16" vs 17" wheels - question

[wayne551]

Looking for some help and info from the wheel folks out there.

My previous truck was an FJ. I replaced the OEM 17" alloys with 16" AR Mojave Teflons. I like the look of less wheel and more tire.

I'd like to do the same to my 3" lifted 4th Gen 4R with AR Chamber Teflons. Is there any mechanical or functional reason that I should stick with 17" wheels? Or is this mainly an aesthetics choice?

To make it more interesting, AR's website lists the two sizes like this:

AR Chamber Teflon:
17" x 9": Offset: -12, Backspace: 4.53
16" x 8": Offset: 0, Backspace: 4.5

Is there a reason why the same style wheel in 16" and 17" would have different amounts of offset?

If I go with the 17" wheel, approximately how much further outboard does negative 12 offset stick out? Is it dramatically more than the 0 offset of the 16" wheel?

The plan is to then fit as much BFG AT as possible after I choose the wheel size.

 

[bxc13]

my inital thoughts are that if you have bigger SE brakes (or plan to upgrade), the 16" rims will not work.

-12mm is about 1/2 inch. factor in the extra 1" width of the 17x9 rim, then it should stick out almost an inch further than the 16x8 with a 0mm offset.

I personally would go with the 17x9's since you are already lifted 3". The stance would look much better with the wheels/tires out more.

HTH,
Bill

 

[CJ3Flyr]

My mental math is working out similar but I don't know how important it is... You're going to gain 3" (plus or minus a bit) on the track either way.

The stock wheels are a -30mm offset and 7.5" wide. By going to a zero offset that would move the outer edge out by 1.2". Add .5" of rim width. Now the outer edge of the 16x8 rim is 1.45" farther than OE, right?

If so then the 17" diameter wheel moves in 12mm (almost .5" so we're out "1.2") BUT the 17" rim is yet another inch wider and therefore the outer edge is back to 1.7" farther out than OE.

I'm a fan of 16's even though I don't have them now... If I bought rims I'd take the .5" (.25"x2) hit on on track to have the 16's. Sounds to me like the stance will be virtually identical. The other thing is I like tall skinnies, 9" rims are ideal for tires that are bigger than I'd want on a stock-geared, V6 T4R. Just my 2cents...
:cheers:

 

[wayne551]

Thanks for the numbers help - I was always sloppy with my math (gave my father, the engineer, many gray hairs).

CJ3Flyr - I follow that negative offset equals wider track. If the stock wheels are -33mm offset, then why would -12 or 0 offset be wider than stock?

Two replies, two opinions... So if there aren't any other mechanical or handling concerns other than potential bigger brakes, then I see that it will come down to my aesthetic preference.

Any else I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

 

[CJ3Flyr]

Thanks for the numbers help - I was always sloppy with my math (gave my father, the engineer, many gray hairs).

CJ3Flyr - I follow that negative offset equals wider track. If the stock wheels are -33mm offset You're correct, I had the right concept but positive and negative reversed:bash: Zero offset is kinda wide and beefy, negative offset = very beefy, wide and rough of suspension components/bearings. Bottom line is the aftermarket rims sit farther out.:bash: Sorry for saying the wrong thing!, then why would -12 or 0 offset be wider than stock?

Two replies, two opinions... So if there aren't any other mechanical or handling concerns other than potential bigger brakes, then I see that it will come down to my aesthetic preference.

Any else I'm overlooking?

Thanks!

Do the 16's I'm sorry if I wasn't clear the first time.

 

[Gstick]

I wish that I had the option for 16" wheels on my 2010. Way more tire choices, and 16" rubber is cheaper than 17" +.

 

[wayne551]

No problem CJ3Flyr - thanks for the follow up. I like the thought of the 16" size. But I'm still left with one question -

You said that the stock 17" 4th Gen 4R wheels are -30mm offset. So, wouldn't a replacement 16" wheel with 0 offset be that much less beefy and wide than stock?

 

[CJ3Flyr]

No problem CJ3Flyr - thanks for the follow up. I like the thought of the 16" size. But I'm still left with one question -

You said that the stock 17" 4th Gen 4R wheels are -30mm offset. So, wouldn't a replacement 16" wheel with 0 offset be that much less beefy and wide than stock?

I am both confused and very sure... The 0 offset wheels WILL be a wider stance than OE. I wrote neg 30. I should have written 30mm offset. The stock wheel absolutely goes in 30mm farther than zero Does that help clear it up? Offset seems to be a funny term; I have seen it both ways: Neg equals a narrow stance and neg equals a wide stance. I just need to be better educated on the terminology

 

[wayne551]

In my math-challenged world, I usually get lost in the exact calculations, but I'm pretty good with the overall concepts, and I have been doing my research on wheel basics. I can say with confidence (from what I've read, not from wrench experience) that negative offset = outboard, positive offset = inboard. So if the OEM wheels are 30mm offset (positive), then the 0 offset of the 16" AR Chamber Teflons is going to be great.