Do you think a 295/40/19 will fit ok on a 19 x 9.5" rim?

I've had 295/50/15's on10" rims a dozen times on my past cars, so I would think a 295/40/19 would fit on a 9.5" rim. It's only a half inch narrower.

Here's a link that shows the rims and all thewheels specs on it. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...m=110072881149

 

Heck, I don't see why not, should work fine.

Nice rims BTW.

 

The tires will fit on the rim, no doubt. But the factory put 295s on 10.5 inch wide wheels on the C5Z06, and the 295s on the rear of my Porsche are on 11 inch rims, an indication that wider works better.

You will get better results if you check the type of tire carefully.

I've always followed a rule that the tire tread width should not be more than 1 inch or a bit more than the rim size.-- 9.5 inches is 241 mm, an inch more makes 266 -- anything wider than 275 might -- might -- cause problems. Usually the problem is that the tire in "pinched" --the sidewalls are at an angle inward and not intended in design because they have to slant inward to fit on the wheel, and you can get some strange handling characteristics since they were designed for straightup sidewalls. Therefore, generally, tires with weak sidewall designs(drag radials) do better in these situations than ones with very stiff sidewalls (run flats) -- those do give problems fitting to narrower rims give problems.

But I violate this rule myself: I run 345/30x18 drag radials on 12 inch wheels on the rear of my 'vette. They wear a bit too much in the center as you would expect when the rim is pinching the sidewalls because it is a bit too narrow, but otherwise they work fine.

 

I was always told, no more thatn 2" over rim width, that's 1" inside and out.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking as most of my past stuff has been more geared towards the straight track. Plus I usually had rim locks in the sides of them. I currently have 275/40/18's on my existing Z06 rears that are 10.5" wide, and they're very much straight up and down.

I've never liked the low profile tires. I just don't care for that look, although I do understand there's no comparison when it comes to handling and performance in the turns. I'm justa guy who's always preferred a Pro/Street Tubbed look with a tall sidewall in back. When I see a '67thru '69Camaro with 19 or 20" wheels on it and low profile tires,I have a hard time even looking at it.[:'(]

Well, I guess I'll have to look into finding a set of 295'sthat haveasofter sidewall, because I really like those wheels, and Idefinitely want a wider tire under the back of my car.Iactually wish they made the rearsin a wider size but they don't.I just can't see spending $1000.00 per rim for the WCC 946'swhen I can pick up a very close replica (set)for $915.00 shipped to my house.

Well, I'm gonnahave to give it some more thought I guess. IfI decide not to get these, I'll go ahead the Chrome Z06 Motorsportsin the staggered 18x9.5 fronts, and the 19x11 rears. Then I canput a nice 305/40/19 under the back ofit.

Thanks for the info guys!

 

Ideal wheel/rim width is normally 75% of tire section width.

 

I've never heard the 75% rule and I'd be reluctant to go that narrow on any aspect ratio under about 55%. Most of the factory combinations on the C5 and C6, Porsches, and the Viper follow a 90% rule (e.g., 295s on the rear of the C5 ZO6 on 10.5 inch (257 mm) rim, both ratios right at 90%), and Ferraris and Lambos seem to run around 90%, too.

 

Sorry about that guys, rest of my post didn't show-guess I was in too big of a hurry, as it was a longer explanation than that. In short, rim width for a 295 section width with 40 aspect ratio calls for a minimum rim width of 10", according to The Tire and Rim Association guidelines. This is minimum, not ideal, with 12" shown as maximum.

 

Yeah, that sounds right.