18 v 20
5th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,358
From: City of God
I was replying more to your ingnorance thats all.... Im sure people are just torn because you think they are wanna be gangsta, I sure know I am now, going to toss my rims in the garbage....(READ THE SARCASM CAUSE YOU MISSED IT IN MY LAST POST)
What makes somebody a wanna be "gangsta"? Did you stop them and ask them if they want to be in a gang?
I wear jerseys, listen to rap music and im covered in tattoos so I guess Im a wanna be "gangsta" too
lol @ cutterwolfes credibility not getting any favors cause norm peterson said so.... are you the norm peterson from cheers?
Nothing wrong with stating your opinion but atleast put some thought into it before you state it...Im pretty sure the op wanted to know the advantage/dissadvantags of the 2 not if you were gong to call him a Gangsta or not...
what starfire said GET WHAT YOU WANT and dont let DB comments leads you astray....
5th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,616
From: Brandon, Florida
I have no problem with your math and will take it at face value.
What I do have an issue with is comparing against a tire that's way too small (255/35-18) to ever be considered for use on these cars. It's intentionally misleading, and drawing peoples' attention away from the main topic in that manner is not doing your credibility any favors.
FWIW, the load capacity of a 235/55-18 is about right for my 14 year old 2900 lb Mazda 626, not my '08 3500 lb GT. Apples vs apples, please.
Actually, 255/35-20 is somewhat undersized for these Mustangs as well, unless you have load designation 'XL' tires and are inflating them accordingly. But that's a whole 'nother topic for a different day.
Norm
What I do have an issue with is comparing against a tire that's way too small (255/35-18) to ever be considered for use on these cars. It's intentionally misleading, and drawing peoples' attention away from the main topic in that manner is not doing your credibility any favors.
FWIW, the load capacity of a 235/55-18 is about right for my 14 year old 2900 lb Mazda 626, not my '08 3500 lb GT. Apples vs apples, please.
Actually, 255/35-20 is somewhat undersized for these Mustangs as well, unless you have load designation 'XL' tires and are inflating them accordingly. But that's a whole 'nother topic for a different day.
Norm
The point that I was making which was not intentionally misleading is that 18's will make your car not only look lower but in some cases will physically sit lower than most cars with 20's. Most of the time its purely an optical thing but take a look at some stangs with 18's and the same lowering springs and a car sitting on 20's with comparable tire sizes and you will see that the one with the 18's appears to be lower.
So this statement I made in my first post is not intentionally misleading.
"Do you want a nice ultra low looking ride? If yes, get the 18's. With the 18's you can lower it more and it will phyiscally sit lower to the ground then it will with 20's." This statement is true depending on how the OP sets it up tire size wise.
Last edited by CutterWolf; Jun 5, 2009 at 12:50 PM.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,635
From: state of confusion
So this statement I made in my first post is not intentionally misleading.
"Do you want a nice ultra low looking ride? If yes, get the 18's. With the 18's you can lower it more and it will phyiscally sit lower to the ground then it will with 20's." This statement is true depending on how the OP sets it up tire size wise.
"Do you want a nice ultra low looking ride? If yes, get the 18's. With the 18's you can lower it more and it will phyiscally sit lower to the ground then it will with 20's." This statement is true depending on how the OP sets it up tire size wise.
Seriously, 255/35-18's are too undersize for these cars to be really useful in relating wheel sizes here.
TOMBSTANG - No, I'm not THAT Norm. But I really did tip a few in that downstairs pub back before Sam tended bar there.
Norm
5th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,358
From: City of God
Then you won't mind if I suggest that you'd get REALLY low using 275/35-15's. Yes, that size does exist, albeit at only 40 treadwear, 22" tall (and only a little over 1000 lbs load capacity) - bet you'd throw sparks from time to time.
Seriously, 255/35-18's are too undersize for these cars to be really useful in relating wheel sizes here.
TOMBSTANG - No, I'm not THAT Norm. But I really did tip a few in that downstairs pub back before Sam tended bar there.
Norm
Seriously, 255/35-18's are too undersize for these cars to be really useful in relating wheel sizes here.
TOMBSTANG - No, I'm not THAT Norm. But I really did tip a few in that downstairs pub back before Sam tended bar there.
Norm
5th Gear Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,790
From: Elizabeth City N.C.
lol @ "gangsta".......
you tell me when you see a gang banger driving a decked out stang.....
last time I checked they were riding crown vics with 26's or walking or riding in w/e they steal lol
when I see a stang with 18's I think dam dude its 2009 cut the mullett and magnum PI mustache and get some nice rims........(dont really think that just on par with your "gangsta comment)
HRE wheels are not always lighter either just cause they are forged 3 peice does not garantee they are light, garantee they are mad expensive though.
you tell me when you see a gang banger driving a decked out stang.....
last time I checked they were riding crown vics with 26's or walking or riding in w/e they steal lol
when I see a stang with 18's I think dam dude its 2009 cut the mullett and magnum PI mustache and get some nice rims........(dont really think that just on par with your "gangsta comment)
HRE wheels are not always lighter either just cause they are forged 3 peice does not garantee they are light, garantee they are mad expensive though.
5th Gear Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,897
From: TX
After wading through all the arguments lol I've also had 15/16/17/18 and 20's. And a long history of sports/muscle cars. Used to be that a 50 series tire was "super hi-perf" lol. My buddy had a 1990 iroc-z with 245/50's and everyone thought those were the fattest/lowest profile tires they had ever seen back in 1992 
.
I was running 20'' 255/275-35 tires/wheels and they weighed approx. 3-4 lbs more per wheel than my current 18'' 275/40 and 305/35 tires/wheels. Much more rubber on the road and less rotating mass makes a big difference.
.I was running 20'' 255/275-35 tires/wheels and they weighed approx. 3-4 lbs more per wheel than my current 18'' 275/40 and 305/35 tires/wheels. Much more rubber on the road and less rotating mass makes a big difference.
5th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,358
From: City of God
lol magnum PI is off the hook, bad *** ****, do you wear the same size shorts as him though I may have to call ya out on that lol. Lil bit to much thigh for most.
