Rear disc brakes

Michael--so a search on here about the CB rear disc brakes.  As you will read, mine as well as other SOC members' came apart because the rotor is made with two parts , a larger aluminum part ---the outer part-- fused to a smaller steel part that fits onto the axle . I was warned about this and was told that if they are are torqued right when installing, this wouldn't happen.  They were and it did. So I had the inner steel part firmly onto the axle while the outer aluminum part could spin around the steel part.  It was a pretty good jolt when the slack was taken up! This happened in Richmond VA and it was an unpleasant long drive back home to Arkansas.  I was worried that the slack wouldn't take up and the outer part would freely spin around the inner part.

For me the cure was to get two new rotors to replace the faulty ones and I found solid steel rotors from SoCal Imports, p/n 113615601DNS at $ 84.95 each.

This was three years and the replacements have worked perfectly---and why not, they are solid steel!   The new steel rotors were plug and play and fit good onto the rear of the CB Performance disc brake kit.   You might look into the whole kit that So Cal Imports offers because the whole affair is designed to work together.  Call 'em and see what measurements you should provide to swap with the drums on your CMC. The number is 562/633-4979.

I read here that we don't "need" rear discs but a panic stop once out on I-40 with rear drums told me the truth---and we need all the safety we can get with these cars.

Good luck with it!  You are damned sure doing the right thing.

ps--My C.B. Ones were called "race strength" too. Disclamer--this was my experience and maybe CB Perf. has changed the way the two part rotors are made.  Call and find out.

Well, there's racing......   

And then, there's "Jack Crosby Racing"!    

The current "race strength" rear disc brakes use 914 rotors. They use studs pressed into a steel (I think) hub under the big nut and the studs pass through the rotors. The brackets for the calipers are aluminum. 

I would like to be sure they will fit before ordering them.

Thanks for your replies.

I was speaking with one of my customers who owns a high tech machine shop. He and his adult son race formula bee at Watkins Glenand he has quite a collection of VW performance goodies around his shop. I mentioned that I was considering a rear brake upgrade to discs

 He showed me his rear drum pads. They are made for the form v cars and have carbon steel as part of the pad material. He is not cheap but he loves these as they are tested and proven to stop better than the disc conversions! I trust him. He is an aerospace engineer.  Just one of my odd experiences.

Formula Vee!

Michael McKelvey posted:

The current "race strength" rear disc brakes use 914 rotors. They use studs pressed into a steel (I think) hub under the big nut and the studs pass through the rotors. The brackets for the calipers are aluminum. 

I would like to be sure they will fit before ordering them.

Thanks for your replies.

Yes, "pressed".  That's the problem.  Pressed doesn't hold together.

"He is an aerospace engineer.  Just one of my odd experiences."

Yes.....    In my experience, Aerospace guys are always kinda weird......  

Jack Crosby posted:

Michael McKelvey posted:

The current "race strength" rear disc brakes use 914 rotors. They use studs pressed into a steel (I think) hub under the big nut and the studs pass through the rotors. The brackets for the calipers are aluminum. 

I would like to be sure they will fit before ordering them.

Thanks for your replies.

Yes, "pressed".  That's the problem.  Pressed doesn't hold together.

 

Jack,

You had a problem with the CB wide 5 kit, Michael is talking about the 4-lug kit. Totally different animal. The "pressed" part he was talking about is the lugs, which are a world better than the screwed in studs. Regardless, I believe the steel hub centers on the wide-5 kit are friction welded, not pressed into the AL hub body. The hub separation you got with your wide-5 kit can't happen on the 4-lug kit because the entire hub on those is steel.

Michael,

I'm pretty sure they aren't truly "zero-offset", although I could be wrong. I just checked-- there are no competition 4-lug kits with E-brakes, only the heavier iron rot-hub kits are available that way.

Michael McKelvey posted:

The current "race strength" rear disc brakes use 914 rotors. They use studs pressed into a steel (I think) hub under the big nut and the studs pass through the rotors. The brackets for the calipers are aluminum. 

I would like to be sure they will fit before ordering them.

Thanks for your replies.

The most common way of adding 914 rear rotors is with type 3 hubs which add about 5/8" track per side, so I would double check with CB (or whoever you end up buying from) to see how they do it. I forget, Michael- is your car swingaxle (long or short axles and tubes) or irs?

Michael McKelvey posted:

I am considering installing CB's Race Strength Rear Disc Brake Kit, 4 Lug, IRS, With Emergency Brake.

 

@ALB, IRS

@ALB  are there any pictures of this type of install on an IRS rear end with the parking brake cables?

Terry Nuckels posted:

Michael McKelvey posted:

I am considering installing CB's Race Strength Rear Disc Brake Kit, 4 Lug, IRS, With Emergency Brake.

 

@ALB, IRS

Of course! Thanks Terry.

IaM-Ray posted:

@ALB  are there any pictures of this type of install on an IRS rear end with the parking brake cables?

I'm sure if you checked the Samba, Ray, you could find pics (I'm going to bed). Hot VW's magazine (Dec. '94) did an article titled "Adapting 914 Rear Disc Brakes To An IRS VW" and give plans for home fabricated caliper and emergency brake cable brackets. I could scan and send it to you if you like (it'll give me a reason to learn how to use the scanner function on the printer).

Sure that would be nice..

Here is something I just found ... 914 rear brakes and Mk IV VW and brackets & have emerg brake too ... Carrier brackets are billet alloy available from Sharpbuilt

sharpbuilt.com

Here is a good look at the kit and its installation:

http://www.huelsmann.us/bugman/Rear_Disc_Tech.html 

Thanks for posting

Yep, I see now that the kit you're talking about does have an ebrake.

That's a nicely detailed writeup you linked, Michael. I have the Airkewld rear kit for short axle swing, and it doesn't add any width at all. Not that that matters to you. But it does use the same caliper as the CB kit. Pretty much every single rear VW kit uses the Varga caliper.

The install went exactly as your link, the only exception in the Airkewld case is aluminum hub and powdercoat steel caliper bracket. It's not that big a deal to do the install.

Loosening and tightening axle nuts are always best done on the ground. If you don't have anyone to help, make a wheel chock with a 45 degree cut on a 2x4. 

I don't understand the whole Varga VW thing. There's got to be better, more common, lighter rear calipers available.

The jetta type IV caliper works well as does the e brake

Stan Galat posted:

Jack Crosby posted:

Michael McKelvey posted:

The current "race strength" rear disc brakes use 914 rotors. They use studs pressed into a steel (I think) hub under the big nut and the studs pass through the rotors. The brackets for the calipers are aluminum. 

I would like to be sure they will fit before ordering them.

Thanks for your replies.

Yes, "pressed".  That's the problem.  Pressed doesn't hold together.

 

Jack,

You had a problem with the CB wide 5 kit, Michael is talking about the 4-lug kit. Totally different animal. The "pressed" part he was talking about is the lugs, which are a world better than the screwed in studs. Regardless, I believe the steel hub centers on the wide-5 kit are friction welded, not pressed into the AL hub body. The hub separation you got with your wide-5 kit can't happen on the 4-lug kit because the entire hub on those is steel.

Michael,

I'm pretty sure they aren't truly "zero-offset", although I could be wrong. I just checked-- there are no competition 4-lug kits with E-brakes, only the heavier iron rot-hub kits are available that way.

My mistake-I was unaware he was talking about a 4 lug wheel.  

Jack, I still appreciate your response.

You know you are always welcome.  See you in Carlisle and it can't get here too soon!

DannyP posted:

 

Loosening and tightening axle nuts are always best done on the ground. If you don't have anyone to help, make a wheel chock with a 45 degree cut on a 2x4. 

If you go this route be very careful. I've had one of those 45 degree cut 4x4's pop loose under pressure. It flew up crack me in the shin.  I had to carefully take the pry bar/socket off the wheel nut before I could hop around on one foot and let loose with a string of profanities.

Torque Meister makes loosening and tightening the big nut very easy.

Michael McKelvey posted:

Torque Meister makes loosening and tightening the big nut very easy.

That is a very nice tool and I wish I had one / might still get one.

I learned a lesson a few years back while on a trip to Fla and found a nice garage near Bunnell where an older,  former racing guy had  shop that would work on anything foreign. He liked the speedster and I ordered a set of tires from him. Next day while supervising the workers do the install he gave the car a bit of an inspection at no charge. I was impressed and he found one front wheel bearing needed tightening and also the big axle nut right rear needed tightening. 

He went at it with the air gun to the point I got concerned but he just grinned at me and said in a heavy German accent..." dey gotta be tight". 

A year or two later I needed to get that nut off and it took about 800 ft.lbs of me on the far end of a long bar to get it off. The axle threads and the nut were toast. I think the recommended torque spec is either 212 or 216 ft.lbs. Lesson learned. 

Several years ago I suggested we might want to create a tool registry where we could list tools we are willing to lend others.  Then David would be able to find and borrow a torque meister.

I bought a huge torque wrench and a 36mm socket for the rear axle nuts from Railroad Salvage.  Cheap and well made.  Don't use it often but when I do it is an excellent tool.

IaM-Ray posted:

Here is something I just found ... 914 rear brakes and Mk IV VW and brackets & have emerg brake too ... Carrier brackets are billet alloy available from Sharpbuilt

sharpbuilt.com

I just got an email from Sharpbuilt and they still sell those brackets, I wonder if billet aluminum is stronger than the forged or the steel brackets that are available?

Billet will be stronger than some castings but not quite as strong as a real forged aluminum bracket. The disadvantage of billet- you start with a honkin' big block of material and carve it down to shape. If you're paying someone to make the part (from billet or forging) it can be expensive. An aluminum casting, if done properly, should be strong enough, although a billet or forging will have the advantage of slightly less material (and weight) for the same strength. Steel will, of course, be stronger, probably cheaper, and for most people easier to work with, but at 2 1/2 times the weight of aluminum, there is a penalty.

The torque spec on the axle nut is 270 ft-lbs plus the next available slot on the castle nut for the cotter pin.

edsnova posted:

The torque spec on the axle nut is 270 ft-lbs plus the next available slot on the castle nut for the cotter pin.

Because Murphy's Law says 270 ft-lbs will never be where the slot and the hole line up. 

Robert M posted:

edsnova posted:

The torque spec on the axle nut is 270 ft-lbs plus the next available slot on the castle nut for the cotter pin.

Because Murphy's Law says 270 ft-lbs will never be where the slot and the hole line up. 

I said 212 or 216 ft.lbs above and that was wrong. My apologies. My Muir book on page 342 says 220 ft.lbs. on type 1 and  3 and 253 ft.lbs. on type 2. Anyone know for sure ? 

My orange (late model Beetle and K.G 1970 and newer) Bentley manual says 217 ft. lbs (important- and then tighten 'till you can get the cotter pin in; never leave it out, and never back it off just a wee bit to fit the cotter pin!). Always used that figure for whatever year Beetle I had (and I had a few in the first 15 or so years of my driving career) and stock or hotrodded, street or offroad, never lost a rear wheel.

I'm sure the blue Bentley manual (earlier beetle and k.g.) has the same spec.

It's a "spot-torque" part. Tighten it until you see spots.

220 ft/lbs is a minimum value. I use a 450 lb air hammer on mine.

To get back to my original question, I called CB and was told this kit is 1/4" offset, although I am not 100% confident the women actually knew with certainty.

That would use up all the space I have on the driver's side between the tire and fender.

I'm in same boat as you - IRS CMC currently with 914 2L Fuchs and 185/65x15 tires.  Pinky finger clearance on drivers side. Might go with the CIP2 5 bolt Fuchs polished replicas with reported 5" back spacing.  It's that or a set of DrClock's skinny wheels!

Now I am thinking about AC Industries zero offset kit. Some sellers have it with a bent steel caliper bracket but Socal sells it with a cast nodular iron bracket. This will be heavier than the Race Strength but the bracket and disc may not be much heavier than the old drum.

Greg;

Isn't that 5" back spacing worse  than our Fuchs 2L  wheels.

I think I have missed something.  in any event, I also have a pinky finger clearance at the rear drivers side .

I'll have to check calculations I did awhile back.  The 914 alloy wheels all have ET45 off set so that ends up being about 4.42" backspacing.  If the advertised 5" is correct I'd gain 1/2" clearance from the outer fender edge.  (I realize that isn't real accurate since there is still the outer tire rim and the width of the tire to consider too - but even 1/4" would be beneficial.  My concern is some of the Fuchs replicas say 4.5" which is same as the 2L wheels so no gain). 

Wish I had 1 CIP fake Fuchs on hand! Might be worth the $100 plus return shipping - but would really like to mount a tire which means they most likely wouldn't be returnable.

Michael McKelvey posted:

To get back to my original question, I called CB and was told this kit is 1/4" offset, although I am not 100% confident the women actually knew with certainty.

That would use up all the space I have on the driver's side between the tire and fender.

You can remove approximately 1/8-1/4" off of the rotor face to gain some clearance. I have about 45,000 miles on mine with no issues.

Yes you use a process called "Dermabrasion"  

WOLFGANG posted:

I'll have to check calculations I did awhile back.  The 914 alloy wheels all have ET45 off set so that ends up being about 4.42" backspacing.  If the advertised 5" is correct I'd gain 1/2" clearance from the outer fender edge.  (I realize that isn't real accurate since there is still the outer tire rim and the width of the tire to consider too - but even 1/4" would be beneficial.  My concern is some of the Fuchs replicas say 4.5" which is same as the 2L wheels so no gain). 

Wish I had 1 CIP fake Fuchs on hand! Might be worth the $100 plus return shipping - but would really like to mount a tire which means they most likely wouldn't be returnable.

You could call their management and see if someone in warehouse could take exact measurements with pictures... They do respond to my calls.

I may call and see if they have a scratched/damage one.  If it doesn't fit it would be a good air hose reel.

WOLFGANG posted:

I'll have to check calculations I did awhile back.  The 914 alloy wheels all have ET45 off set so that ends up being about 4.42" backspacing.  If the advertised 5" is correct I'd gain 1/2" clearance from the outer fender edge.  (I realize that isn't real accurate since there is still the outer tire rim and the width of the tire to consider too - but even 1/4" would be beneficial.  My concern is some of the Fuchs replicas say 4.5" which is same as the 2L wheels so no gain). 

Wish I had 1 CIP fake Fuchs on hand! Might be worth the $100 plus return shipping - but would really like to mount a tire which means they most likely wouldn't be returnable.

Define "awhile back"...

Yesterday I ordered the AC Industries zero offset kit from SoCal. I ordered their master cylinder for 4-wheel discs too. They told me I don't need residual pressure valves for their brakes and said they are only needed for inferior copies.

I am having them install studs in the rotors for $20 each side for the installation.

The man in the link I posted above suggested painting the whole rotor and letting the pads wear off the paint where they make contact. I wonder if that would work with powder coating. I am planning on having the rotors and caliper brackets powder coated. I assume I can't do that with the master cylinder and calipers because of the heat.

I have the same kit but in 5 lug. Rotating the rotor to 12 oclock while bleading the system is critical.

I wouldn't powder coat the rotor face, but thats just me.

Even though they call it zero-offset and someone in SoCal chat said it is zero-offset (he said the inferior copies are not), I just got a call from them saying it is not. They will have to machine some off the face of the face of the rotor.

@TRP, do you mean rotate the caliper? How do you rotate with the brake lines attached? I guess one needs to bend them and disconnect the parking brake cable.

Mike wrote: "The man in the link I posted above suggested painting the whole rotor and letting the pads wear off the paint where they make contact. I wonder if that would work with powder coating. I am planning on having the rotors and caliper brackets powder coated. I assume I can't do that with the master cylinder and calipers because of the heat."

hmmmmmmmmm.........   Veeery Interesting.

I put new rotors on our Outback and Rogue and the NAPA guys convinced me to go all-in with their Polymer coated rotors:

http://www.napabrakes.com/magn...s/ultra-premium.html

I do not know what the coating consists of, but they coated everything including the rotor faces.  The stuff wore off within a mile or so (lots of brake stomping involved, there).  

I do not know if this was a powder coating.  It seems to me that a number of heat-flowing powder coats are pretty hard once cured so I'm not sure if it is a good thing for a rotor face or not.  Paint or chromate?  Sure, but I can't speak to what's in powder coat mixes.  

On the Master Cylinder - Sure!  Powder coat all you want, just mask off all of the holes. Very little heat is generated in the M/C.

For the Calipers, just use high-heat powder coat, OR a high heat paint - they come in a bunch of colors (but no checkerboard if you're Cory Drake) and are typically good for over 600º.

@Gordon Nichols, I wasn't concerned about heat damaging the powder coating. I was concerned about the powder coating oven heat damaging the rubber and plastic bits in the master cylinder and calipers.

Powder coating takes 200 degrees to cure - so rubber and plastic would be toast.  Calipers would have to be dismantle before powder coating.  The spray or brush on caliper paint is hi-temp and very durable (just prep according to directions).  You can even buy hi-heat BREMBO or ATE decals too (if you want to be a replica poser, i guess).

I have caliper paint on my front calipers. It has chipped a bit.  I thought powder coating would be more durable.  I Googled powder coating brake calipers and some said to remove the guts and some said it is not necessary.

There is such a thing as UV curing powder coating and it would be nice to find someone who could do that.

I've powdercoated small parts for 10 years. All the home-brew kits I've used cure at 350*.  The high-heat coatings are even higher.

Michael McKelvey posted:

@TRP, do you mean rotate the caliper? How do you rotate with the brake lines attached? I guess one needs to bend them and disconnect the parking brake cable.

*facepalm* Yes, sorry.  Rotate the caliper ON the rotor so the bleed screw is at 12 o clock. Bleed the system. Rotate back when done.  You should have rubber lines between the metal lines and the pan. Unhook the metal horse shoe clip and slide thst union out of the retainer... That will give you enough play to rorate things without bending things. 

Rorate, Shaggy, rorate!

Stan Galat posted:

I've powdercoated small parts for 10 years. All the home-brew kits I've used cure at 350*.  The high-heat coatings are even higher.

What kind of small parts did you do and was it worth it?

IaM-Ray posted:

Stan Galat posted:

I've powdercoated small parts for 10 years. All the home-brew kits I've used cure at 350*.  The high-heat coatings are even higher.

What kind of small parts did you do and was it worth it?

 

I imagine... anything that would fit in a standard oven. 

^ that.

... and yes, completely worth it. 

I wouldn't necessarily use your family's kitchen oven, though.  Especially when you can get a perfectly serviceable, used, Kitchen Oven for your shop from a place like a Habitat for Humanity "Re-Store" or Goodwill or even a free one from an appliance store that was removed when a new stove gets installed.  We had one in the car club down south and it was really handy.  All I have up here is an old counter-top toaster oven.

Valve covers for both the Speedster and the Mustang, exhaust pipes, my shift and 550 brake levers, the backs of my fog lights, a set of wrenches, a cast-iron piggy-bank thing, the tops of my carburetors, odds and ends in the shed, some of our Raleigh bicycle parts, a couple old Tonka trucks ... pretty much everything that can be baked in the ol' family oven ... has been.

I like to do that when Mrs. Drake is not at home, and thoroughly clean the oven afterward. I'm not big on residual bad stuff hanging around in there -- but if it comes down to me or the car, the car's going to last longer than I do anyway.

I'm sort of (not really) kidding.

PFFT.

Powder-coat doesn't off-gas at all. There are no distillates in the powder, so curing parts in the oven is probably safer than spraying that same oven down with Easy-Off. It's nothing at all like curing paint.

I'd love to build a big oven using an element and control from a cast-off electric range, but I'm still working out the design. 

I'll try some in my 900 degree plus UUNI Pizza oven outdoors...... maybe not. It's pellet fired.

I'll stick with my cast-off, Oster counter-top jobbie, thank you.

The one we got in Beaufort was a KitchenAid Electric range.  We actually got two that came from the same home, one was a single, YUGE! floor oven and the other was a wall-mount with an upper/lower config.  The big one could easily take a complete front A-Arm assembly from a full-size car, (or a 30 pound turkey) while the smaller ones were good for something up to brake drums and such.  NONE of them had heat accuracy worth a Dam so we used a BBQ thermometer to set the heat level - once set they would hold it to within 15 - 20 degrees or so.

Just another one of those things I wish I had room for (and many reasons to use it).

https://www.rcnmag.com/d-i-y/powder-coating-at-home

Good article on powder coating on RCN

WOLFGANG posted:

https://www.rcnmag.com/d-i-y/powder-coating-at-home

Good article on powder coating on RCN

That's the gun I use. I've got 3 of them.

Art posted:

Greg;

Isn't that 5" back spacing worse  than our Fuchs 2L  wheels.

I think I have missed something.  in any event, I also have a pinky finger clearance at the rear drivers side .

Wolfgang, what I was trying to understand, is that the larger the backspace number, the further the distance from the outside edge of the wheel well?? ie rub spot ?

thanks, Art

Art posted:

Art posted:

Greg;

Isn't that 5" back spacing worse  than our Fuchs 2L  wheels.

I think I have missed something.  in any event, I also have a pinky finger clearance at the rear drivers side .

Wolfgang, what I was trying to understand, is that the larger the backspace number, the further the distance from the outside edge of the wheel well?? ie rub spot ?

thanks, Art

Yes, Art. The larger the backspacing, the closer to the outside the mounting surfacace is and the further in the wheel sits. 

Lol, I keep reading these posts and it gets confusing.  

"The larger the backspacing, the closer to the outside the mounting surfacace is and the further in the wheel sits. "

So... the larger the backspacing, the more space is given from the front rim edge of the wheel to the fender and thus provides more clearance with the fender. 

This will make the wheel rim look like it is a bottle cap, when placed on the hub, as nearly nothing of the rim is on the fender side and most of it is now sitting towards the   interior of the car.   as in the positive offset example below.

The deep dish look is kool on the ultra wide VS - but just can't work with a classic CMC rear.  The fake Fuchs at CIP1 say 5" back spacing so on 5.5" wheel that remarkable and hardly any to stick out and rub. A 4.5" wheel would work well but that is a skinny wheel and really too narrow for a 185 or probably 165 tire.

Check this wide 5 out - mounting surface has to be near flush with outer rim?

Negative Offset:

Back in the day, this is what any self-respecting corn-fed white-boy aspired to. Mickey Thompson M50s on Cragar S/Ss sticking 3+" proud of the fender lips, air-shocks with 150 psi pressure so the bodywork would clear, chromed differential cover on the 12-bolt rear-end. Weight-transfer was horrible, but we all though the massive rubber made up for it. It was impressive when those big bias-ply meats broke loose.

This one must've had ladder bars, because I can't see any traction bars hanging under the leaves.

FYI: 4.5-inch rims are fine for 165/80-15s and will fit 185/65s without complaint. I currently have a garage full of these combos. Also: my TD runs 4-inch MWS wire wheels with 165/80-15s.

I spoke to Andy at Socal who I presume is the owner.  He said he didn't realize the brakes were not quite zero offset.  He put a drum in a lathe and set the cutting tool to the face and then replaced the drum with my rotors and cut them to the same dimension. He mentioned they supply a lot of parts to Vintage Speedsters and he owns a Vintage Speedster.

edsnova posted:

FYI: 4.5-inch rims are fine for 165/80-15s and will fit 185/65s without complaint. I currently have a garage full of these combos. Also: my TD runs 4-inch MWS wire wheels with 165/80-15s.

According to Tirerack- recommended rim size for a 165/80 is 4-5.5" As the aspect ratio goes down the recommended rim changes- for a 165/60 it calls for a 5- 6.5" rim. For a 185/65 a 5-6.5" rim is also recommended. Beetle owners (as well as the occasional Speedster owner) put 185's on 4.5" rims all the time and with such light cars we get away with it, but some tire shops might not want to do it (I guess for legal issues that would pop up if something happened).

Illegal ?? Perhaps... but when the tire rolls off your (skinny) rim ...you will realize that size and dimension ARE meaningful !

 ReV

Yes, a 185/65 calls for a minimum 5" rim. But experience has shown that a 4.5" rim works just fine. Like I said on this EXACT SAME ISSUE over at Spyderclub, I personally have over 40,000 road and track miles that say this is OK. 

So instead of trying to scare people, name me any incidences you have of this tire/rim combo rolling off. I've heard of and experienced zero.

And it's not illegal to mount, just not recommended.

If all you are doing is putting the car on a trailer and off the trailer...then it does not matter...But if you are a "fast shoe" it is ever so much a factor !

 ReV

 Mr. Panhandle,

 I am a long time drag and road racer (40 + years). I once had an Anglia Gas Coupe which had 3” wide front rims and the appropriate (very narrow) rubber. No one would attempt any high speed turns with this set-up except in a dire emergency !

 But perhaps of more relevance is my experience with my own Beck Spyder. When purchased from Adriana Lima and her husband, the car had 200 miles on the clock, and needed to have both front and rear suspension “tuned” and aligned... which I did.

 After some 2000 mile I was disappointed at “tuck” (understeer characteristics). Since the Mangels wheels could not be balanced (massive runout), I got rid of them, and only then discovered that the front rims fitted with 185/65/15” rubber were 4 ½ inches wide…inadequate…in every way, and that explained why the tires in the front literally peeled off the rims in entry to sharp corners, irrespective of  normal  (1.4-1.7 bar) tire pressures.

If you don’t go fast…it really does not matter…but if you try to go fast with the wrong set-up... there is a guard-rail out there waiting to get to know you better

  ReV

Again, Rev, you have proven to be an ass over here as well as at Spyderclub.

My car has never been on a trailer except when it was delivered, smart ass. And I have driven that car pretty darn hard, as all my buddies over here will attest to.

Are you a politician? Deflect and don't answer, yup, that's what they do.

So I'll ask you again and make it in caps, not because I'm yelling, because I'm not. It's because I actually want an answer!

PLEASE GIVE EXAMPLE(S) OF 185/65R15 TIRES ROLLING OFF A 4.5" RIM.

Or just go away.......

OK, so we posted at the same time. So you have one example. This has not been my experience. I've autocrossed the car many times and done track days. No problems. And everyone here will tell you I definitely DON'T drive like Grandma.

R Vosari posted:

 

 Mr. Panhandle,

 I am a long time drag and road racer (40 + years). I once had an Anglia Gas Coupe which had 3” wide front rims and the appropriate (very narrow) rubber. No one would attempt any high speed turns with this set-up except in a dire emergency !

 But perhaps of more relevance is my experience with my own Beck Spyder. When purchased from Adriana Lima and her husband, the car had 200 miles on the clock, and needed to have both front and rear suspension “tuned” and aligned... which I did.

 After some 2000 mile I was disappointed at “tuck” (understeer characteristics). Since the Mangels wheels could not be balanced (massive runout), I got rid of them, and only then discovered that the front rims fitted with 185/65/15” rubber were 4 ½ inches wide…inadequate…in every way, and that explained why the tires in the front literally peeled off the rims in entry to sharp corners, irrespective of  normal  (1.4-1.7 bar) tire pressures.

If you don’t go fast…it really does not matter…but if you try to go fast with the wrong set-up... there is a guard-rail out there waiting to get to know you better

  ReV

You'll note that I eliminated my earlier post. I Decided I just didn't want to get into this, but you saw the post before I eliminated it, so here goes.....

First, Mr. Panhandle is unnecessary. Just call me Bob.

Second, it may amaze you to learn that I actually understand the meaning of terms like "tuck". No need to define.

Thirdly, I am surprised that you didn't do a thorough inspection of the Spyder before acquiring it. If you had, you would have known what the tire and wheel size were. Something expected of a man with more than forty years of drag and road racing under his belt.

And, lastly, you come across as a pompous ass.

No need to respond, I don't have time for this. I have a lot of time, just not for this, and I am simply going to block you.

Bob, hope to shake your hand in person someday.

Back at you, Danny.

Panhandle Bob posted:

R Vosari posted:

 

 Mr. Panhandle,

 I am a long time drag and road racer (40 + years). I once had an Anglia Gas Coupe which had 3” wide front rims and the appropriate (very narrow) rubber. No one would attempt any high speed turns with this set-up except in a dire emergency !

 But perhaps of more relevance is my experience with my own Beck Spyder. When purchased from Adriana Lima and her husband, the car had 200 miles on the clock, and needed to have both front and rear suspension “tuned” and aligned... which I did.

 After some 2000 mile I was disappointed at “tuck” (understeer characteristics). Since the Mangels wheels could not be balanced (massive runout), I got rid of them, and only then discovered that the front rims fitted with 185/65/15” rubber were 4 ½ inches wide…inadequate…in every way, and that explained why the tires in the front literally peeled off the rims in entry to sharp corners, irrespective of  normal  (1.4-1.7 bar) tire pressures.

If you don’t go fast…it really does not matter…but if you try to go fast with the wrong set-up... there is a guard-rail out there waiting to get to know you better

  ReV

You'll note that I eliminated my earlier post. I Decided I just didn't want to get into this, but you saw the post before I eliminated it, so here goes.....

First, Mr. Panhandle is unnecessary. Just call me Bob.

Second, it may amaze you to learn that I actually understand the meaning of terms like "tuck". No need to define.

Thirdly, I am surprised that you didn't do a thorough inspection of the Spyder before acquiring it. If you had, you would have known what the tire and wheel size were. Something expected of a man with more than forty years of drag and road racing under his belt.

And, lastly, you come across as a pompous ass.

No need to respond, I don't have time for this. I have a lot of time, just not for this, and I am simply going to block you.

I guess I don't need to point this out to him, you handled it first!

Anybody got any popcorn?

Panhandle Bob posted:

R Vosari posted:

 

 Mr. Panhandle,

 I am a long time drag and road racer (40 + years). I once had an Anglia Gas Coupe which had 3” wide front rims and the appropriate (very narrow) rubber. No one would attempt any high speed turns with this set-up except in a dire emergency !

 But perhaps of more relevance is my experience with my own Beck Spyder. When purchased from Adriana Lima and her husband, the car had 200 miles on the clock, and needed to have both front and rear suspension “tuned” and aligned... which I did.

 After some 2000 mile I was disappointed at “tuck” (understeer characteristics). Since the Mangels wheels could not be balanced (massive runout), I got rid of them, and only then discovered that the front rims fitted with 185/65/15” rubber were 4 ½ inches wide…inadequate…in every way, and that explained why the tires in the front literally peeled off the rims in entry to sharp corners, irrespective of  normal  (1.4-1.7 bar) tire pressures.

If you don’t go fast…it really does not matter…but if you try to go fast with the wrong set-up... there is a guard-rail out there waiting to get to know you better

  ReV

You'll note that I eliminated my earlier post. I Decided I just didn't want to get into this, but you saw the post before I eliminated it, so here goes.....

First, Mr. Panhandle is unnecessary. Just call me Bob.

Second, it may amaze you to learn that I actually understand the meaning of terms like "tuck". No need to define.

Thirdly, I am surprised that you didn't do a thorough inspection of the Spyder before acquiring it. If you had, you would have known what the tire and wheel size were. Something expected of a man with more than forty years of drag and road racing under his belt.

And, lastly, you come across as a pompous ass.

No need to respond, I don't have time for this. I have a lot of time, just not for this, and I am simply going to block you.

THANK GOODNESS the PANHANDLE has blocked me also

I'd have to visit a SHRINK if he did NOT

POPCORN anyone?

I've always followed the published tire size/rim width recommendations.  (I don't believe in Global warming though - especially the human contribution). Was told a 4-4.5 rim got a 145/155 tire and 5/5.5 got 165/175/185 tire.  The explanation was "too wide a tire on a rim could cause the side wall to start to roll over and lose air (suddenly deflate) in aggressive driving or the side wall to be damaged from the rim due to contact in area not designed for contact.  Newer rims (for tubeless tires so not early VW rims ) do have a safety bump in the rims to help prevent this and keep the stiff tire bead situated). The side wall on passenger tires are flimsy with like 2 ply nylon cord.  This maybe "old school" and is based on old tall tires (80 or 75 aspect ratio tires) like original '70 sports cars used).  With lower aspect ratios, the side walls are shorter so stiffer - even on 65 series but more so on 50/45/40. I suspect weight of car and tire compound has impact too.  A light car with wide tires on skinny rim and sticky rubber would be different than heavy powerful Chevy on same set up.

Nice diagrams

... but the fact that the captions say "to" instead of "too" bothers my sensibilities. 

@Stan Galat, it is nice to see your comment.

Grammar. The difference between feeling your nuts and feeling you're nuts.

as a former Proof/Content Editor for two national fishing magazines, I get a kick out of this forum, many of the posts wouldn't pass muster in a 6th grade english class but...I love you all anyway, keep on destroying my (and Stan and Michaels) sensibilities...

I love all too and there are other things that offend my sensibilities more than grammar and punctuation - like Wolfgang's comment on global warming. I love the maker of such comments despite their misguided opinions. 

I find any theory that cannot be questioned and where my tax dollars are commanded to be used by governments akin to a religion.  

Where Religious belief are questioned there is always suppositions of lack of intelligence to the one believing in reliigion or God, yet no one can question the theory of global warming or CO2 emissions.  

Let's face it, it is just the new religion that is state sponsored by zealots who have taken control of our governments, and their coffers and discovered that they can control the public purse to their advantage. 

Ethanol in gaz is another nonsense. 

Well, we have launched into thread drift.

I agree about ethanol.

 Ray;

Do not move to California.  Just sayin.  It would drive you nuts.

I should also mention that while this was happening, the take over of the government purse that is,  those in the real world who happened to have a higher than normal IQ simply when off to make money in the capital system forgetting that those who chose the government sector, will when they get numerous enough, take control of the government coffers and policies, and cause  the sale of Government koolaid to be sold  from K to 12 and also universities.  

Science by it's definition is to be continually questioned until whatever is postulated can be replicated by any investigator.  It is Evidence based.  

Now we have the Ideology of historical science where no witness exists replacing real Science... 

Historical science is just theory, and to adopt it as fact, is certainly the new koolaid of government.  

Hence my definition of this koolaid being the new Religion.  Religion is not rational, and certainly mostly in your mind... hence the very definition of a delusional state. 

And it keeps on going. 

Hope you enjoyed my rant.

Art posted:

 Ray;

Do not move to California.  Just sayin.  It would drive you nuts.

Cali, Virginia to name a few.  

Apologize for the "too" faux pas.  Pulled diagram from internet so can't blame auto-correct.  All the other diagrams spelled "tyres" wrong - couldn't have that!   

Will,

You may want to read your posts again for editing/content errors.  Your errors must be at the 7th grade level.

wow, sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes...Jim included...