PDA

View Full Version : Wheels Wheel upgrade issues



LeoH
12-19-2016, 11:35 PM
Well. I can't say I'm shocked, but for those who are considering upgrading their rims to newer tires and wheels, I can say, if you have a 1960 wagon, you're going to have a problem. I bought a set of the widely approved 90s Crown Victoria rims and have 205/75/15 tires mounted on them and, though close, they do fit under the front fenders, but based on how I felt the previous 195/75/15s fit in my wheel wells, I was right, they do not clear the outer fender on the rear wheels.
I guess I'm going to have to have someone help flare out the rear fender wells. Crap.
I'm really surprised no one else has commented that this has happened to them. I know wagons aren't as common, but they're not rare and someone else has to have upgraded their rims. I would have thought. The first photo is the wheel fit when it's off the ground, the second one with the wheel on the ground.





6065360654

RadioRoy
12-19-2016, 11:42 PM
Rather than flaring the rear wheel wells, perhaps there are other wheels you could get with a greater offset?

Also, are both sides the same? Sometimes the rear axle assembly is slightly offset from one side to another.

Do the front tires clear the tie rod ends on extreme turns? That's where my clearance issues show themselves.

Studebakercenteroforegon
12-20-2016, 12:03 AM
"Upgrade". The most overused word on this forum!
Hey! Your wheels are too wide! What are they - 8 inch?
Get some 5-1/2" older Dodge wheels, which should be findable in good shape in California.
I just bought a '61 Lark hardtop, which has similarly shaped rear wheel openings, and the 5-1/2" Dodge wheels installed by the previous owner fit just fine. Not even maybe close but more than adequate clearance.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 12:14 AM
No, they're 6.5 inch, the standard width on the Crown Vic rims which, again, are touted as the rim to go to.
Frankly, on the original rims, the 4.5", I wouldn't have been able to fit chains on my 195 tires that were on those rims, much less any 5". 195/75/15s.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 12:22 AM
Rather than flaring the rear wheel wells, perhaps there are other wheels you could get with a greater offset?

Also, are both sides the same? Sometimes the rear axle assembly is slightly offset from one side to another.

Do the front tires clear the tie rod ends on extreme turns? That's where my clearance issues show themselves.

No, the fronts are fine, it's the rears. The front is close enough, I had to have a small crinkle straightened out to straighten out the inner curve at the bottom of the front fender...that rubbed on the one side, but once we straightened it back to original, the fronts clear fine. http://www.partsgeek.com/catalog/1992/ford/crown_victoria/driveshaft_-ar-_axle/wheel.html

bensherb
12-20-2016, 01:49 AM
Those 6.5" Crown Vic wheels fit great on a Hawk, evidently too wide for a Lark. Dean,(Voxnut), put new wheels on his '61 Lark wagon. I know he bought them new but don't recall from who or the size, he did not mention having any clearance problems with them though. Perhaps he'll chime in, or you might message him.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 02:30 AM
Thanks for that, I'll follow up if I don't hear from him.

Mike Van Veghten
12-20-2016, 02:42 AM
Interesting how Leo bounces back and forth calling a wheel, both a "rim" AND...a "wheel"..!
You trying to cover all your bases with the various names people put on wheels ?

With the "rim" being only part...of the whole..!

Looks like the rim offset is a bit off to fit that wheel well. Looks good, too bad there isn't just a tad more clearance.

Mike

48skyliner
12-20-2016, 05:19 AM
I don't know why people make such a fuss over something so simple as stretching out the fender by an inch or maybe a bit more. I had serious interference on the rear and slight interference on the front of my 48 Champion, and it took me a total of about an hour to fix it. I carved a piece of wood to fit the shape of the fender, to lay inside the fender rim. I used a soft piece of a 2x4 about 8 inches long. I carefully tapered the ends so they did not touch the metal-otherwise you might have a small crease or bulge at the ends. I jacked against the wood with a small hydraulic Portopower used for bodywork, but I certainly could do it with a common scissor jack. Carving the wood might take some time if you don't have wood working tools, but it will take less time than chasing down another set of wheels. You can easily roll under the flanged edge in the appropriate place to get more clearance.

doofus
12-20-2016, 06:54 AM
Wagons dont have a flanged edge on rear. there is an inner fender to deal with. i have wide rims on 56 that arte close, as long as no fat back seat pass i'm ok. will try to measure offset today,among other things. wheels were a scrounged item,drilled for dual bolt pattern.Luck Doofus

mbstude
12-20-2016, 07:05 AM
I don't know why people make such a fuss over something so simple as stretching out the fender by an inch or maybe a bit more. I had serious interference on the rear and slight interference on the front of my 48 Champion, and it took me a total of about an hour to fix it. I carved a piece of wood to fit the shape of the fender, to lay inside the fender rim. I used a soft piece of a 2x4 about 8 inches long. I carefully tapered the ends so they did not touch the metal-otherwise you might have a small crease or bulge at the ends. I jacked against the wood with a small hydraulic Portopower used for bodywork, but I certainly could do it with a common scissor jack. Carving the wood might take some time if you don't have wood working tools, but it will take less time than chasing down another set of wheels. You can easily roll under the flanged edge in the appropriate place to get more clearance.

Wagons have less fender clearance than almost any other Stude, except maybe the 47-52's like you have. I found that out when I had this '57. I bought 15x6 wheels and 205/75R tires. The rears wouldn't go on. A scissor jack sideways against the frame rail, and a short 2x4 against the inside of the rear quarter panel was what I came up with. It worked fine.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag47/mattbphantom/mattbphantom007/2012-03-09_13-24-25_420_zps6vv1abvf.jpg

jackb
12-20-2016, 09:29 AM
try thinking new springs up front & out back.... 205's will go on out back fine if you jack up by the frame rail vs. the R/A.

52-fan
12-20-2016, 10:36 AM
You also have the option of wheels from someplace like Wheel Vintiques. They are not terribly expensive and you can get the width and offset you need.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 10:53 AM
Wagons dont have a flanged edge on rear. there is an inner fender to deal with. i have wide rims on 56 that arte close, as long as no fat back seat pass i'm ok. will try to measure offset today,among other things. wheels were a scrounged item,drilled for dual bolt pattern.Luck Doofus

Thanks Doofus.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 10:55 AM
Wagons have less fender clearance than almost any other Stude, except maybe the 47-52's like you have. I found that out when I had this '57. I bought 15x6 wheels and 205/75R tires. The rears wouldn't go on. A scissor jack sideways against the frame rail, and a short 2x4 against the inside of the rear quarter panel was what I came up with. It worked fine.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag47/mattbphantom/mattbphantom007/2012-03-09_13-24-25_420_zps6vv1abvf.jpg

Thanks for the real world experience. Is that car after you did the massaging? It looks fine, if so.

Buzzard
12-20-2016, 10:56 AM
I fitted 215/70r15's on 15x7 70's Chryco ventilated Cop Car wheels on my 1959 Lark 2 DR HT. I'm not familiar with the rear wheel well differences between hardtop and station wagon but these fit like a glove(tight but great looks filling the fenders). As mbstude and 48skyliner suggested, a little coercing with a scissors jack is all it takes to massage the fender and make up for the build differences between the various vehicles. Goodluck.
Bill

LeoH
12-20-2016, 10:59 AM
try thinking new springs up front & out back.... 205's will go on out back fine if you jack up by the frame rail vs. the R/A.
After seeing how it fits, that thought crossed my mind, but $1000 for wheels and tires is enough for one go around. I did not budget for a complete suspension upgrade on top of the initial purchase. :(

LeoH
12-20-2016, 11:06 AM
I don't know why people make such a fuss over something so simple as stretching out the fender by an inch or maybe a bit more....

Well, it isn't an expected process to have to go through, although I'd say it should be added to any description about upgrading rims to modern radial tire use. It's not just my personal frustration, with the few models made from the late 50s to 1966, it shouldn't be such a hassle to upgrade rims and tires. I don't think; but clearly, I'm missing something....

LeoH
12-20-2016, 11:11 AM
I fitted 215/70r15's on 15x7 70's Chryco ventilated Cop Car wheels on my 1959 Lark 2 DR HT. I'm not familiar with the rear wheel well differences between hardtop and station wagon but these fit like a glove(tight but great looks filling the fenders). As mbstude and 48skyliner suggested, a little coercing with a scissors jack is all it takes to massage the fender and make up for the build differences between the various vehicles. Goodluck.
Bill

I've read several posts like yours, which convinced me this shouldn't be an issue I'm having, but clearly, for wagon owners, it WILL be a problem. At least, for 1st Gen Lark wagons. I can say, before I switched to these rims, I had replacement original shocks, original rims and 195/75/15s on the car and there is NO way a set of tire chains would have fit with the clearance on the rears on as it was, so the fact that I'm having this trouble is a surprise, but not a shock based on how the car sat originally.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 11:14 AM
Fortunately, I'm not into showing the car, so from that perspective, I don't mind mushing out the fender enough, it's just a bit excessive to have to do, imo, if you're not expecting to have to do it from the outset.

mbstude
12-20-2016, 11:19 AM
Thanks for the real world experience. Is that car after you did the massaging? It looks fine, if so.

Yes, that was "after". That car also had some rust issues, so I wasn't too worried about messing anything up.

I just remembered that I cut a coil out of a pair of new HD front springs and put them in to give it a nose down stance. There weren't any clearance issues in the front.

LeoH
12-20-2016, 11:52 AM
Yes, that was "after". That car also had some rust issues, so I wasn't too worried about messing anything up.
I just remembered that I cut a coil out of a pair of new HD front springs and put them in to give it a nose down stance. There weren't any clearance issues in the front.

Wow, really? It sure likes you might have had at the top. Pretty close. Fortunately, my fronts cleared also. It was just a bad day and that was the sprinkle on the cupcake of yesterday, watching that fender slide over the sidewall at 9 pm at night. :mad:

jackb
12-20-2016, 01:15 PM
Leo...too bad you're not near me. I have a pair of brand new snow tires mounted...... With a couple hundred pounds out back in that wagon and snow tires, you can go pretty much wherever you want except where you shouldn't be...... Old North country driving advise: never put your vehicle in 4WD until you get stuck in 2WD..... get out and get on a better road or back home....

LeoH
12-20-2016, 02:19 PM
I agree with your assessment Jackb. I've gotten around town without snow tires for 3 years with just sandbags in the rear end. The tires on the car though were old and in need of replacing, leading to this current dilemma.

48skyliner
12-20-2016, 04:08 PM
Radial tires began to appear on sports cars in the early 60s, to my knowledge. They have advantages in traction for cornering and braking, but the main issue is that the contact patch is less distorted. This is possible because the belt is stiff, but the sidewalls are thin and flexible. In order for this to work, the tires must be mounted on wider rims to provide lateral stability. As the technology has improved and cornering forces have gotten higher, the rims and the tires have gotten wider and the sidewalls have gotten shorter. The wheels on my 48 are 17 by 7, which is about the minimum for really good modern performance tires.

Considering all this, it should be no surprise that some older cars do not provide enough clearance for modern wheels and tires. However, in most cases you can fit tires significantly wider than the original if you can select the right offset. In other words, if it is tight to the fender, then check for clearance on the inboard side, with springs, shocks, sway bars etc. If the clearance problem is on the inside, wheel spacers are an easy solution. Most of the alloy wheels used on modern cars have a lot of offset, and spacers are frequently used.

When I first saw your post I though you were talking about these Crown Vic wheels. I know a couple of guys who use them on Mazda RX-7s.


60663

LeoH
12-20-2016, 04:58 PM
Yeah, no, the olde style, so I could keep the full wheel covers I have. With 4" of backspace on these rims, iirc, if I was able to find a 1" or 2" backspaced rim, it possibly wouldn't be a problem especially since these are rear tires and if I wasn't trying to keep the original full wheelcovers and just went to a modern rim of some sort, it could have been made to happen. At this point in the game though, it's body morphing time....

voxnut
12-20-2016, 05:09 PM
Leo,

I bought the 5" wide Wheel Vintiques Ford steel wheels from Summit Racing for my '61 wagon and have 205s on them. I do still get a little bit of rubbing on the inner fender, but not constant, and I'm chalking it up to work shocks and springs. They come with a 3" backspace, which I really wish was 3 1/2" on both the front and rear, but new front springs will cure the issues with the front. Anyway, just wanted to chime in that the 5" wheel was available and was an improvement, although not a 100% cure. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/wvi-62-553403/overview/

Dean

6066460666

wittsend
12-20-2016, 05:36 PM
Apparently not all Larks (and or Crown Vic wheels) are of the same feather. I have a '64 with the early style 16" Crown Vic wheels (see image) and 225-60-16" tires. Being that most Crown Vic wheels are 16" and you state yours are 15" that might account for some of the differences. The Crown Vic 15" wheel predate the Crown Vic 16" wheels. Perhaps I'm wrong, but when most people mention Crown Vic wheels I assume they are talking about the 16" early style wheel that are most readily available and have a more common offset. - My tires are at least 3/4" wider than yours and at the standard ride height I have little to no rubbing issues at the wheel opening, and close to 2" between the tire and the leaf spring. Maybe the '61 to '64 years are that different???

Just an FYI to anyone following this thread there are seemingly THREE crown Vic wheels. The 15" version that look like a common style steel wheel, the early 16" style that has circular holes in the face and the late Crown Vic 16" Wheel that has an offset much like a front wheel drive car, oval holes and almost looks flush with the wheel edge. The images with the red Lark (images 1-3) have the early 16" Crown Vic wheels and the fourth image is of the late 16" Crown Vic wheel.

PackardV8
12-20-2016, 07:32 PM
Just an FYI to anyone following this thread there are seemingly THREE crown Vic wheels. Maybe several more than that. There were compact Crown Vics in 1980 and up to 1990 were 15" wheels. Larger brakes necessitated the standardization of 16-inch wheels. Cop cars had full wheel covers and dog-dish covers held onto the wheel by four nubs but later switched to Explorer SUV wheels with center caps attached to the lug nuts. So when discussing, it's important to sort Crown Vic wheels into years, steel or aluminum and 15" or 16".

Bottom line - this thread reinforces and we should remember that as to wheel fitment, even when discussing post-'53 Studes, there are differences between Lark, Hawk and Avanti, then between sedan and wagon. The same with Crown Vic wheels, there are many different sizes and offsets and materials.

jack vines

bensherb
12-21-2016, 12:24 AM
I believe when Crown Vic wheels are mentioned in relation to Studebaker, the usual reference is to the 1983-1997, 15"x6.5" wheels. Regardless, here's the rundown.

The 1983-1997 Crown Vic steel wheels are 15"x 6.5" standard type wheels. '98-2002 steel wheels are 16"x7" with 18 round holes, the '98-2005 Explorer uses this same wheel, as does the 2003-2011 Ranger. 2003-2005 used two different steel wheels; both 16"x7"and having oval holes, one with 12 and one with 7. 2006-2011 steel wheels were 17"x 7.5" and have 10 round holes.

These wheels can also be found on Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Town Car and Mercury Mountaineer of similar years.

I can attest that the earlier 15"x 6.5" wheel works great on the Hawk, I have them on my '62 and my father's '53 coupe. The '53 however, does have a properly centered Ford rear axle assembly in it. The Crown Vic wheels would not have fit the left side with the original Dana axle. I run 215-70-15 tires.

As mentioned above, the '98-2002, 16"x 7" wheel seems to work on some models. But I sincerely doubt any of the later wheels can be used without extensive modification to the fender wells and likely the suspension too, due to their massive amount of negative offset.

StudeRich
12-21-2016, 01:22 AM
The "OTHER" issue at work here Leo, is your Rear Springs and possibly even the Front ones!

I do not have a good straight on, Side view of your '60 Wagon, and the small angled view you show may distort things, but it does appear that the ride height is quite low in the Rear and maybe a little in the Front, THAT WILL do you in as far as Tire Clearance is concerned.

On a Lark, the fronts will hit the 45 degree angle of the floorboard on turns, going up driveway aprons when Tires are too Large, Wheel offset is wrong, or Springs are weak.

jpepper
12-21-2016, 09:32 AM
Pay attention to the backspace of the wheel. If I recall, the 15 X 6.5 Ford wheel has a little under a 4" backspace. There are Chrysler 15 X 6 wheels with 4"+ backspace that should work. The Lark wagon admittedly is tight. I have seen rear quarters flared a little and it is almost unnoticeable.

Dwight FitzSimons
12-21-2016, 11:50 AM
Bensherb has covered the topic of Ford Crown Victoria rims well. All I have to add are a couple tidbits:
(1) In the late 60's my brother and I both had '64 Avantis. We both ordered new Ford 15x6 steel rims at our local Goodyear dealer (for Crown Vic, or whatever that car was called then) and ran radials. We never had any clearance or interference issues. I have always considered 15x6 rims to be wide enough for normal driving. Perhaps 15x6 on the front and 15x6.5 on the back would lessen the Avanti's tendency toward oversteer when cornering too fast.
(2) I have collected numerous Ford Crown Vic steel 15x6 & 15x6.5 rims when I could find them in nice shape at junkyards. As I recall the sedan ones were 15x6 & the station wagon ones were 15x6.5. So, the 15x6 Ford wheels would be late 1960s to 1982.
(3) Don't forget that these steel Ford rims have a larger seat and require larger lug nuts. NAPA has these that are necked down to use a 3/4" socket.
-Dwight FitxSimons

LeoH
12-21-2016, 09:16 PM
The "OTHER" issue at work here Leo, is your Rear Springs and possibly even the Front ones!

I do not have a good straight on, Side view of your '60 Wagon, and the small angled view you show may distort things, but it does appear that the ride height is quite low in the Rear and maybe a little in the Front, THAT WILL do you in as far as Tire Clearance is concerned.

On a Lark, the fronts will hit the 45 degree angle of the floorboard on turns, going up driveway aprons when Tires are too Large, Wheel offset is wrong, or Springs are weak.

Yeah, I have to say, though the shocks may well be adequate, between the springs and coils, that could well be enough to cause me the problems I'm having with clearance. Still, flaring will have to get the job done, as running out and getting new coils all the way around and possibly re-arcing the rear springs is not in the cards in the immediate future.
Still, for anyone reading this before they do it, bear in mind this will need to be factored in for anyone else undergoing this on their car. After the fact, this all makes sense; based on what I'd read, and I didn't just go by one or 2 threads about what was needed to install new rims and radial tires, I had no inkling I had to look for all this.

LeoH
12-21-2016, 09:21 PM
Maybe several more than that. There were compact Crown Vics in 1980 and up to 1990 were 15" wheels. Larger brakes necessitated the standardization of 16-inch wheels. Cop cars had full wheel covers and dog-dish covers held onto the wheel by four nubs but later switched to Explorer SUV wheels with center caps attached to the lug nuts. So when discussing, it's important to sort Crown Vic wheels into years, steel or aluminum and 15" or 16".

Bottom line - this thread reinforces and we should remember that as to wheel fitment, even when discussing post-'53 Studes, there are differences between Lark, Hawk and Avanti, then between sedan and wagon. The same with Crown Vic wheels, there are many different sizes and offsets and materials.

jack vines

Thanks Jack for putting it out there like this. If you were to do wheel/rim/tire upgrade threads and webpage searches, and I did a more than the average bear amount of it, it's pretty generic when it comes to models that these fitments work on and, one would think by now, the bases were all covered, but, at least with the 1st Generation Lark wagons, (I wouldn't be able to comment on the 2nd Gen wagons or Wagonaires), there will be issues.

LeoH
12-21-2016, 09:30 PM
Apparently not all Larks (and or Crown Vic wheels) are of the same feather. I have a '64 with the early style 16" Crown Vic wheels (see image) and 225-60-16" tires. Being that most Crown Vic wheels are 16" and you state yours are 15" that might account for some of the differences. The Crown Vic 15" wheel predate the Crown Vic 16" wheels. Perhaps I'm wrong, but when most people mention Crown Vic wheels I assume they are talking about the 16" early style wheel that are most readily available and have a more common offset. - My tires are at least 3/4" wider than yours and at the standard ride height I have little to no rubbing issues at the wheel opening, and close to 2" between the tire and the leaf spring. Maybe the '61 to '64 years are that different???

Just an FYI to anyone following this thread there are seemingly THREE crown Vic wheels. The 15" version that look like a common style steel wheel, the early 16" style that has circular holes in the face and the late Crown Vic 16" Wheel that has an offset much like a front wheel drive car, oval holes and almost looks flush with the wheel edge. The images with the red Lark (images 1-3) have the early 16" Crown Vic wheels and the fourth image is of the late 16" Crown Vic wheel.

Your pictures point out something not immediately obvious, but, if you do a search, it's easy to then notice, there is a HUUUGE difference between the rear fender openings between your sedan and the early wagon rear wheel openings.

http://bringatrailer.com/2015/11/30/289-swapped-1960-studebaker-lark-wagon/

(http://bringatrailer.com/2015/11/30/289-swapped-1960-studebaker-lark-wagon/)
Then, when you look at the sedan and wagon difference in the 1962, it's still apparent, there is potential fit issues and obviously, Studebaker wasn't designing bodies for difference tire clearances for most of its production anyway....
http://hem.bredband.net/b284654/project/1962_2.htm

LeoH
12-21-2016, 09:38 PM
Leo,

I bought the 5" wide Wheel Vintiques Ford steel wheels from Summit Racing for my '61 wagon and have 205s on them. I do still get a little bit of rubbing on the inner fender, but not constant, and I'm chalking it up to work shocks and springs. They come with a 3" backspace, which I really wish was 3 1/2" on both the front and rear, but new front springs will cure the issues with the front. Anyway, just wanted to chime in that the 5" wheel was available and was an improvement, although not a 100% cure. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/wvi-62-553403/overview/

Dean

6066460666

Thanks Dean. The thing is, iirc, I have 4" backspace as it is. I know the issue with rim fitment on a hub is more calculus than arithmetic, but I probably need a good 2" of moving the rim center outward, based on what I am looking at, in order to draw in the tire shoulder enough to clear the fender.

If it was not time sensitive and wallet sensitive, I could futz around and spend a week looking for the right alternate wheel configuration that exists on SOME car out there, but, I don't. I'm also sure, there are likely plenty of aftermarket style rims, that might even look nice, that would fill that bill, but, I've bought these and they are close enough that, as a practical matter, I'm going to make them work.
Nice looking wagon!

LeoH
12-21-2016, 09:44 PM
I'm waiting for my neighbor to come by to help do this right. What with the holiday, and me just walking down the other night to knock on his door asking if he could help, I'm obliged to wait until it fits in his schedule to come on over. An exercise in enforced patience.

1oldtimer
12-21-2016, 10:10 PM
Look up mine, I had the same issue and old saggy springs. The answer is front wheel drive wheels. I have an 8" rear also , so won't have to go with an offset as big as mine.


I have the original springs in my '60 wagon so they sag a little and the 205/75r15 with 15x6 ranger wheels rubbed a little on the front. I went to a used wheel place and checked to see if any wheels would fit with a disc brake kit (and a 8"). I couldn't find one that wasn't 4" wide, I went with modified front 15x5 with a 3.5" backspace and GM APV mini van rear wheels (15x6 with 5" backspace). I have 205/65 on the front and 225/60 on the rear, but I can't run stock caps because of the rear wheel offset.

53119

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/rear-wheel-1-jpg.3087664/

bensherb
12-21-2016, 11:21 PM
Pay attention to the backspace of the wheel. If I recall, the 15 X 6.5 Ford wheel has a little under a 4" backspace.

Yes, I measured the backspace on the '83-'97 Crown vic wheels at 3.75".

1oldtimer
12-22-2016, 12:08 AM
Leo, find a wheel shop in your area and have them move the center out a little. The place I used did it for $25 a wheel, cut the weld, moved center, trued center and re welded it back in.

LeoH
12-22-2016, 01:51 AM
Leo, find a wheel shop in your area and have them move the center out a little. The place I used did it for $25 a wheel, cut the weld, moved center, trued center and re welded it back in.

Hm. Thanks, I'll look into that, that sounds pretty cost effective.

LeoH
12-22-2016, 01:55 AM
Look up mine, I had the same issue and old saggy springs. The answer is front wheel drive wheels. I have an 8" rear also , so won't have to go with an offset as big as mine.



http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/rear-wheel-1-jpg.3087664/

What about just getting the springs re-arched? Wouldn't that give enough clearance if that was done? It'd be simpler on the tire situation, as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Re-arced or re-arched? Which is the correct term when it comes to leaf springs?

LeoH
12-22-2016, 01:56 AM
That's a lot more clearance than what I'm looking at now, although, as tight as that is, that's about as much clearance as I had with my 195s.

1oldtimer
12-22-2016, 02:33 AM
In the future I'll get to the springs (front and rear) but for now the easy way was to find the wheels, down side is that I can't use the stock caps on the rear wheels. All the wheels I have came from the used wheel shop, the used stock mini van rear wheels where $25 each, the modified Ford shoebox with disc brake hoops (I have the Tuner Disc brake kit so calipers are right there) were $45 each (new hoops and used center). Plenty of room in the tire to lip and still 2-3" on the backside on the rear tires, so when the axle shifts going into a driveway at an angle or just a dip there's no fear of rubbing. On your picture, even if you clear the lip as the suspension compresses (bump or weight) the tire will go up further and hit the inside of the body curve above the lip.

That picture above is at ride height and is about 2-2.5" away from the lip. Here's the side view (I kinda like the old spring lowered look):
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/outside-1-jpg.3091162/

With the hubcaps:
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/side-1-jpg.3099651/

Better view:
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/attachments/outside-5-jpg.3168874/

Maybe try here:
https://www.yelp.com/biz/sierra-wheel-repair-sparks

tim333
12-22-2016, 09:15 AM
I put a set of Marquis 15 x 6 1/2 wheels on my 63 R2 Hawk, stance and ride were great. The skinny 4 1/2 wheels looked terrible.

LeoH
12-22-2016, 09:58 AM
Thanks for the photo oldtimer, are you sure that's a 'lowered' look? It sort of looks stock to me, frankly and I agree I like that look. I hear what you're saying about the inner rubbing, I'll have to crawl under there tonight and look. I have been looking only at the outside clearance issue. I have basic clearance on the front, even when turning the wheels but now, I imagine, I'll have to be wary of possible clearance issues during some moving scenarios.

So, for wagon owners, beware! Check your suspension bits and factor all THAT in before YOU get new wheels and tires! There, I did my part to educate future owners.

Where'd you get those wheelcovers? I think I've seen them advertised before somewhere....

1oldtimer
12-22-2016, 08:52 PM
Not 100% about the lowered saggy springs, I though it was just because the tire rub with the ranger wheels and the 205/75's (and the fact that they're original springs).... but I could be wrong. I spent a few hours in the used hubcap side of the tire place and came up with the best thing I could find.....a 1971 Chevrolet Impala hubcap. I found a place online that would put any picture into a center cap, encased in resin, with adhesive on the back (up to 3" or 4") for pretty cheap.

I did the same thing and rushed it, I think it's ok for the cars but the wagon needs to be exact in the rear.

BTW if anyone local wants some rims and tires, I have them for sale (205/75R15 with new rims).

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?98562-Rims-and-tires-for-sale (http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?98562-Rims-and-tires-for-sale)

jackb
12-23-2016, 09:44 AM
Though you're not positioning your attempts here ..... most folks replace their bias tires with radials and leave it at that. The wide footprint covers up a lot of suspension and handling deficits. You can learn to live with anything excusing 50+ year old vehicles. Though a pet peeve of mine, and likely a wallet issue....firming up old suspensions and steering/bushing issues should come first before tires/rims.... JMHO

jpepper
12-23-2016, 10:18 AM
I have various width Chrysler wheels. Do you want me to measure the backspace on those? Let me know.

1oldtimer
12-23-2016, 01:46 PM
If it wouldn't be too much trouble for you, I think having a data base could help others in the future.
http://www.wheellugpattern.com/

Here's what I have:

1992-1996 Chevrolet Lumina APV mini van 15x6 115mm bolt pattern (5 on 4.53) with 5" backspace.
1995-newer Toyota Avalon 15x6 114.3mm bolt pattern (5 on 4.5) with 4.5" back space (IIRC)

Might check the 2000- Toyota Solara 15x6 114.3mm bolt pattern.... might be 4.5 to 5" back space.

The Chrysler and ford products I looked at all had a MAX of 4" back space, most were 3.5". If you look at the website I listed above it says what the offset is L, M, H (low, medium, high), and assuming the APV wheels I have are listed as high and the Crown Vic ones are listed as low, that gives you a good idea what to look for.

When checking back space use a ruler or something straight, lay it across the back of the wheel and use a tape measure from the mating surface of the wheel to the ruler.

LeoH
12-23-2016, 08:34 PM
Though you're not positioning your attempts here ..... most folks replace their bias tires with radials and leave it at that. The wide footprint covers up a lot of suspension and handling deficits. You can learn to live with anything excusing 50+ year old vehicles. Though a pet peeve of mine, and likely a wallet issue....firming up old suspensions and steering/bushing issues should come first before tires/rims.... JMHO

No worries, but that's where all this drama is originating. For sedans and coupes this doesn't appear to be an issue, for the wagons, probably through the 60s, it IS an issue for the rears. It's close, but even with original springs and replacement shocks, acceptable and does not appear to be an issue with the fronts. If you stop and look at photos of the station wagon rear panels and the sedans, it's pretty obvious to see that there could be an issue with clearance, considering where the line of the fender on the body travels on the station wagons vs. where it is on the coupes, Hawks and Avantis.

FWIW, when I got the car, it had 195/75/15 radial tires on the original rims and though the shocks were replaced, the clearance with the sidewall and the inner fender was about a finger's thickness and I don't have thick fingers. Some of that clearance is no doubt due to old leaf springs (even though the car did come with the original 'helper' coil over assists) but obviously some of that is due to the difference in tire width with a radial tire and the original bias ply tires.

After reading many, many threads about replacing tires and rims on Larks and such, I thought it wasn't going to be the problem it's turning out to be. But even with the narrowest radial tire and one of the accepted common rim replacements for the 60s Studes, my tire sidewall, at the level of where the fender is on a station wagon, is in contact with the lip of the fender front and back of the tire circumference.

LeoH
12-23-2016, 08:37 PM
I have various width Chrysler wheels. Do you want me to measure the backspace on those? Let me know.

I'm trying to remember what years of Mopar, maybe Chrysler, wheels are listed as possible alternatives. It was something like an 80 something Monaco, iirc. But then, there's part of my issue, that may well work for a sedan, I'm suspecting it may not apply to the rear dimensions on a station wagon.

LeoH
12-23-2016, 08:42 PM
Hm. Thanks, I'll look into that, that sounds pretty cost effective.

I just emailed a custom wheel shop/refurbisher. I'll see what they say.

Studebakercenteroforegon
12-23-2016, 09:39 PM
I'm trying to remember what years of Mopar, maybe Chrysler, wheels are listed as possible alternatives. It was something like an 80 something Monaco, iirc. But then, there's part of my issue, that may well work for a sedan, I'm suspecting it may not apply to the rear dimensions on a station wagon.

Dodge full size vans (B Series) used 4-1/2" bolt circle wheels through about 1984 before switching to 5-1/2" bolt circle. I have owned a few Dodge Vans over the years - seems like the 6 cylinder vans had 5-1/2" bead width and the V-8 vans were 6". I bought a couple of different '61 Lark hardtops from a local family that always switched their Larks to these 5-1/2" Dodge van wheels. Of course these wheels were probably quite easy to find in local wrecking yards 20 - 25 years ago.
Used wheels can be pretty good in our mild climate, so they could likely still be found. Might try a wrecking yard that specializes in pickups and vans.
I don't have one off of a car right now so I can't measure the back spacing.

bensherb
12-24-2016, 01:02 AM
I bought a couple of different '61 Lark hardtops from a local family that always switched their Larks to these 5-1/2" Dodge van wheels. Of course these wheels were probably quite easy to find in local wrecking yards 20 - 25 years ago.


I remember buying sets of factory mag wheels at wreckers back then. These days, at least around here, it's almost impossible to find a wheel of any kind at a wrecker. I needed a wheel for a PT Cruiser, and found probably 50 cars in wreckers but not one had a wheel. It seems what the wreckers are doing now is removing the wheels when a car comes in, and sending them to recycle immediately. I had to get my PT Cruiser wheel from ebay. I did get my Crown Vic wheels for my Hawk from wreckers but it was two different yards and four different cars. It seems they often overlook the spare in the trunk. If $50 to $75 a wheel is in your price range places like Wheel Vintiques, Pete Paulsen Motorsports, and Stockton wheel can usually make whatever you need.

1oldtimer
12-24-2016, 04:29 AM
For the '59-'60 Lark wagon (only ones I personally dealt with) for the rear you need to measure carefully. My 15x6 wheels have a 5" back space which means there is about 1" of wheel sticking out on the front of the rim and it has about 2"-2.5" of clearance between the tire sidewall and the inner lip of the 1/4 panel. Only thing that's kind of hard to estimate is the bulge of the sidewall. I also have a '67 Mustang 8" rearend in it which is about 3/8" wider on each side. You can not get an aftermarket new wheel made with these dimensions, because of the wheel centers they offer. The centers are basically flat and there is only so much flat space in the wheel hoop to place the center.

Typical aftermarket wheel with flat center.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41PYnWIIOBL._SX300_.jpg

Disc brake hoops notice the small flat area in the middle.
http://s3.racingjunk.com/ui/8/76/34331768-396-KELSEYHAYES-15-x-6-STEEL-WHEEL-SHELLS.jpg

Notice the deep offset on these centers, they vary the back space on these by how far back the lug hole area is recessed and where they weld the center into the hoop.
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/Mzc1WDUwMA==/z/rcsAAOxycmBS-spq/$_3.JPG?set_id=2

1oldtimer
12-24-2016, 04:48 AM
The stock hubcaps won't fit the 15x6 5" back space wheels because where the hubcap dips in by the valve stem it hits the rim. I think that a 4" wide might have enough room to fit the hubcap (I haven't tried it personally).

My Chevy hub caps has a resin sticker of a Studebaker logo from here:
http://3dcarstickers.com/
(http://3dcarstickers.com/)
They print anything from 1.38" to 3.54" and are about $15 plus shipping for 4.
Anything you can download they can copy:
http://www.discoverforce5.com/sites/default/files/Studebaker-Ball-logo-300x298.jpg

jackb
12-24-2016, 10:45 AM
Though not for the vehicle that is truly driven daily (>10K miles /year).... I have successfully mounted 205's on stock Stude rims without any problems out back in a 59 & 62 wagon(s). You might not like the look of the radial "bulge", but I never noticed it after I drove a few times. For most of us who drive < 2000 miles/year......I don't see it as a problem, especially if tires are new and a decent quality. If you go bargain brand (and are skipping suspension requirements)-all bets are off for high speed or any post-60's driving habits. I was more bothered by the non-PS handling around town...

WinM1895
12-24-2016, 11:52 AM
D0LY-1007-A (replaced C8AZ-1007-F) .. 5 lug 4 1/2" bolt circle 15" x 6" Wheel / Obsolete

1968/78 LTD/Grand Marquis/Town Car/Continental Mark III/IV/V / 1979 Town Car/Mark V / 1979/82 LTD/Grand Marquis.

Note: LTD name changed to Crown Victoria in 1983 / There are other FoMoCo 5 lug wheels w/a 4 1/2" bolt circle besides these.

Plus, there are 14" wheels also. My former '62 GT Hawk had 1968 Fairlane/Torino 14" wheels on it.

48skyliner
12-24-2016, 06:16 PM
"---- find a wheel shop in your area and have them move the center out a little. The place I used did it for $25 a wheel, cut the weld, moved center, trued center and re welded it back in."

In 1967 I rebuilt a 1967 Ford Cortina that had been flipped, and set it up for autocross. The original wheels were 13 by 4 inch. My friend suggested we put Corvair rims, which were 5 1/2 inch, on the Cortina wheel centers. The diameter of the centers was the same, though the Cortina rims were riveted. We had lots of room inside the fenders and quarter panels, so we spaced the rims OUTBOARD as much as we could, to get maximum track width for the cornering stability. We just bolted the centers on the car, slid the rims on and spun the wheels to get them true, tack welded them, checked them carefully for true, took them off and welded them. This is not rocket science, and you don't need a wheel shop to do this, just a competent welder.

If there is any doubt, you could tack weld one wheel, mount a tire that you plan to use, and then check it for clearance on the car before proceeding with the other wheels.

You can see in this photo the rims are moved outboard as much as fender clearance would allow.

60764

jpepper
12-27-2016, 07:51 PM
I got out to my storage garage and measured the wheels I have.
A Chrysler 15 X 6 has a 4" backspace. Chrysler 15 X 6 1/2 has a 4 1/4 backspace. Chrysler 15 X 7 has a 4 1/4 backspace.
Magnum 500 as used on Avanti II is 15 X 6 and has a 4 1/8 backspace.
2000 Ford Crown Victoria aluminum spoke wheel (picture)that I use on our Avanti II is 16 X 7 with a 4 1/4 backspace.

Using a 15 X 6 1/2 Chrysler wheel compared to the Ford wheel would result in an extra 1/2" fender clearance.

55 56 PREZ 4D
12-28-2016, 01:01 AM
Ford Ranger 93-09
Ford Explorer 93-94, 96-00
Mountaineer 97-01
Mazda B2300 96-2003
15" x 6", 5 on 4 1/2" bolt circle, 4" backspace, 2 3/4" centerbore

mbstude
01-02-2017, 09:33 AM
Thought I'd add to this thread again. I had a slight rub on the back of my '56 with the 6" wheels when going around turns. Borrowed this from a friend. Problem solved. Masking tape was to mark where the clearance was too tight.

http://www.eastwood.com/ew-fender-roller-w-instruction.html

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag47/mattbphantom/20170101_140627_zpsbrinnnqe.jpg

bill matwijec
01-02-2017, 10:10 AM
Hi not trying to steal this thread but I have a question. I have the same wheels on the rear of my 65 commander as pictured above in 1oldtimers reply and want the same wheels in the front but can't find any with the right offset. (they hit the suspension). Any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks

48skyliner
01-02-2017, 02:36 PM
As I stated previously, moving the wheel outboard is easy using a spacer. These are readily available on Ebay in a wide variety of thicknesses and bolt patterns, and in some cases are called adapters, used to change the bolt pattern to fit different wheels. If you only need 1/2 inch or less, you can use thin flat plate spacers and just get longer studs. The big advantage of using spacers is that you can buy one set of wheels and effectively have different backspace for the front and rear.

The first two photos shows a 1.25 inch spacer on my Mazda RX-7, required to get clearance from the strut. The other photos shows how we installed disc brakes on an old Mustang: we turned down the outside diameter of the spacer to fit INSIDE the brake disc, because it allowed us to use a very simple flat plate for the caliper bracket. I believe that spacer was 1 inch thick. We had to roll the fender for tire clearance, primarily because we lowered the car about 1 1/2 inches. Both of these examples had no spacers required in the rear.


61001 61004 61000 61006 61007

1oldtimer
01-03-2017, 01:15 AM
Hi not trying to steal this thread but I have a question. I have the same wheels on the rear of my 65 commander as pictured above in 1oldtimers reply and want the same wheels in the front but can't find any with the right offset. (they hit the suspension). Any suggestions are appreciated. Thanks

Take a straight edge across the rotor face, use a tape measure to find the distance to the part it's hitting and there's your max backspace. I would subtract about 1-1.25" for tire deflection. Then look for those wheels after checking the back the same way to make sure they'll fit.