thought they were a compromise that few payed sufficient attention to how it altered things like hb bearings and virtual tire pivot location.

Edit: Oh, wait. Engineering Explained! Yeah, I’ve seen almost all of Jason’s stuff. Damn, he looks young in this one!

Edit 2: First, at 1:12, Jason notes the low Cg of the BRZ and that cars with a higher Cg would show “a more dramatic effect”. The Stinger feels absolutely top-heavy in comparison to my FD, for instance, with almost the exact same Cg height.

But a wider track ISN’T my goal. It has more to do with having more “wheel meat” to the outside of the hub face (balanced by similar added width inboard for several obvious reasons, within confines, of course) much like a wider human stance resists tipping under similar lateral force. Simply, I’m trying to keep the wheel from “picking up” the inside tread as much as it is…AVOIDING spacers if at all possible.

 

[Thomby]

If I order another two 19x9.5 40 offset and run 10mm spacers up front

Strictly addressing the fitment, you'd have a 9.5 +30 up front which nicely complements the +40 rear (outside wheel face within ~4mm).

In front, the outer edge would be 23mm further out than stock, and in back, 19mm further out.

 

[Volfy]

If you know of front camber plates for an AWD GT2 (electronic dampers) I’m all ears. I’ve been looking for quite a while with no results…either top or bottom end. Even eccentric bolts just won’t work with our mechanism.

LOL... One look at the Stinger's front strut should tell you why what you are asking is flat out impossible. This is not a typical cheesy econobox front MacPherson struts with flimsy stamped lowers.

Stinger's front strut's lower end is secured with a cast aluminum hub carrier, with a beefy cup machined to receive the strut lower body. This is how most high end MacPherson struts (Porsche, BMW, etc.) are set up. As such, there is no way for camber adjustment bolt down low. And that is a good thing. It means the suspension geometry is fixed firm and tight.

Up top, there is just no space above the strut bearing and the suspension tower to slip in a camber plate. Was this not painfully obvious to you?

The only way to add front camber adjustment is to replace the entire strut with a coilover that is designed from the get-go with top camber plate.

Your direction to revisit instruction is always a good answer and I appreciate the advice. There is never anyone so good they can’t stand input from another perspective, but to the fundamentals of proper cornering, I’ve been one of the HPDE instructors you reference, I’ve taught professional drivers you would know if I could name them, and I’ve run tracks like Sebring (hairpin and safety pin), Road Atlanta (dip and post-dip), Moroso, Homestead, and Summit Point at respectable rates. For instance, I’ve run the full Sebring hairpin course in my daily driver FD RX-7 in times (2:22/2:23) that would have qualified me around 3/4 of the way down the starting order of the next weekend’s 12 Hour. (Where I wrenched on the #87 GT1 Camaro of John Annis. I did so at Sebring, Daytona, St Pete, etc., for John and Pettit Racing’s RX-7 for almost a decade.)

You can always drive around a setup issue, but a steady-state skid pad situation that creates a strong linear temperature gradient across the tread, colder to hotter, inside to outside, definitely points to a lack of camber for the rest of the setup. The wheel is just going positive camber at that body roll. I miss a real suspension, meaning SLA. The Stinger is do good otherwise.

Oh, and, yes, RWD would make things easier since the car rotated completely different on- and off-throttle.

Now, let’s take a look at that video. I’ve never run spacers. Always thought they were a compromise that few payed sufficient attention to how it altered things like hb bearings and virtual tire pivot location.

Edit: Oh, wait. Engineering Explained! Yeah, I’ve seen almost all of Jason’s stuff. Damn, he looks young in this one!

Edit 2: First, at 1:12, Jason notes the low Cg of the BRZ and that cars with a higher Cg would show “a more dramatic effect”. The Stinger feels absolutely top-heavy in comparison to my FD, for instance, with almost the exact same Cg height.

But a wider track ISN’T my goal. It has more to do with having more “wheel meat” to the outside of the hub face (balanced by similar added width inboard for several obvious reasons, within confines, of course) much like a wider human stance resists tipping under similar lateral force. Simply, I’m trying to keep the wheel from “picking up” the inside tread as much as it is…AVOIDING spacers if at all possible.

Okay, at least you seem to have a rudimentary understanding of the different characteristics between RWD and AWD tire grip dynamics. The only time AWD holds a distinct advantage over RWD is drive traction when powering out of a corner. All other times, be it threshold braking into a corner, tipping into a corner while trail braking, and through mid-corner, the front tires of ANY CAR (FWD, RWD, AWD) is simply balancing available traction between the two sides to make use of as much of the 100% available traction. For a RWD, the front tires only need to balance available grip between braking and cornering. FWD/AWD adds power/drive, which is why some AWDs tends to be an understeer fest. Power/drive uses up available tire grip, leaving less for braking and cornering. It is why most driving enthusiasts tend to prefer the purity of RWD.

Still, nobody in legit car suspension circles talks about how much "wheel meat" is to the outside of the wheel hub face.

If you're talking about wheel offset, then talk about wheel offset.
If you're talking about scrub radius, then talk about scrub radius.
If you're talking about roll center, then talk about roll center.

"Wheel meat" just sounds like something clueless guys at Donut media would say to poke fun at each other.

Regardless, whether you prefer to talk "wheel meat" or wheel offset, the fact is... the end effect of what you're trying to describe makes a marginal difference, be it 1.0%, 1.5% or 2.0%. Certainly that little gain is not worth (very real) handling woes that comes with veering too far away from the OEM design offset. If you need a reminder, review Jason's video on SCRUB RADIUS.

I cannot imagine a self-professed seasoned expert HPDE instructor would so profoundly misunderstand so as to argue otherwise.

 

[DeltaV]

LOL... One look at the Stinger's front strut should tell you why what you are asking is flat out impossible.

Exactly. Thus my frustration. Because it COULD BE so good. Might just be easier to retrofit an SLA solution. I’m kidding, of course. I think.

Stinger's front strut's lower end is secured with a cast aluminum hub carrier, with a beefy cup machined to receive the strut lower body. This is how most high end MacPherson struts (Porsche, BMW, etc.) are set up.

Hello Biermann.

As such, there is no way for camber adjustment bolt down low. And that is a good thing. It means the suspension geometry is fixed firm and tight.

And wrong. Far too shallow. Uneven, side-to-side. And unfixable, even with a heavy persuader.

Up top, there is just no space above the strut bearing and the suspension tower to slip in a camber plate. Was this not painfully obvious to you?

You’re just agreeing with me.

The only way to add front camber adjustment is to replace the entire strut with a coilover that is designed from the get-go with top camber plate.

Yes. Megan Racing, for instance. But, especially with the Mando setup, I’m finding the ability to tune on-the-fly very useful as situations change.

I’m just being selfish…and frustrated because it’s SO CLOSE to being workable, yet so far from being doable.

Okay, at least you seem to have a rudimentary understanding of the different characteristics between RWD and AWD tire grip dynamics.

Gee, thanks.

The only time AWD holds a distinct advantage over RWD is drive traction when powering out of a corner. All other times, be it threshold braking into a corner, tipping into a corner while trail braking, and through mid-corner, the front tires of ANY CAR (FWD, RWD, AWD) is simply balancing available traction between the two sides to make use of as much of the 100% available traction.

101. But when the front axle doesn’t even try to manage the contact patch, it’s intentionally throwing away, what?, 20% of the grip that SHOULD be available!

For a RWD, the front tires only need to balance available grip between braking and cornering. FWD/AWD adds power/drive, which is why some AWDs tends to be an understeer fest.

Yes, do you want my HPDE presentation in the friction circle to reference? Center diff power distribution can help make the best of this compromise, but we have a simplistic take-off setup…at least it’s semi-variable.

Power/drive uses up available tire grip, leaving less for braking and cornering. It is why most driving enthusiasts tend to prefer the purity of RWD.

Again, Mazda RX-7 FD R1 crushing Vipers, 911TT, Corvettes, and a few Spice racers at Sebring, despite only running 379 down. And to a lesser extent a C7 Z06-beating RX-8…at least on the twisty mountain roads around here. You are talking about my world.

The Stinger was a family compromise. She needed our second car to be auto for the rare occasions and I figured AWD for the mountain winters…and an M3 Competition SMG was out of the family price range (and still a bit of a pig).

If the car wasn’t so good otherwise, I’d just treat it like a Camry. But if I had front camber adjustments available, this could be a sporty car!

Still, nobody in legit car suspension circles talks about how much "wheel meat" is to the outside of the wheel hub face.

If you're talking about wheel offset, then talk about wheel offset.
If you're talking about scrub radius, then talk about scrub radius.
If you're talking about roll center, then talk about roll center.

"Wheel meat" just sounds like something clueless guys at Donut media would say to poke fun at each other.

Apologies that my TBI has robbed me of appropriate vocabulary after long work hours. Not knowing your ability to consume more technical jargon was in the back of mind as well.

This has nothing to do with scrub radius or roll center, and little to do with offset, purely, though the concept could be related if varying wheel width wasn’t in okay.

Regardless, whether you prefer to talk "wheel meat" or wheel offset, the fact is... the end effect of what you're trying to describe makes a marginal difference, be it 1.0%, 1.5% or 2.0%. Certainly that little gain is not worth (very real) handling woes that comes with veering too far away from the OEM design offset. If you need a reminder, review Jason's video on SCRUB RADIUS.

I cannot imagine a self-professed seasoned expert HPDE instructor would so profoundly misunderstand so as to argue otherwise.

Sigh. Scrub radius doesn’t enter into it if wheel width is added symmetrically. This is all about managing the contact patch transition laterally through the phases throughout a corner. Yes, as I originally said, there are plenty of driving techniques that can be employed to minimize the performance list to pedestrian design (Ever driven a 1996 Viper GTS in anger? Brake in a straight line. Tip toe around the corner like you’re on a bicycle. Mash the loud pedal in a straight line. Because it handled like a UPS truck.) If an engineering solution is available, I’d like to be able to induce some additional camber. Nothing ridiculous. Whatever the tire temps tell me. I’m guessing 1.5 to 1.8 degrees. I’ve got 0.4 and 0.6 now…pickup truck numbers with enough skew to irritate my frustratingly hypersensitive nature.

If engineering solutions weren’t important, we’d all be driving 100hp K-cars and trying to develop super-human driving skills to get some performance out of them. Instead, we buy the best engineering for our needs that we can afford. I knew about the drawbacks of struts, but was over-confident that the BMW fixes to Biermann would translate to the Stinger, but there just isn’t the performance market to justify the engineering (other than more Hp, which the car doesn’t need…again, my 250hp RX-8 easily stayed glued to the tail of multiple 650hp C7 Z06 Corvettes that were trying to lose me on mountain roads but couldn’t (until the short straights, of course, but one or two corners later I’m up their butts like curious dogs meeting).

Anyway, I’m rambling. My brain injury hurts. You made your point (by agreeing with me) that there is no camber solution, other than aftermarket strut replacements, and that my investigation into wider front wheels helps only marginally (but gives me options…at least to rotate tires in such a square setup).

I still figure that it doesn’t hurt to ask.

 

[1qazwsx4]

Hey guys, I've had a really good read through this thread and have looked at the amazing spreadsheet with other people's specs but need some help. I've got the usual staggered OEM setup and wish to swap to a square setup due to rotations etc...
I'm looking at Dtm 3352 in Alberto Satin Graphite 19X8.5 5X114.3 with 245/40 rubber.
Problem is I'm limited to two options for offset: 33 all round or 40.

I'd be happy for just under flush ideally, not a fan of poke. It seems the 33 should be relatively flush up front but the rear would be poked out the fender a little?

The 40 brings the fronts in a few mm thinner than OEM with the rears increasing a almost 10mm

I'm not able to use spacers for the 40offsets to help reflush nor do I wish to use 9" on the back since I want easy rotations.

Anyone running 33 offset all round with 19x8.5 that has some photos please? I'd really appreciate any thoughts on which would be the go! Cheers