XQUSIS: Tristan's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Area for JZX NZ members to show off their rides
Post Reply
murdoko
Member
Member
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by murdoko »

lofreq wrote:
murdoko wrote: It's already scraping on tricky roads as it is. I don't wanna damage the underbody.
sorry my man, but this is a fail. :)
HAHA the downside of living on the shore, especially where we are situated.. don't worry, consider the coilovers installed... it's just a question of when.. :D
WATDA wrote:Coming along nicely! Swaybars are well worth it, makes it handle alot better especially when tracking it. Manual conversion would be well worth it man.
Thanks Andrew! a lil more peer pressure and you might see a new set of swaybars in a few days.. LOL

Already had a chat with James at Rota, he told me a few new wheels are comin in 2 months. He doesn't recommend a low offset (18x9.5 15-20) for Toyotas. I did the maths,

it's 95-105mm from hubs to outside edge of the rim (fronts) for a decent stance

and 100-110 mm for the back

If i'm looking at an 18x9.5, the offsets required would be +30 (f) and +25 (r)

the best way to achieve this is to get 4x 18x9.5 +30 and just put slip-on spacers at the back (5-7mm) (doesnt require a cert)

hmmmmmmmmm any thoughts??

murdoko
Member
Member
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by murdoko »

oh BTW the numbers above was based on Phil's and Luke's Chasers..

Phil's WOLF specs:

18x9 15p - hub face to outer edge = 228.6mm (9 inches) /2 -15mm = 99.3 mm (front and back) - gives a nice stance

so if I have a 18x9.5, offset I need to get to obtain the same stance would be :

99.3mm = 241.3mm (9.5 inches) / 2 - X
isolate X, you'll get:

X = 21.4 mm

Hmmmm maybe I should get a 20P.... it doesnt make sense?? lol how come Luke's 18x9.5 30P sticks out??? camber??

murdoko
Member
Member
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by murdoko »

and because I cannot base my measurements on a different model, I obtained this data from car directory:

tread dimensions for JZX100 and JZX110 (axle length)

F/R width in mm
JZX100 1485 / 1490 1755
JZX110 1495 / 1475 1760

as you can see the x100 has almost similar tread measurements for the front and rear.

on the other hand, the x110 has a narrower rear. 15mm narrower to be exact (7.5mm each side)

if i crunch the numbers, assuming that total width of the car is the measurement from on edge of the guards to the other

to get the rims to sit flush to the guards

jzx100 - 1755-1485 = 270
270/2 = 135mm

JZX110 - 1760 - 1495=265 , 264/2= 132.5mm (front)
1760 - 1475=285 , 285/2 = 142.5mm (rear)

assume that 95mm is the axial distance from hub face to guards.

let A = 95mm = 135 - B
B= 40mm

adjust jzx110 measurements:

132.5mm - B = 92.5mm
142.5mm - B = 102.5 mm

assume offset used for the jzx100 is 15p (18x9) ---> distance to hub to wheel edge = 99.3mm

JZX110 ideal offset is (for 18x9):

(FRONT)

15 p + 5 = 20 p

(rear)

15p - 7.5 = 7.5 p

FOR 18X9.5:

241.3 MM (9.5 INCHES) /2 =120.65 mm ----> 120.65 - 99.3 = 21.35 mm ( for JZX100)

for JZX110

(front)
21.35 +5 = 26.35p

(rear)
21.35 - 7.5 = 13.85p

this is true, if you take note that for the fronts, the tread width of the jzx100 is 10mm shorter than the jzx110 (in other words, the front hubs of the x110 sticks out 5mm more each side), it is logical that a higher offset is needed. for the rear, the jzx110 is 15mm shorter than the jzx100 (the rear hubs of the jzx110 is 7.5mm further inside than the jzx100) it is just to get a lower offset relative to the x100...


to sum it all up, 18x9 - 20p (fronts) and 7.5 p (rear)
18x9.5 - 26p fronts and 14p (rear) ---->could round up and down to 25 (f) 15 (r)

could do a staggered fit
18x9 20p fronts and 18x9.5 15p rear

addition:
18x8.5 -- 13.7p front and 1.2p rear

18x10 --- 32.7p front and 20.2p rear ---> rounded 33p front and 20p rear

pretty sure this is spot on, these specs are based on Phil's Tourer V's stance... can be adjusted accordingly

the main lesson here is, for the x110 , the difference in offsets for the fronts and rears should be about 10-15mm...


(PHEW!)

PSIBRG
Member
Member
Posts: 543
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:36 am
Location: Auckland
Contact:

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by PSIBRG »

Holy crap lol :o

I've been awake for over 30 hours now, I tried making sense of your posts, but my eyes shriveled up and fell out, and then my brain exploded out the back of my head :lol:

To be honest, I think you're over thinking it a bit. Best thing to do rather than racking you're brain trying to work it all out mathematically, is to go to James and test fit a few of their wheels to get an idea of fitment. They do trial fits at Hori Dori, but you'll have to compete if you want in on it cause they chuck their stand up in the pit area (no spectator cars allowed) :lol:

Do you want the wheels PERFECTLY flush with the guards? Can they poke out a bit? I run 18x10 +24 on my rear, they stick out a bit, but I run 235/40 tyres on them, the actual tread itself is still under the guard. I have 18x9 +22 up front, they sit flush with the guard, but with the 225/40's I have on them, they look sunk. I could get away with 18x9 +12 up front quite easily I think.

I'm not sure on the how the JZX90 measurements stack up against JZX110 (sorry if you explained in prev posts, refer to above brain explosion), but i'd say with the slightly bigger body, you should be able to fit slightly bigger wheels?

Like I said, test fit! Even if it means going into Platinum Wheels and begging them to trial fit a few different sizes on your car and see what you think looks best. I still think the 18x10 +15 rear / 18x9.5 +20 front would be awesome!


Here, i'll show you something cool/retarded
This is 19x11 -8 on a JZX90 ;)

Image

Image
JZX91 1JZGTE マークⅡ - Dori project
UZZ30 1UZFE ソアラ - Whale Rider
C83A 4G63T ミラージュ - Lawn Ornament

murdoko
Member
Member
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by murdoko »

haha don't worry man, I've been doing that^^^ for years. It's actually my job to do calculations first before spending time and money unto things... :)

well, yeah James and I already had a chat and we are gonna tee up a time to test fit wheels.. oohh yeaahhh!

and compared to a jzx100,

the JZX110's distance between the front hub faces is 10mm longer (WIDER) (therefore requiring a higher offset or thinner wheels to match the jzx100's stance)
and the distance between the rear hub faces is 15mm shorter (NARROWER) than the x100 (therefore you can fit bigger wider wheels or at least a lower offset)

^^^ that pretty much sums up the post above.. HAHA shouldve done that instead...

now you see that dilemma , I can't fit a set of wheels ( unto a JZX110) with the same offsets without it looking weird or without using spacers. It has to be staggered or different offsets.

but according to your photos, ANYTHING can be fitted! LOL

User avatar
lofreq
Member
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:10 pm
Contact:

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by lofreq »

i dont think youre overthinking it - ive always done the same, math doesnt lie as long as all your variables are correct.

its interesting to note that the 110 track is wider at front and narrower at back - it definitely suggests that staggered fitment was intended from factory. i would not run a +30p tho i would def push for +20 with a slightly narrower tire, will make all the difference visually. running +30 will just look sunk and at that point you might as well have some rubbish Axis/trademe wheels on there as it will just look cheap.

User avatar
Tofu
Member
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:59 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by Tofu »

what Andrew said on JZX forums about his wheel fitment.

19x8 +18 and 19x9 +22 with 225/35 and 235/35 tyres, Sits pretty flush but running the car real low, 3 deg camber allround

tbh, i'm sure you would be sweet going 9J @ 20P all around with 225's :)

WATDA
Member
Member
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:16 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by WATDA »

My new wheels are 19x8.5 +28 with a 15mm spacer so +13 and rear 19x9.5" +26.
Depends on what tyre sizes, camber etc etc also. ive got 225/35 front and 235/35 rear.

Now have camber arms in the rear and running 1.5deg camber which is what i was after and it sits pretty flush. Need to mod guards allround if you want to run it low, Bumper mounts need cutting off, bumper support grinded back + guard roll.

murdoko
Member
Member
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by murdoko »

WATDA wrote:My new wheels are 19x8.5 +28 with a 15mm spacer so +13 and rear 19x9.5" +26.
Depends on what tyre sizes, camber etc etc also. ive got 225/35 front and 235/35 rear.

Now have camber arms in the rear and running 1.5deg camber which is what i was after and it sits pretty flush. Need to mod guards allround if you want to run it low, Bumper mounts need cutting off, bumper support grinded back + guard roll.
I might take your advise in the previous pages.. 18x8.5 and 18x9.5 +30 is actually a perfect fit without rolling the guards (I say 25p -20p would be ideal for a subtle setup) . I tested the Work Emotion 11R ( link posted on the previous pages) yesterday and it sticks out (equally on both front and rear) just enough to make it look good. I might go with this setup as I'm not planning to drop mine real low. haha plus the better the stance = the more air resistance... ;)

hrmmm we'll see.... :D

User avatar
Tofu
Member
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:59 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: XQUSIS: Murdoko's Mark II JZX110 IR-V

Post by Tofu »

murdoko wrote:18x8.5 and 18x9.5 +30 is actually a perfect fit without rolling the guards
If you want any good fitment you will at least need to lip your guards ;)

Post Reply