[Vettethret]

Originally Posted by Scottyz

Those look tough vettetret and rcoe. Looks great.

[wwiiavfan]

You said tire width. Did you mean you were putting new wider rims on as well?
If not, Nitto 295’s fit the OEM 9.5” rims no problem.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by wwiiavfan

You said tire width. Did you mean you were putting new wider rims on as well?
If not, Nitto 295’s fit the OEM 9.5” rims no problem.

Nitto only lists 9.5" as a fitment for 295 tires in 295/45.

In 40 profile and lower, 295/xx tires need to be mounted on wheels at least 10" wide. It's a sidewall height thing.


Norm

[Blade21]

I have Nittos 305s. No rubbing.

[wwiiavfan]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Nitto only lists 9.5" as a fitment for 295 tires in 295/45.

In 40 profile and lower, 295/xx tires need to be mounted on wheels at least 10" wide. It's a sidewall height thing.


Norm

Nittos run small, I’ve been running 295 on 9.5 rear and 265 on front for probably 15k miles, no issues. They look correct, too, really no bulging to speak of, the sidewalls are flush with the rim. Tread patch is flat across, too.

Edit: this thread has some pics: https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=556921

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by wwiiavfan

Nittos run small, I’ve been running 295 on 9.5 rear and 265 on front for probably 15k miles, no issues. They look correct, too, really no bulging to speak of, the sidewalls are flush with the rim. Tread patch is flat across, too.

All that may be true, and for the first half inch under it's not a hard pass-fail matter. But going narrower than the recommended minimum does involve additional sidewall flexing as you drive (even on a straight road), and with that more sidewall heating. What it looks like can't tell you any of that.


Norm