None of those are mine. Here's my current fleet: 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 1985 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 1996 Chevrolet Caprice 9C1 2003 Chevrolet Avalanche Z71
The only thing it's missing is a big round red squeaky nose. Just never been a fan of the bulbous oversized tire scene, but as mentioned earlier, to each their own. :beers2: You have to understand when people start threads asking for opinions, opinions they will get. People love to give opinions when asked. Sometimes even when not asked. o No:
Looks are a matter of taste. I could ask 10 different people what rims look best on my car and I might get 5 or more different answers. The questions that pop into my mind are: How does it ride? How does it handle? Do the tires rub? How is the turning radius? I would guess it rides far more harsh than a 14" to 16" rim. As for handling, I would bet that the responsiveness is good due to the lack of sidewall deflection but the cars ultimate turning capabilities are diminished compared to a 16" or 17" due to the tall ride height and higher center of gravity. I am guessing the tires do rub badly or the turning radius is poor unless a lot of body and maybe even frame mods were made. So does it "look" stupid? Well, only in the sense that I suspect it has diminished the cars performance and usefulness as a performance automobile. For me once the rims get so big that they have exceeded the range of a performance improvement modification and into the range of "hey look at me! I have really big wheels". It starts to look stupid.
since I cant post pictures or links yet.. check out Guillermo's Buick Skylarkon its;s a 72 buick skylark on cardomain
Body and paint look pretty sharp. I'm not a fan of "shaved" or painted trim, but do like the color and even the side graphics (is he going to finish it on the front?) of the car. Wheels . . . I've seen worse examples of how to mess up proportion and design composition, but I'd still be swapping them out. Perhaps, the owner just has a different perspective and that's fine. It's the statement he wants to make.
Its a personal preference like everyone says,i personally would`nt go bigger than a 19" at the rears,but 15" or smaller is not my taste,looks good on stock cars but thats about it.would`nt change this look for the world!!
Neither would I George. The reason it looks great is because you don't need an extension ladder to get in. Bigger tires with a touring suspension look great. :beers2:
With rims/tires that large, the car bodies need to be lifted much higher for true 4x4 profile!:laugh:
First of all, I know this thread is old, and these replies are old... but I'm new, and I'm gonna comment anyway! 10+ years of proof that this "fad" isnt temporary. Not any more than the lowrider guys who have been putting spokes and curb feelers, and huge murals on the hoods of their cars for decades. This isnt going anywhere either. Nobody else was there to catch it, because the brakes are on there, plain as day. Ive seen the car in person at SEMA, and its a complete, running and driving car. Ugly? To me... yes. but its a completed car, brakes and all. Big wheels, and wide tires have been proven time, and time again to HELP with braking, not hurting it. This is a FACT. Turning radius? Depends on the wheel and tire setup. a properly sized 20-22" on most cars, with proper back spacing can easily clear fender wells, at full lock. As for the transmission being burned out because of the wheels? depends on the added rotating mass. On my 96 impala, I have a set of 20" wheels and tires that the whole combo weighs LESS than the stock 17" wheel and tire. So... its not about generalizations, its about facts. Does it look stupid? It sure CAN look stupid. Does it always look stupid? Of course NOT.
Not just any big wheel and tire combo helps with traction. And I highly doubt ANY of these folks who are putting these DONK things together are doing it to improve performance. That's a generalization and I'm sticking to it. :laugh:
