Vintage Mustang Forums banner

15" or 17" wheel?

52K views 68 replies 44 participants last post by  zray 
#1 ·
I know this question has been beat to death, but I'm really struggling with this wheel choice, mostly due to the limited summer tire choice in the 15" size. Car is a '68 FB 302 stock front disc brakes.

Objective: Good handling street car with respectable open track capability, but I am not interested in stuffing crazy wide meats under the car - I don't want to deal with any potential rubbing issues, so I'm trying to limit myself to a 225 width (maybe up to 245 for the 17)

The engineer and hard core racer in me tells me I need to stick with 15" wheel since it clears my brakes, and minimizes rotating mass.

That would be an easy choice, except the only summer tires I'm finding on Tire rack are in the 23" OD range - great short sidewall for handling, but will my relatively larger '68 look completely goofy with such a small diam tire? It is lowered approx 1.5" front and 1 " rear.

Am I missing out on some good high performance 15" street tires in the 24.5" - 26" OD range? I suppose that would dictate a relatively large sidewall which kind of defeats the purpose of the high performance tire.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading and I appreciate any feedback.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I been kicking the tires on this same issue. I currently have TTII's 17x7 on my 1966 FB. I do have tire rub under heavy throttle in the rear and some in front when hitting a pothole. Front Tires are 215/40/17 and rears are 235/45/17. (26.5 OD)

I'll be changing to shelby 10 spoke, 15x7, probably with BFG T/A's that measure 215/60/15 front and 225/60/15 rear and just shy of 26 OD.

But my 66 has less room than your 68 in the wheel well. Good Luck!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 66gt
#4 ·
You could look at 16s. They fit better than 17s anyway. Last time I looked there were some decent tires for that size.

I have 15 inch Magnum 500s on mine and run Yokohama YK520 in 215 60 15 and they handle and ride great.
 
#7 · (Edited)
You could look at 16s. They fit better than 17s anyway.
Can you please clarify if you are referring to visual look in terms of 'fit better' or if you are referring to some limitation in the car design preventing 17s from fitting properly?

You know something like "Hey did you know that when you put a 16x8 wheel on the front of the mustang you have a limitation and can only run 4.5 backspacing because anymore than that and the wheel lip hits the upper ball join which limits the max amount of rubber you can put on the car whereas with a 17x8 wheel you can move up to 4.75 backspacing and get a better fit for the same rubber under the fender and maybe even squeeze 1 size up on the tread width if you want to really push the envelope"

Ohh wait..... :p:pirate:

And on edit...another good argument around 16/17 centers on braking. With 15s you can fit a certain size rotor/caliper combo, to get something larger I am not aware of anything out there that fits under a 16 inch wheel. AKA all brake upgrades over the stock size kelsey hayes setup require a 17 inch wheel to run. If I am mistaken on this, I would like to be corrected, but I'm pretty sure.
 
#5 ·
I also went with 17 x 8" on my 67 Fastback. The fronts are 235/45/17 and rear are 255/40/17 with no issues of rubbing or interference. The 17" helps to fill in the wheelwells and give me a more modern look while also affording me good choices of tires. I ended up using the California Ponycars 17" Styled steel wheels (Aluminum).
 
#8 ·
I think the only disadvantage of running 17" wheels is it makes the tires look like black rubber bands. If you don't mind this look, go for it. Personally, I like the look of 16" and smaller wheels on a classic Mustang. If you're going to be installing big brakes, you'll likely have to run 17" wheels.
 
#9 ·
With all due respect to the old school community, 17s look and perform much better for even kind-of-high-performance driving. True, increasing unsprung weight has a detrimental effect on acceleration (turning, accel, and decel), but the stiffer sidewall helps to offset the increased rotational inertia. There's a reason high-performance cars have larger rims, and it isn't just for the bling.

Here's an interesting example of the effects of upsized wheels that C&D tested on a WV Golf. As one would expect, straightline acceleration suffered as the wheel size (and weight) increased, but handling and stopping improved.
 
#56 ·
As with anything / everything, look better is subjective. I'm in the old school club and like the look of rubber vs the wheel.

Of course I'm also a fan of fat and skinny Centerlines, you can't get much more old school than that. :surprise:
 
#11 ·
I went with the newer mustang "bullit" wheels which are a 17x8. Some days I look at it and love the way it looks but some days I look at it and it looks to big. I think the next set of wheels I get will be 16's, still bigger than stock but not TO big. This probably only makes sense to me but its my 2cents worth.
 
#13 ·
i have always prefered 15" tires with the taller sidewall for roadracing. however the only good tires in 15" are racing slicks. 17"-20" tires started being used to meet federal cafe laws because they have less rolling resistance. all the newest technology has ben put in these sizes. i reluctantly went to 17" back in the 90's. i know a few guys that had 18" and went to 17" for better ride quality and they said the car seemed to handle better. several years ago the ford mustang came with 18" rims and soft springs to give a good ride. the next year they switched to 17" with stiffer springs and the ride was still good and handling was much better. since your not going very wide and unless your going to pushing the car to the limit in the turns i would stay with 15" or 16" rims. if you want maxium cornering 17" with nitto nt05 tires is the ticket for the street.
 
#20 ·
i have always prefered 15" tires with the taller sidewall for roadracing. however the only good tires in 15" are racing slicks. ......."
like most rules of thumb, there is an important exception to this statement: the Avon CR6zz

CR6ZZ | Avon Motorsport

it's DOT street legal, but essentially a soft compound race tire. You can have the best of both worlds with this tire, vintage looks and modern traction without the "rubber band" look of the 17" tires, which, in my opinion, look like hell on '60's cars.

I've seen cars with the Avons COMPLETELY embarrass cars with more HP, but that were running modern 17" rubber.

the downside is the cost, they will cost upward of $350 each and won't last too long.

Z.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Last sanity check

Thanks for all the feedback on this question - it has been interesting reading.

Right now I'm leaning toward two options (both in anthracite):

AR Torque Thrust M 17 X 7 , 4" BS, 235/50 R17 all 4 corners

OR

AR Torque Thrust M, 17X8, 4.5" BS, 245/45 R17 all 4 corners

Based upon my research, these should be a slam dunk for fitment, although I've seen 17X7 4.25 & 17X8 4.75 suggested.

Does anyone think I should expect any rubbing problems with either of these? 1968 FB, Global west front (with 1 3/8" upper arm drop - lowered around 1"), stock rear lowered 1".


EDIT: I'm going from 205/75R14 on the front now, and the car drives very nicely - should I expect much change in bump steer, or a tendency to follow ruts in the road (paved roads - like where semits travel alot asphalt their tires tend to make ruts)?
Thanks again,

Andrew
 
#17 ·
Thanks for all the feedback on this question - it has been interesting reading.

Right now I'm leaning toward two options (both in anthracite):

AR Torque Thrust M 17 X 7 , 4" BS, 235/50 R17 all 4 corners

OR

AR Torque Thrust M, 17X8, 4.5" BS, 245/45 R17 all 4 corners

Based upon my research, these should be a slam dunk for fitment, although I've seen 17X7 4.25 & 17X8 4.75 suggested.

Andrew

Interesting...I started a thread last night on this. I'm going with the 17x7 Torq Thrust M. I want 4.5" BS though (I need to make sure they make these) and I think I'll use a 1/4" spacer. 235/45 front Bridgestone Potenza's. Can't make up my mind on the rear...maybe 235/55's (if not, I'll go with 235/45 on all 4 corners).
 
#21 ·
I have owned many different sets of wheels/tires on my 65-66 cars. I just recently sold a 65 fastback that had 17x 8 tq thrust 2's and until 6 months ago. I had the same wheel tire combo on my 65 coupe. Although it looked nice, the ride quality with "rubberband" sidewall height sucked.

I just switched to 15 x 7 styled steel wheels with michelin tires and the car rides so much better and does't look like every other mustang/camaro at the car shows anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 66gt
#22 ·
17x7 4.75 bs

Thanks for all the opinions so far, I've got some more questions:

I've looked at a couple of cars with 17X8 4.5 BS, and I see that it does push the tire very far out toward the fender lip. I would prefer the wheel pulled in a little more (for clearance reasons), and according to my math, a 17X7 with a 4.75 BS would provide a full 1.25 additional clearance. Why don't more people run something like that? Is it mostly an appearance issue, where people want to run a closer gap to the fender?

Also, most of the non-custom BS wheels I am finding seem to be 17X7 4" and 17X8 4.5 (basically 0 offset for vintage cars, and maybe another version with 30+mm offset for newer cars). Does anyone know of and affordable five spoke style (decent quality) 17 X 7 4.25+ BS? As far as the 17X8 4.75, the MB old school is the only affordable option I am aware of, I may wind up going that route, although I think that would still be a little closer to the fender than I am comfortable with.

Also, to zray's point - I do agree that these cars tend to look better with the 15s and taller sidewall, but the tire selection is so poor these days (and probably will be worse in 5 years when I need another set), I feel like I would basically married to those Avon's if I went 15, and praying they didn't go extinct down the road.
 
#24 ·
I run the 16x8's all the way around on a 66 and love the look. Its tall enough to be vintage with a nuance of modernization without the downtown look showing up on every customized car.

The best part is there is a huge fleet of Porches and BMWs that give an extremely wide selection of tires at very affordable prices. All the vintage styles come in 16x8 and if they fit on a 66...

The handling advantages 17s over 16s have to be in the noise. If anyone wants to find out, lets roll ;o)...

Cheers,

M
 
#27 ·
The handling advantages 17s over 16s have to be in the noise. If anyone wants to find out, lets roll ;o)...

Cheers,

M
There is a braking advantage ;) :pirate:

 
#26 ·
I had this same discussion with my son about 9 years ago when I was looking to upgrade from 14" to 15" or 16" and he was working for America's Tire Store. In essence he said that tire technology R&D money is going into the 17" and larger tires so if street performance tires are on your list, the options going forward will be fewer and fewer below 17". He was right.

On the rubbing issue, the sweet spot in backspacing for a 17" x 8" is 4.75" on these cars. Unfortunately, many wheels have less backspacing and the outer corner of the tire tread can rub the inner fender wells and wheel lips during bumps and cornering, especially if you carry passengers regularly. Custom backspacing may be in your future if you can't find a style with the necessary backspacing form the "off the rack" selections.

Lastly, despite identical tire sizes, tires from different manufacturers can be different. For example, in my experience, the B.F. Goodrich 245/45x17 KDWS is the same tread width as the Yokohama 235/45x17 S-Drive.
 
#29 ·
I went through this decision process just a few months ago. There are several "good" choices in the 15" realm if you stay in the 225s. If you want a wider tire for the back the only real choice is the CR6ZZ. I chose BFGs for the Sunday drive and will get a set of Avons next season if I make it to the track.
Although 17s will open lots of doors on both the tire and brake front, don't think there aren't some great options that fit 15s, they just tend to be expensive. S&T just put out a new aluminum caliper 12" disc that will fit under 15" wheels and will brake with the best of them.
 
#30 ·
".........S&T just put out a new aluminum caliper 12" disc that will fit under 15" wheels and will brake with the best of them.
the need for huge disc brakes on a relatively light car such as the '65/'66 Mustang is so overblown. Once you have a brake that can lock up the wheels at any desired speed you have ALL the brake needed. The key to great brakes is not size, it's having the right friction material. With ebc redstuff pads in front & porterfield RS-4 shoes in back I had no problem locking up the brakes at way beyond legal speeds (100 mph +) on my former '66 GT350 with stock brakes (no power assist). Granted, the Shelby has wider shoes than a stock Mustang, but you get the idea.

Z.
 
#32 ·
throw in no fade after repeated stops, and the ability to lock-up the brakes at speed is all a brake can do performance wise. ABS is another story entirely.

Spend the money on the right friction material for your application and save a bundle to spend elsewhere, like making the car turn a quick corner, which is one area where dropping a bundle can really make a difference.

Now if you are a 90 lb weakling, you might want reduced pedal pressure, etc. But that isn't stopping you better, only easier.

Z.
 
#36 ·
HI Guys

Your all making my head hurt. Your all much farther out there than I am. I am thinking of Buying a set of 14 x7 style steel wheel from scott drake and throw out my drums for a Kelsey disc upgrade from chockostang.


Should I have to worry about using my used set of 67 styled steels on a disc brake set up?

Is the market really getting hard to find tire for 14 inches wheels?

my apologies for using Meadowlarks thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 66gt
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top