Just thought I'd let you all know....I ordered custom bs cragars from Carlisle wheel and tire (the company that owns cragar now) with 5 1/8" inches of bs for my '66 (stock rear end). Had the bfg radial t/a's mounted and the tires fit, but they're rubbing on the inside of the frame at any corner over 15 mph. graemlins/angry.gif So rather than run wheel spacers (which are realllllllly unsafe) or try and return the non-returnable wheels, I opted to order 275/50 Bfg's for the back..hopefully that will fix the clearance issue...I'll let you all know how it turns out... :-/

About 5 inches of BS would work well...

rather than run wheel spacers (which are realllllllly unsafe)NOT true...

Wheel spacers (within reason) are NOT unsafe... Sure, a 1-inch think spacer might not be the best safety idea

A 1/8 to 1/4-inch spacer will not cause any realistic safety issues (assuming all other components (studs and lug nuts) are good quality pieces properly torqued... And you are not taking the car beyond normal limits (jumping, full-on racing, etc). BFG T/A Radials do not have enough grip to make this an issue.

A thin spacer acts doesn't act much differently on the studs than a brake drum or rotor.

then there is the safety factor engineered into the car originally.

If you lug nuts are loose, then yes, the spacer might help increase problems, but other than that, thin spacers shouldn't be an issue...

Sure, ideally I wouldn't want to run spacers, but I do for my 295/50-15 on 15X8 on my Chevelle (I too ordered just a bit too much and experienced the same as you, inside rubbing on corners or when loaded with passengers...

I added 1/8-inch spacers, and didn't have to make any mods to the outer lip. I have driven the car like this for 9 years (even raced it at the dragstrip where Tech inspection said the spacers were okay), and have never had a problem.

As an engineering student (7-8 years ago), I actually did some calcs on this, and it wasn't worth worrying about. I never looked into really thick spacers.

I would Never use the thick spacers (or really over 1/4 inch thick). And I would personally never use those "wheel adapters", although I have never heard of problems with those either.

I also think that larger companies (like Mr. Gasket) would not even sell these spacers if there were likely liability issues, they don't want to get sued.

Tony, what backspace did you use on your Chevelle? What year is it?
I have a pair of 295/50/15's and I was going to order the 4 1/2" backspace to fit on my 69 Chevelle. I've heard that a tire that wide on an 8 inch wheel would crown, because the bead would be too close together, and not give as much traction as if it was on a 10 inch wide wheel.

Mark,
My Chevelle is a 1966 with a stock 1966 12-bolt (narrower than the 68-72 rears). BS was a little over 5 inches (and with the 1/8 inch spacer yields about 5 inches...

I've heard that a tire that wide on an 8 inch wheel would crown, because the bead would be too close together, and not give as much traction as if it was on a 10 inch wide wheel.No, while placing a wide tire on a narrow rim can cause "crowning" and contact patch/traction issues, BFG recommends that the 295/50-15 be placed on rims between 8 and 10 inches wide...

If it was "bad" to use an 8-inch rim with this tire, then they (BFG) wouldn't suggest that rim size (8-inch is the narrowest rim BFG suggests for this tire size)...

While I have had traction problems with my Chevelle, the contact patches are full width and have even color (rubber) distribution patterns... So no "crowning" at 32 psi inflation.

I understand what you are asking, but I think that having too wide a rim can cause the tread to cup as well (opposite effect of "crowning"). Still leading to a loss of traction. Looking at my tires and the wear of them, I would think that using 10 to 11 inch rims might cause problems with the 295s, but these sizes are also in BFGs suggested range...


I am not an expert, but I have had these tires on my car for 8-9 years (5000+ miles, with lots of burnouts, getting sideways in 2nd and 3rd, etc). While the tires are starting to wear out, there are NO signs of uneven treadwear. Tread depth is almost identical all the way across the tire (when measured last summer).

I also had 295/50-15 BFGs on several other cars over the years. Never a problem and always on 8-inch rims.

I used to work at a speedshop/tire and wheel store (SuperShops) and we sold ALOT of BFG T/A radials (this was 19 years ago). We periodically had BFG training, and I remember this topic coming up (because the widest BFG was the 295, and it was very popular). For some reason many people thought they had to buy 10-inch rims too. Wasn't the case, and never had a complaint...

1966_L78. Dude...it would have been nice to know you were running spacers on your wheels. I called up and ordered custom cragars based on your advice..."a little over 5" of b/s." You never mentioned anything about running spacers..so I ordered my cragars with 5 1/8" bs to fit 295/50/15's on cragar 15x8's.

You say that spacers are not a safety issue...and I would tend to agree with you...but the tire shops will not install them because "they are unsafe". In any case though, I don't think that even 5" of b/s would keep the meats from rubbing on the inside of the frame around any corner going over 20 mph...so, alas, I am downsizing to the 275/50's....not really a big deal, but like I said, if you answer a post on specific backspacing, I would classify the fact that you are running spacers on your wheels as "pertinent and necessary info."

Swing....why don't you order less of a backspacing on the wheels? You then wouldn't have to use the spacers, and you would still be able to use the 295's that you wanted. based on what I have read so far, the 295's will fit with the right wheel combo. I'm going to go with 15x8 and a 4 1/2 backspace on my '69.

I cant change the order, cause the wheels are already here, and custom orders are non-returnable. :mad: And as of now, I'm a poor college student...in a couple of years, after I pay off my 100k in student loans, I can order and re order as many times as I want... graemlins/beers.gif

1966_L78. Dude...it would have been nice to know you were running spacers on your wheels. I called up and ordered custom cragars based on your advice..."a little over 5" of b/s." You never mentioned anything about running spacers..so I ordered my cragars with 5 1/8" bs to fit 295/50/15's on cragar 15x8's.Swing,
Sorry, but mine still is equivalent to over 5 inches, with the spacers... I had originally ordered somewhere around 5-1/4 inch or 5-3/8 inch (its been 9 years, but it was more than 5-1/8", so even with the 1/8 spacer its still over 5 inches)...

So even with the spacer, I still have slightly over 5 inches of BS...

I added the spacers because the car rubbed when loaded, or when cornering somewhat aggressively, but it was fine when driving ordinarily, and this was when it was lowered 3-4 inches in the back...

With the 1/8" spacers, the car has NEVER rubbed, leading me to believe that less than 1/8 inch was actually needed...

I honestly did use a hammer to bend back the lower lip of the inner fender, but this was just to insure that the tire would not get cut by that sharp edge... Signs of rubbing the inner fender were further up inside...

Furthermore, while the GTO/Lemans "should" be the same as the Chevelle (inner wheelwells that is), the outer lip location and overall width are all likely slightly different from the Chevy counterpart... Maybe not significanly different...

There are also production variances, and these 38+ year-old vehicles have been known to NOT be centered on the frame (both due to production and old body-mounts).

rear drums or discs? Disc rotors are usually thicker than drums, and would also push the wheels out slightly more. Very little, but then my 1/8" spacers are very little.

Then there's the potential issue of suspension condition. Are you using rubber or poly bushings? Stock sway bar or larger? Rear sway bar? Stock (or stock replacement) springs and shocks?

My suspension was very stiff (all Poly, 1-1/4" front bar, "stock" GM rearbar, boxed lower control arms, Hotchkis springs, and KYB gas shocks.

If your suspension was not really stiff or had excessive bodyroll in corners, this could have also made the tires rub...

Had the bfg radial t/a's mounted and the tires fit, but they're rubbing on the inside of the frame at any corner over 15 mphIf your suspension is stiff, and if your tires were rubbing at any corner over 15 mph, then they might not need more than 1/8" less BS, and therefore would still use slightly more than 5", as you said I stated...


Finally, I think there might also be slight variance in BS with production wheels... I recall my wheels being slightly off from what I had specified...


The point is, I am honestly sorry that you ordered the wrong combo. I know this worked for me, but 5-inch BS would probably work as well... I do not think 4.5" would work, but 4.75" might clear, but it might cut at the outer lip...

BUT all vehicles are different...

Very timely,

Alan posted this the other day...

http://www.chevelles.com/forum/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002414

hey you guys....sorry about the irate posts. you're right...people should be measuring their own cars...although it's often impossible to tell how much a tire is going to bow out (bulge) on a given sized wheel, I probabaly would have been able to tell that there was gonna be some rubbing if I had measured...but alas, the car was in WA and I was in NC...and with a 2-3 week lead time needed for custom bs wheels, it would have been unlikely that I would have gotten them in time if I had waited to order while I was home. Every last piece of suspension has been replaced with poly bushings/hotchkis stuff on that car...so it corners pretty much flat, but even still, I don't think 1/8" would have made a difference - my wheel wells just aren't big enough for my driving style :). I ended up going with the 275/50/15's on the rear...and they look sharp, and there is NO rubbing...even when I'm taking corners at 35mph+ And they're a hell of a lot sticky-er than the Mickey Thompsons that were twice their size...:) so all is well guys. Thanks again for your help...