It is currently Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:52 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 5:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 336
Location: Central Coast
OK, so I looked at an Ignis Sport with the missus. She loved it and we've bought it. But she says the white rims have to go and for me to sort it out with some that are silver :lol:

Now I have no great urge to go larger than 15, but we HAVE to do something about that damn factory offset. What is the offset of the factory wheels? I found one website that said 38, and another that said >45 (whatever that means). Is the problem really just cause they're only 5" wide? I know from searching that 16 x 6 was supposedly an option but has anyone ever actually seen them? No mention on the tyre placard...

I see from searching that 7" wide rims look great in 37 or 38 offset, but aren't us Aussies meant to stick to only 1" wider than standard? So my question - has anyone got 6" wide rims that look good in terms of offset (ie not tucked so far in under the guards?). And if so, what offset are they? If I'm working it out right a lower number (ie +25) will stick out further from the hub than a higher no (ie. +38) but the exact distance further will depend on the width of the rim :D

Ta


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:06 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 17515
Location: ACT
Stock offset is +45mm, which is why the standard wheels look so awful from anything other than side-on. :lol:

rattlyswift wrote:
If I'm working it out right a lower number (ie +25) will stick out further from the hub than a higher no (ie. +38) but the exact distance further will depend on the width of the rim :D


Correct. If you're going for a 6" wide rim then you can be a bit more aggressive in lowering the offset, but your chances of finding anything larger than 15" in 6" width are slim. (Even 15x6" are thin on the ground.) At 6.5" or 7" wide I wouldn't go any lower than +38mm offset. I put 17x7" on my missus' Mazda2 with +38mm offset (standard is 45mm) and it is a whisker outside the front guards.

Personally I'd go for some nice fat 15" with sticky tyres and slam it, but there's no denying that 17" in white do look the part on an Ignis.

_________________
Suzuki MightyBoy - Three pots and a snail.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 336
Location: Central Coast
Ta for that YLD80Y, and I read your guide to legal wheel fitment... well done.

You've got me curious though - are the standard Mk2 and 3 GTi rims really 14 x 5.5"? I thought they were only 5" wide, but that extra half inch gives GTi owners access to the much more common 6.5" width. Ignis owners have been dudded... checked both the tyre placard and the manual in the glove box and there's no mention of optional 16s let alone their width. So that means that without engineering legally all Ignis owners are restricted to 6" wide rims, and we've got nothing to prove wider rims were an option.

Given there's loads of people out there running wider than allowable rims (well, without having been engineered) how do they feel about the clauses in their insurance policies along the lines of refusing to pay out if the vehicle has been "modified in a way that does not meet the law"? Too big a risk for me - under Murphy's law, it'll be a Merc or Bimmer you hit...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:20 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 11061
Location: RedlineGTi HQ
rattlyswift wrote:
Ta for that YLD80Y, and I read your guide to legal wheel fitment... well done.

You've got me curious though - are the standard Mk2 and 3 GTi rims really 14 x 5.5"? I thought they were only 5" wide, but that extra half inch gives GTi owners access to the much more common 6.5" width. Ignis owners have been dudded... checked both the tyre placard and the manual in the glove box and there's no mention of optional 16s let alone their width. So that means that without engineering legally all Ignis owners are restricted to 6" wide rims, and we've got nothing to prove wider rims were an option.

Given there's loads of people out there running wider than allowable rims (well, without having been engineered) how do they feel about the clauses in their insurance policies along the lines of refusing to pay out if the vehicle has been "modified in a way that does not meet the law"? Too big a risk for me - under Murphy's law, it'll be a Merc or Bimmer you hit...


I'm lost.. why do you need to engineer wider than 6"? the limitation you are referring to sounds like an insurance company rule, not an engineering requirement.

My memory of the ADR referring to wheels doesn't mention specific sizes +/-, just that the wheel can't be in contact with body / suspension components at full range of travel (including steering at full lock). There are also rules about protruding out past the body, and same wheel diameter front/rear etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 5:06 pm
Posts: 278
Location: 4870
Im running speedy rims 15"" x 6.5"" with 195 x 50 series tyres ,that never touch anyoff the body work at any time and fill out the guards nicely. Plus 195 x 50 series tyres are dime a dozen and to get and top line tyres are one hell of alot cheaper then 16,17 rubber. As for insurance its stated on my insurance policy aftermarket rims n there size and have never once beeen challenged by cops or the road side inspectors for wrong offset .Go bigger fowl the body work then theyll knock you off every time. And ill also point out from my point of view bigger rims are just a wank we copying from the yanks . :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:24 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 17515
Location: ACT
bzchi wrote:
I'm lost.. why do you need to engineer wider than 6"? the limitation you are referring to sounds like an insurance company rule, not an engineering requirement.


Previous rules in most states had a limit of 26mm width increase, with 26mm overall track increase (13mm per side). Overall diameter increase was 15mm max.

I've just checked the new NCOP LVM rules and found that they've dropped the max rim width requirement, and instated a 30% tyre width limit, with a note saying that rim width must merely 'suit the selected tyre size'.

NCOP cliffnotes:

Quote:
4.2.3 Clearance
No part of the wheel must touch any part of the body, chassis, steering, braking system or suspension under any operating condition. To check this, the vehicle must be fully laden and capable of negotiating raised obstacles that would normally be encountered whilst driving such as speed humps and driveway entries. This test should be conducted from lock to lock without any part of the rim or tyre contacting any other part of the vehicle. Test weight for passengers is 68kg plus 15kg per person for luggage where luggage space is provided.

The wheels must be contained within the bodywork, or mudguards (including flares) when the wheels are in the straight ahead position.
Steering and/or suspension stops must not be modified to provide clearance for wheels.

4.2.4 Overall Nominal Diameter
The overall diameter of any tyre fitted to a passenger car or passenger car derivative must not be more than 15mm larger or 26mm smaller than that of any tyre designated by the vehicle manufacturer for that model.

4.2.8 Maximum Passenger Car Tyre and Rim Width
Tyres fitted to passenger cars or passenger car derivatives must not be more than 30% wider than vehicle manufacturer’s widest optional tyre.
The rim width must not exceed the recommendations for the tyre fitted.
For example, if the original widest optional tyre is 185mm, the maximum tyre width is 1.3 times 85mm = 240.5mm, i.e. a 235mm wide tyre. The maximum rim width for a 235mm tyre is 9 inches if the aspect ratio is 60 or below.

4.2.9 Passenger Car Wheel Track
The wheel track of passenger cars (or derivatives) must not be increased by more than 25mm beyond the maximum specified by the vehicle manufacturer for the particular model. This means that the rim offset must not be changed by more than 12.5mm.
Reduction in wheel track must not be performed without approval of the relevant Registration Authority.



So the answer is that if you live in NSW (who have already implemented NCOP LVM) then there is no limit on wheel width as long as you obey the rules on track increase and body protrusion.

_________________
Suzuki MightyBoy - Three pots and a snail.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 336
Location: Central Coast
Whoa... so short story is the 1 inch wider rule doesn't apply?!?! When did it stop applying? And why is impossible to find on the RTA website?? Grrrrr!!! If I'm reading the NCOP VSB 14 right I can actually go to 9 inch wide wheels with an aspect ratio of 60 or below :shock: Obviously, I'd also have to do that without increasing the track by more than 12.5mm per side :lol:

I'll be cancelling that 15 x 6 wheel order then... there's a whole WORLD of possibilities now :-)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:48 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 17515
Location: ACT
Yes I'm glad Sam's comment made me investigate further!

_________________
Suzuki MightyBoy - Three pots and a snail.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Sat Sep 01, 2012 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:25 pm
Posts: 15
Location: Brisbane
I should add this here (spotted on facebook). Wheel specs are apparently 15x8jj with a +20 offset.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:36 am
Posts: 12
Location: Sunshine Coast
Resurrecting a seriously old thread...

So... Stock wheels on an Ignis Sport are 15x5 +45 wrapped in 185/55R15 tyres...

Are they 4x100 or 4x114.3??

Can anyone post any pics of their 17's with width and offset info to match??

_________________
ignis sport | cyprus blue | factory foglamps | mostly stock


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2015 9:13 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 17515
Location: ACT
davo43 wrote:
Are they 4x100 or 4x114.3??


4x100mm

_________________
Suzuki MightyBoy - Three pots and a snail.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:36 am
Posts: 12
Location: Sunshine Coast
[YLD80Y] wrote:
4x100mm


Thank you :-)

_________________
ignis sport | cyprus blue | factory foglamps | mostly stock


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 6:27 am
Posts: 42
Location: Melbourne
I've just fitted 15 x 6 rims from the Suzuki Swift Beat, which was a limited edition model from a few years ago

The offset of these is +40
Fitted with 195/50 tyres, this combination fills the guards nicely

I agree, the std Enkei rims with their +45 offset look crap
Plus, 5" rims are just too narrow

The handling has been transformed, you can really feel the extra width in the rims around corners

I personally wouldn't go any higher than 15 x 6 rims


I'll post pics this weekend

_________________
Old-school, weber-inducted, four pot rorty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:17 pm
Posts: 323
Location: Back in the UK
Agree 15x6 (or 15x6.5) and 195/50s seems the best combination.
I have one set of ET40 and on the blue car with the 20mm lower Suzukisport spring and shocks it will rub the arch liners over a big compression or similar. They're fine on the Silver car with standard suspension.
Also have a set of ET45 (from Mazda2) and they don't rub on either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: IS wheels, offset, the debate continues...
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 6:27 am
Posts: 42
Location: Melbourne
I'll post some pics of my rims this w/e
Very happy with both the performance & appearance of the Suzuki Beat 15X6 rims...

The rims were made in Aust by ROH, finding that out was a bonus!
I always thought the factory rims would be Chinese

The funny thing is, I thought they were 5.5" wide not 6"
All the specs I can find state they are a 5.5" rim

WTF??

_________________
Old-school, weber-inducted, four pot rorty


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group