j0oftheworld

Been wheel shopping for the new "S" I don't even own yet..
I've been planning on running 17x9 RPF1s but the Advan RSII's have tickled my fancy..
Question is, would going 17x9 et63 work on the front and 17x9 et45 on the rear be better over-all fit?
My priorities are square tires, no risk of fender damage, roll okay but no pulling for sure!
These still look good in different sizes as the spokes are the same just the hubs are deeper.
How would the outside alignment be with these offsets?
Thanks!

RedCelica

Short answer is no, it wouldn't be better. You'll have an almost 2" wider track in the rear. If you're going to go square I'd recommend matching the offsets as close as you can. I run +62 square on 255s and have no problems and dont even need a roll. I'd just get the Advans and be done.

j0oftheworld

Thanks for the reply, are you saying there's a performance issue with the diff track widths? Any photos of your setup on et62?
The difference in the wheels/sizes I mentioned are 18mm(.75") x2 = 1.5" and could easily be adjusted at the front by spacers.
5mm would net 13mm(.51") x2 = ~1" offset and make the front wheels et58

s2000Junky

Somewhere between +63 all around and +45 in the rear would be optimum visually and from a performance standpoint in my opinion. +63 in the rear is really conservative (no rolling even needed, yet is moderate fitment up front) You can fine tune suspension around track width to bias over/under steer (wich is what track widths do to a lesser degree when biased f/r) but there is no simulating a wider track width in dispersing center of gravity, so I aim for maximizing the fullest available fender space with a higher offset and wider wheel wile keeping in mind the best tire widths accommodation and tire profile/shape for maximizing the tires ability to grip and hold its shape under G force. In simple terms, low and flat is the goal for any road course performance car. Tall and narrow isn't. How you get there without sacrificing something else that negates that, is the key. For example, I'm super low to the ground, but am now resting on the bump stops so I have no working suspension.

I'm running 80mm more rear track width total on stock/modded fenders then what came stock on the ap1 with 16's. and slightly shy of that up front, just because of the fender/steering logistics. I'm about 1.5" lower to the ground as well. I'm also maximizing the inner fender room, as to compound the increase in performance from maximizing tire section width the stock chassis can accommodate.

9+45 in itself works pretty optimum with a 255 if you plan on modding/rolling the fenders. It wont work up front however if you do not want to either pull the fenders along with the roll and or run a 255. If you want to run a 225-235 width and not pull fenders, then that works. If you want to run +63 all around, and add some spacers front and rear to fine tune/maximize your track width, that is totally acceptable, as long as you run enough threads on the lugs to be safe, which means either picking the proper max with spacer to run stock studs (no more then 5mm and some wheels3mm) or you press in longer studs and or run spacers that have longer studs incorporated. Some people choose not to bother, and just run the offset of the wheel. Up to you. But there are options and benefits to taking the time to perfect the set up.

j0oftheworld

Thanks for the reply.
To dig deeper into my setup goals I was planning on running:
Square tires 245/40 RE-71r
Ohlins DFV with Sake bomb lower rear perches and 12f/10r rates
Ride height around -1" of lowering
-2.5 ish (if possible) front and slightly less rear camber
Planning on some road driving and as many casual track day trips I can manage.

I guess what I don't understand is the effects of the shifted track between the front and rear of the car or how much is acceptable?
I know this setup will run 17x9et45 RPF1's but just seen the Advan's had a few offset options so wanted to put it out there for feedback!

1nate7

I can't really answer to the performance aspect but visually it would look fine. In your scenario, front would stick out 17mm and rear 26mm compared to stock AP2 fitment. Strictly speaking about outer clearance, difference is less than 10mm deviation from stock stagger. It might even be less of a difference compared to stock than a true non-staggered fitment. I always thought same width/offset all around doesn't look quite right because the front is pushed out more than the rear when compared to stock.

adrs2k

Advan RSII, 17x9 +63 (I run a 3mm spacer on the rear on the street and in this picture), 255 Advan AD08R tires, -2.9 front camber -2.8 rear camber.

As a precaution, my fenders are gently rolled (I never rubbed for the three years I ran without a roll). I do rub my rear bumper with the current setup over large dips.



[/url]

adrs2k

Here is a +63 front a +45 rear

[/url]

A few other pics can be found here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/125706319@N05/page2

s2000Junky

^^^ Looks great. The more concave spoke design you get in rear is a nice touch as well.

j0oftheworld

My problem is the car I'm picking up tomorrow is an '01 w. only 28k miles!

After reading this: https://www.s2ki.com/forums/s2000-ra...track-1166477/
It seems my original setup posted could be tuned to be balanced even with the overlap in track/tire patch.
Google puts the AP1 track width at 57.9″ front, 59.4″ rear (which represents wheel center)
Problem is AP1 wheels are different width F/R and then I'm trying to calculate 9" F/R's with different offsets! haha

Also the fact I was looking at running the RE's in 245/40 will give me a little more "clearance" as far as bumps/rolling etc.