|
|
|
|
 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593650
04/18/05 04:38 AM
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I have seen a few websites saying that a 33 inch tire can't be fitted to a stock 1990 4Runner (without rubbing), but these either fail to mention the tire width or they specify a 12.5" wide tire. I was wondering if anyone has tried to fit a 33 x 10.5 to a stock 4Runner. This is mostly my woods truck, mud and sand will be all I am seeing and an extra inch of clearance would help a lot.
Can anyone offer some guidance? Thanks, Mike
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593651
04/19/05 04:19 AM
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 354
Mudrunner
|
Stick to your stock wheels and they shouldn't be hard to fit at all. There is tons of stupid plastic in the wheel wells you can trim away, then metal you can bang or cut away if you have to.
I run 32x11.50s on 15x7's with 3.75" backspace with no lift and some simple trimming. I would think 33x10.50s would be as easy to clear (I wish I had them instead).
If they don't fit or you don't want to trim much, throw a 1" bodylift on from Roger Brown.
90 pickup, 22RE, stiff-ass Ranchos, 2.25 catback, 4:1 header, conical intake, 15x7 ICW alloys, 32x11.50 Dunlop Mud Rovers, 4.56s w/v6 rear
-Farm truck until school is done...then plans
2000 Honda CRV EX 5 speed
-Driver
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
[Re: jcssurf]
#593652
04/19/05 04:46 AM
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks for the info. My other thoughts were a 32x10.5 or 32x11.5, so I am glad to see your comment about wishing you had the 33's. That makes me think I am heading in the right direction...
BTW, you mention backspacing. Is that the distance from a wheel's mounting surface (on the hub) to the edge of the rim?
I will have to check out the body list, too. Easy to install?
Thanks,
Mike
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593653
04/19/05 09:42 PM
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 354
Mudrunner
|
Yeah you are right on Backspace...
Your stock wheels are probably between 4.5 and 5 inches...which means the wheels sit closer in. As you start to decrease backspacing they stick out more and are more likely to rub the wheel well.
A body lift, especially the 1", is not a hard install. All you really need are some sockets, a block of wood, and a jack.
I don't know how bad your 4runner is sagging in the rear (like many are) but if you spend any money on lift you might want to put a small spacer back there to level it out.
90 pickup, 22RE, stiff-ass Ranchos, 2.25 catback, 4:1 header, conical intake, 15x7 ICW alloys, 32x11.50 Dunlop Mud Rovers, 4.56s w/v6 rear
-Farm truck until school is done...then plans
2000 Honda CRV EX 5 speed
-Driver
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
[Re: jcssurf]
#593654
05/01/05 03:18 AM
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks again for the info, especially on the 1" list. It looks like I may have to do that.
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593655
05/04/05 06:20 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,656
Body Damage is Cool
|
33x9.5 doesn't rub and 10.5 rubs a bit. Mostly the inside rear of the front fender.
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593656
05/10/05 04:07 AM
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2
Need a Spot
|
if you could sling the money you could do ball joint spacers and new coils in the rear. it is a relitivily easy lift(i hear) and isnt overly expencive, roughly $400 it is good for about 2 inchs and can easily clear 33's and it will give you more suspension travel. i will be doing this soon to my 93.
|
|
|
Re: 33 x 10.5's on a stock 1990?
#593657
05/10/05 08:30 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 22
Need a Spot
|
Like the others said: they?ll rub a little with original wheels. Remove mud flap and they don?t rub any longer at normal driving. Little pounding is necessary if you don?t want to get any rubbing at any circumstances. Check my photo (-94 with no lift and 33x10.50s): http://image44.webshots.com/44/4/34/94/300243494uONLSP_ph.jpgAnd read this also: http://www.brian894x4.com/33INCHTIRES.html
4Runner 3.0 Turbo-Diesel, 2" suspension lift, 33x10.50R15 tires
|
|
|
|
|
|
