spotted this on the japnortheast forum, a pic took of a car at the meet

 

To be honest, it just looks like the owner cant afford the correct tyre size ergo it looks absolutly shit! I just dont see the appeal!

 

 

Seconded :D

in all pics they Look W@NK :no::no::no::no::no:

You need to drop to the next diameter down to get that rim effect. eg- a 17" tyre on a 18" rim. I saw it being done for BBS alloys in my local tyre place recently. So no- not legal!

I dont mind a bit of stretch, but something like that is bloody stupid.

Flat tyres walls look best. Meaty and proportionate. Stretch just looks like 'any old tyre will fit'.

Flat tyres walls look best. Meaty and proportionate. Stretch just looks like 'any old tyre will fit'.

 

In your own opinion ;) when running a drift car and you want bigger alloys, and a good size profit tyre you run stretched to stop it hiting the arches.

Drifting sucks anyway! :rofl: :wack:

Its to reduce flex in the sidewall making it easier to break traction hence why drifters do it, the lad brought the car from middlesborough to newcastle for me to set his tracking, bit of a nightmare, a slight stretch looks good but i agree its a tad over the top, i've just bought a set of blitz split rims which are 18x10 on the rear, with a 265 tyre it looks about right

 

^^ would looks spot on with a set of 285s on those.

Is that what your running in your pic?

when it goes past the wheel arch its illegal will not pass mot

 

Not part of the Mot bud.One of those mot myths im afraid.Only protrusions on the body caused by damage or corrosion are failable items,so in other words if you mounted pitch forks across the bonnet and along the side id have to pass it.

Not part of the Mot bud.One of those mot myths im afraid.Only protrusions on the body caused by damage or corrosion are failable items,so in other words if you mounted pitch forks across the bonnet and along the side id have to pass it.

 

Thanks for clearing this up mate

Is that what your running in your pic?

 

My rears are 9.5" wide. 275 tyre width. Gives it a flat tyre wall and makes the whole thing very flush with the body.

 

Edited March 29, 201015 yr by FunkySi

Not part of the Mot bud.One of those mot myths im afraid.Only protrusions on the body caused by damage or corrosion are failable items,so in other words if you mounted pitch forks across the bonnet and along the side id have to pass it.

 

unless its "fouling part of the vehicle" :wink:

unless its "fouling part of the vehicle" :wink:

 

Not strictly true either,Morgan lock stops are wooden and the tyres rub them on full lock.The manual has rather a few grey areas,the ministry rely on their testers to use common sense.

Not strictly true either,Morgan lock stops are wooden and the tyres rub them on full lock.The manual has rather a few grey areas,the ministry rely on their testers to use common sense.

 

The manual does state:

 

Note: Some vehicles have lock stops comprising soft metal pads on the body for the front tyres to rub against. These are acceptable if they are properly maintained so that they do not damage the tyres.

 

however a reason for rejection is:

 

1a. a component of the steering mechanism, road wheels or tyres fouling any part of the vehicle

 

So if that vehicle did foul the vehicle then it should be a reason for rejection ;)