rudypoochris Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I searched for this but couldn't find it through all the other backspace posts. I read in another thread that the front backspace is more ample then the rear. Unfortunately I upgraded wheel lugs (to a longer length) and cannot put the front wheels on safetly until i have new wheels that use conical nuts instead fo the ones that run through the wheel (acorn?). Any way, I measured front backspace to be at minimum 5-1/8", any ideas on how much less, or more the rear will be, or is it the same. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueovalz Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 My 280 had almost identical BS measurements front to rear. It was about 1/8" difference between the two, but this allowed about a pinky's width between the tire, and the OEM springs (4.5"). I would assume, that with the same coil-over assembly front to rear, the difference (or lack of) would be the same as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudypoochris Posted November 1, 2005 Author Share Posted November 1, 2005 Thanks! I am thinking of waiting for the rota grids if they ever come or I might go with the sportmax 050's with adapters in 17"X8". Any way thanks for the info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 I'm running a Mustang 8 inch wheel with a 5.5 backspacing. The car has coil overs and I am running a half inch spacer in the back to clear the tire to strut assembly. On the front, no spacer is required and this is with a 240Z style and dimension from hub assembly (Jamie T.s!) Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.