[urq] Compomotive Question

[QSHIPQ at aol.com]

Data point
I've run 235/45 on 17 x 8.5  ET30  on my 83 with rolled  fenders and the 
stock springs.  That would be the same as a 8in with ET  24.  Pull another .6 
inches in, things getting close.  My suggestion  is to put the Ronals on and see 
if you have .6inches between the wheel and  upright.  I doubt it, but more 
specifically I doubt you have the tire  clearance to the steering arm..
 
IME, it's not so much if the wheel touches, but the tire is really close to  
the steering arm.  I don't think you can put a 10ET wheel on an audi with a  
tire on it.  I've seen many an urq in my shop with the steering arm rubbing  
the inside of the tire down to cord.
 
HTH and my .02
 
Scott Justusson
wheels and offsets aplenty
 
In a message dated 5/23/2007 7:01:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
racingiron at comcast.net writes:

> So  the Ronals are 8x15 24 ET, and the movement is 
> directly outboard by  14mm on a 10ET wheel, is that 
> right? 

Yup.

> For  some reason I thought it was the center of 
> wheel so they would be  outboard by 7mm if all else 
> was the same.

No, you may be  thinking of width measurement of the wheel.  If you go 1"
wider  (assuming the same offset), you end up with 1/2" more on the
outside and  1/2" more on the inside.

> So why would "...where those coilovers  are set..." 
> be an issue. Isn't a set of coil overs a direct 
>  reduction of the spring perch diameter, and of 
> course the springs?  

Coilover kits generally do have smaller perches, but the main reason  for
them is adjustability of ride height.  Strictly speaking, the  stock
setup is a coilover, and the kits are just _adjustable_  coilovers.  In
this case, if they are set for an extremely low ride  height, fender
interference becomes more likely.

Eric R.
'86  urq
'93 urS







************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.