I rarely march to the common drum, so it's no surprise that I went against the general polling results below (thanks to everyone for your input). I wanted a wheel that would compliment the unique finish of my suzuka blue and I didn't think a silver wheel would do it. Gun metal or hyper black was a legitimate choice and I liked most of those wheels that I saw in that finish but I kept coming back to the ADR Sokudo, especially since the price I am getting was $205 for the rears and $120 for the fronts. I wanted to keep the stagger of tire width so I went with a 205/45/17 in the front and a 225/40/18 in the rear. The diameter of the rear tire increased to 25.0 from OEM 24.8 and the front dropped to 24.3 from 24.8 which gives me a little bit of room under the wheel well if I want to drop the car an inch. I know many like a "dropped" look, but I'm 50:50 on the benefit so we'll have to see. Once I put my 6-4, 230-lb body in the car, that gap disappears right quickly! I didn't want to go super wide on either the front or rears because I was opting for a 21-lb front wheel and 23.5-lb rear, I didn't want to exasperate things by getting a significantly heavy tire. Because I'm going to a 17-inch tire with a 45 aspect ratio and rear tire with a 40, I actually helped to offset the increased wheel weight by going to tires that weigh LESS than stock, in spite of their increased diameter. I chose Yokohama Paradas because of their tread pattern and decent enough dry/wet handling capabilities. I don't race my car on weekends, so I had no reason to opt for a super sticky $200/a piece tire. FWIW, the entire package with hub centric rings, locking lugs, etc WITH shipping cost me $1277. Now...at the expense of receving the wrath of photoshop experts residing here, I tried (with what appears to be pathetic results) to give ya'll a half-baked idea of what I was trying to accomplish with this combo). Be easy on me you graphics goobers!
Anyways, lots of verbage here but I know newbies will check this forum when they're trying to seek out info so I thought at the expense of brevity, I would write my experiences and reasons for buying. Also...just to wrap up the measurement details, both of these wheels, because of their ET48 (front) and ET42 (rear) offsets, are less than 1-inch outboard on both sets so I think that is ok...only because I stayed with 205 and 225 widths...I couldn't go much higher on the rear using a 7.5-inch wheel.

 

The blue and gold actually looks quite nice...

 

I have had 225/40/18 in rear and I would advise you to get a wider tire. The stock S02 tires have a section width of 225, but the tread width is 8.5 inches...a comparable tread width measurement would be found on a 255/35/18 tire.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phantom
[B]



I have had 225/40/18 in rear and I would advise you to get a wider tire.

 

Interesting, but there is no way I could put a 255mm tire on a 7.5-inch wheel. If you visit the following link, http://www.venommotorsports.com/howto/whee...eldiameters.htm with the offset of 42mm in the rear wheel, that would put the tire/wheel outboard almost 2-inches! Yikes! Because of the lower offset of these wheels, one really can't stuff a tire wider than 225/235 under the car as it would stick out way too much. As long as the stagger remains between the front and rear, I'm not going to suffer much by choosing a 225mm rear, even if the OEM S0-2's are running 245 (according to some). The difference in width between old and new is only 3/4 of an inch. Even Tire Rack recommends 225's in the rear for some of their S2K combinations and that is with more appropriate offsets. I'm not sure going with a slightly less wide width in the rear compared to stock is going to compromise handling
if the car spends 100% of its time away from a racetrack. I think spirited driving won't suffer on the street because I've kept the stagger. I'd appreciate others comments on this...maybe I'm way off? One thing I can't understand is how a tire labeled as a 225 changes to 245? All tires when inflated and placed on the car will change widths under load. How are people reaching these measurements? Measuring the tire alone? Thanks guys for your advice...you might have saved me a big hassle. The general manager of the tire shop is calling ADR and his tire reps to check on this.

 

O.k., let me explain...225 is the section width. It is completely different from the tread width (look at the picture above...courtasy of www.tirerack.com). Some manufacturers will have their sidewall bend in, to result in a smaller tread width. Some tire manufacturers will have thier sidewall be flat...and have a monster tread width (like the stock S02's.). In our case...Honda specified that they wanted Bridgestone to make us a 225/50/16 tire with a huge tread width.

For example...look at the picture below. The left two tires are 225/50/16 S02's for the S2000. The right bottom is a 255/35/10 Dunlop SP9000. Do you see that the tread width measurement is pretty close? The top right is a 225/40/18 SP9000...see how whimpy the 225/40/18 looks compared to our 225/50/16...do you really want to run a skinny as tire in the rear of a S2000?



[QUOTE]
Interesting, but there is no way I could put a 255mm tire on a 7.5-inch wheel. If you visit the following link, http://www.venommotorsports.com/how...eldiameters.htm with the offset of 42mm in the rear wheel, that would put the tire/wheel outboard almost 2-inches! Yikes! Because of the lower offset of these wheels, one really can't stuff a tire wider than 225/235 under the car as it would stick out way too much.

 

Russ,

I forgot to mention...I am telling you this because I have gone down that road.

I have 18x8.5 +50mm in rear. I am running 245/35/18 Toyo T1-S, which the tread width is smaller than the stock S02's. My car is lowered and I am in the process of trying to fit 255/35/18.

If I could re-shop for wheels...I would be looking for a wheel to possibly fit 265/35/18.

 

Phantom, great info. These are the kind of threads I can sink my teeth into. I can recall Nitto's ad campaign a year or two ago regarding their NT555 tire. They compared their contact patch with the following tires, all a 235/45/17 size:
Dunlop SP9000 59.8%
Michelin Pilot SX 61.3%
Potenza S-02 61.5%
Pirelli P-Zero 62.4%
Yokohama Nexus 64.7%
Nitto NT555 69.8%
What that entails is simply the construction of the Nitto surpassed all the others when it came to section width which tells me that the Dunlop used in the pic above is a "worse case scenario" when comparing tires as its particular construction provides minimum section width and that the difference between the Bridgestone and Dunlop would not be the case with other tires (whose differences are shown above). I guess it comes down to the particular tire one chooses as to whether or not going to a 245mm or beyond is necessary. In my case, the Parada has a low void shoulder and thus a wider section width (similar to the S0-2) so it should work ok for me. Tires with construction similar to the Dunlop definitely support your "go big" experience but again...it probably has more to do with the tire selected than simply millimeters of width. Keep the opinions coming!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phantom
For 18's...I recommend you get no less than 245/35/18. You really have to worry about not having enough tire to hold the rear end. [/QUOTE

I think for normal, every so often, aggressive street driving, the 18x7.5 ET42 is fine with the tire width specified above (225/40/18) rear. If one is going to take the car to the track, definitely not. It's obvious that a compromise of sorts has been made in order to open up the possibilities of more wheel choices, albeit less expensive as well. In order for these choices to be practical, a 205/215 in the front and 225/235 in the rear is required if the wheel is going to be under 8-inches in width. Most standard aftermarket wheels in 17-18-inch sizes come with widths in the 7 to 8-inch range. When you start finding 18x9 or 18x9.5 wheels, they are naturally going to be priced accordingly. So...the compromising begins. If someone doesn't want to spend $500/wheel, they must realize that the possibilities of using a 245-255 width tire in the back will not be recommended if they're selecting a 7.5-inch width wheel. You don't want the tire pinching on the wheel. Ultimately, the best choice is to find the narrowest tire applicable to the recommended wheel size width, not the widest. This is simply for maximizing the tire's potential. Under most conditions, the minute difference in actual tread width coming into contact with the road surface between a 245 and 225 is less than .75 inches which can EASILY be negated with a seasoned driver (which, at the risk of sounding horribly pretencious, after 40 years and 25 assorted sportscars, I'd like to think I am). If the driver of the S2000 is unskilled or with little or no experience with high performance sportscars, the width difference of which you speak definitely will only go to accent the difference and compound the negativity of it. My last two seater was a mid-engined car whose tire stagger I quickly returned to same-size all four corners. Why? Because I love pronounced oversteer (as many do) and feel comfortable with it. Eight out of 10 drivers would not, especially in a mid-engined car. It would create a white-knuckled experience for sure, especially in the rain. One thing that I've only seen a select few mention is that a tire which promotes confidence and maximizes the car's ability will increase the g-force being placed on the suspension and will actually make the car's transition more severe while a tire that cannot duplicate such handling performance and thus LESS g-forces, makes the handling more "linear" if you will and for the average driver, this creates a much more desirable situation.
Everything you have posted is correct with regards to maximizing the "at the limits" handling of our cars but for the average Joe, a 225 in the rear is an acceptable tire choice if their "comfort limit" resides significantly further from the edge than yours or mine. You sound like my kind of enthusiast...IOW, a driver who I could tail (or perhaps lead....heh heh) thru the Vermont woods and after about 30 minutes, we'd pull over and compare grins. Each which probably could be poured on a waffle!

 

Russ, although you've got a great attitude, it's quite obvious you have already made up your mind on the subject. So have at it (on your bike tires) and try not to inadvertently back into any Maple trees at high speed.

BTW, Maybe sticking with the stock set-up wouldn't be a bad idea