TEASER
Originally Posted by BSeriouS' date='Jan 27 2009, 06:00 PM
It cannot be a 9.5 +35. I've seen a 9.5 +28 CE28N and it DOES NOT concave.
Farid "HH-s2000" (J's Silverstone AP2 from germany) was running a 9.5 +35 and it did not concave. Just a lot of lippage
Farid "HH-s2000" (J's Silverstone AP2 from germany) was running a 9.5 +35 and it did not concave. Just a lot of lippage

Originally Posted by red@9k' date='Jan 27 2009, 07:21 PM
From the pics he provided in his for sale thread 17x9.5 +35 ce28s definitely concave
From HH-s2000 FS post, his does concave. Thats weird.
why argue just buy the wheels and prove it to yourselves lol.... besides the fact that they are sick wheels nobody could tell you whats what if you have the proof right there on your car..... basically SHADAP!!
I was gonna buy a set of 17x9.5 +28 ce28s from an evo vendor and he stated that the rims are concave in that particular offset. Huy has 17x9.5 +28 TE37s and his are concave. I have 17x9.5 +28 RE30s but sadly mine dont have concavity like the CEs or TEs
Originally Posted by BSeriouS' date='Jan 27 2009, 09:06 PM
You'd be surprised on what can or cannot fit on our cars, especially if you done the appropriate body work on the car and still be well within proper tire to width ratio. Please remember that when you do run a low offset wheel, you do indeed get a wider track from it. Maybe little or more, but its something.
Hence why you see a lot of track junkies making a switch to a very popular 9 +40 (also clearing aftermarket brakes), as opposed to 9 +63. Thats about 1" inch more aggressive. Just a thought.
Hence why you see a lot of track junkies making a switch to a very popular 9 +40 (also clearing aftermarket brakes), as opposed to 9 +63. Thats about 1" inch more aggressive. Just a thought.






