best tire combo? 275/60/15 rear.. 235/60/15 looks short for front.

[Dennis H]

Yes. Rear wheels and tires came mounted and balance from Summit.

 

[Melk-man]

Yes. Rear wheels and tires came mounted and balance from Summit.

cool.. and what psi do you run? i'm finding some comments on various forums that say on an 8" rim, these wider tires had to be run with a bit less psi to keep the centers of tread from wearing as fast.

 

[6PKRTSE]

I have a few pictures of some of my 295 combo's on the rear.

 

[68 Sport Satellite]

Yes. Rear wheels and tires came mounted and balance from Summit.

Dennis, aren't your rear wheels wider than 8"? I know you did some careful measurements for backspacing if I recall.
Dennis' car is a Dodge. OP's is a Plymouth. The rear wheel arches on the Plymouth are lower and could make it fit differently unless some inner trimming is involved...

 

[68 Sport Satellite]

I have a few pictures of some of my 295 combo's on the rear.


View attachment 1796913

View attachment 1796914

295's on the rear of the Plymouth also?

 

[6PKRTSE]

295's on the rear of the Plymouth also?

Yes, on 8" steelies.

 

[SoldierOfTheLaw]

IMO, 295/55/15 is the sweet spot. They are the same height as the 275/60/15 and fit on an 8" rim. I am running the 295/55/15 in the rear and 225/70/15 up front.

 

[nitro_rat]

nice.. may have to sell the new 275/60's for a loss, and get the 295 50's. will see.

295/50's are a little wide for an 8" rim. For what it's worth, 295/50's on a 10" rim and 235/60's on an 8" rim are a widely accepted matching pair. The sidewall bulge and proportions just look right, the 295 is about a 1/2" taller than the 235. If you go any taller than a 245/60 or a 205/70 your front tire will be taller than a 295/50.

 

[nitro_rat]

IMO, 295/55/15 is the sweet spot. They are the same height as the 275/60/15 and fit on an 8" rim. I am running the 295/55/15 in the rear and 225/70/15 up front.

That is a really good looking combination!

 

[Dennis H]

Dennis, aren't your rear wheels wider than 8"? I know you did some careful measurements for backspacing if I recall.
Dennis' car is a Dodge. OP's is a Plymouth. The rear wheel arches on the Plymouth are lower and could make it fit differently unless some inner trimming is involved...

Summit order can’t be found. I ordered 15” Rallyes with Coopers mounted and didn’t specify width IIRC. No backspacing mentioned or an issue.

 

[33 IMP]

and your 295 50s are on stock-ish sized 15 x 8 wheels?
about to pull trigger on 295 50s and most comments are saying they WILL work on 8" wheels. BFG site says they will fit on a rim width range from 8" to 10.5", but then says "measured rim" of 9.5" ? wonder what these 2 things mean..

The measuring rim is what the published dimensions are based on. Section width obviously changes depending on rim width. Tread width doesn't change, but shape of tread will change. Tread will be flatter on a wider rim.
Your 295 section will be less on an 8" rim, and wider than 295 on a 11"rim.

 

[Black_Sheep]

The measuring rim is what the published dimensions are based on. Section width obviously changes depending on rim width. Tread width doesn't change, but shape of tread will change. Tread will be flatter on a wider rim.
Your 295 section will be less on an 8" rim, and wider than 295 on a 11"rim.

So true. Lower tire pressure will be needed for a full contact patch with a 295 and 8” wheel. I have to run 18psi with 10” wheels to get a maximum footprint. Ideally it should be lower but the drag radials seem to hook pretty good at 18psi. It also diminishes some of the harshness in the ride from the Super Stock springs.

 

[Melk-man]

getting a bit spooked for the awesome 295 50's on my 8" rims.. it would "work" but not be ideal till i get 9" or ideally, 10" rims. to get my front looking better may just get the 245 60's up front or 225 70's.. and keep the 275 60's out back that are on the car. i added another 1.5 turs on the lower control arm screws and brought the front up a bit more. looking more like i like it, and bit more tire up front to fill in the wheel well will be nice (235 60 on there now just seems tad small to me). awesome info guys !!

1 28.jpg - Click to see more photos]

[/URL]
https://imageshack.com/i/po8igK4Fj]

[/URL]
https://imageshack.com/i/pntAcfuUj]

[/URL]

 

[Keith926]

All the talk of 275/60R15s made me want to share my former 72 Newport on 4 275s. Think those wheels were 8", it rubbed on the rear with a load, I put another leaf in the back and a 9.25 diff from an 81 Gran Fury that was about 1.5" narrower.

 

[Melk-man]

All the talk of 275/60R15s made me want to share my former 72 Newport on 4 275s. Think those wheels were 8", it rubbed on the rear with a load, I put another leaf in the back and a 9.25 diff from an 81 Gran Fury that was about 1.5" narrower.
View attachment 1797105View attachment 1797106View attachment 1797107View attachment 1797108View attachment 1797109

nice! the sidewalls don't bulge too much on those BFG's on 8" rims. Which FRONT TIRES do you have on there? 245 60? or even 255 60s'.. those look ideal to me.. somehow the sidewalls don't even bulge much more than the 295 50's on the back

 

[Dennis H]

295 15.

 

[Melk-man]

295 15.

View attachment 1797283

the tread looks good and flat on these 295 50s, and what PSI do you run.. have read some comments on other forums saying they have to go down to get tread to lay flat when using 8" rims ?? the sidewalls don''t look bad either on these 8" rims.. decisions !

 

[BSB67]

I don’t understand the “bulge” comment regarding a smaller rim. Sure, the look is a little different for different rim widths, but it’s small. The tire cross section is smaller with a narrower rim. For a 1” smaller rim there is a 1/4” less bulge from tread to max cross section width, and a 1/4” more bulge from rim to cross section width.

You are giving up nothing meaningful going with a rim width that’s in the manufacturers accepted range.

For 50 years I’ve always run the smallest rim recommended for a tire size and even smaller a few times. I personally prefer the less rim width look. Tire performance has always been fine.

 

[Melk-man]

I don’t understand the “bulge” comment regarding a smaller rim. Sure, the look is a little different for different rim widths, but it’s small. The tire cross section is smaller with a narrower rim. For a 1” smaller rim there is a 1/4” less bulge from tread to max cross section width, and a 1/4” more bulge from rim to cross section width.

You are giving up nothing meaningful going with a rim width that’s in the manufacturers accepted range.

For 50 years I’ve always run the smallest rim recommended for a tire size and even smaller a few times. I personally prefer the less rim width look. Tire performance has always been fine.

when i was saying "bulge" (and maybe others mean it same way), i was meaning the wider the tread on the same rim, the tire tread and sidewall protrude out further from the rim.. can keep going, to a point. As you said, if within the mfgs accepted range, shouldn't be an issue. Personally, i'd love a 295 50 on my 15x8 rear rims, just having never done it, i'm having a tough time getting on board with them on an 8" when i was gonna put them on 10" rims for a 67 chevelle i just bought.

 

[33 IMP]

I'm probably wrong, and I'm sure someone will tell me so, but I've always considered guidelines to be.....,guidelines.
I've had tires too narrow for the wheels they were on, and tires that were (way) too wide for the rims they were on. Neither has caused, me any grief. ( currently have a 19" section, 16"tread tire on a twelve inch rim. Not the best situation, but I had the rims and the tires were cheap)
If the backspace on your 8s works, and you want 295s, I wouldn't think twice, I'd just do it.
Edit: forgot about my drag radials. 315/65s, also on a 12" rim, a little bit wider rim than recommended, but drag radials work great on "too wide" rims. I've heard of 275 drag radials on,14s. (With bead locks, obviously)