I found the wheel I'm going to go with but not sure on the size. 16x10's aren't offered in the style I want. They're the same price and I'd be putting 33" tires on no matter what size rim. 15x10's only come in polished aluminum, 16x8's are chrome or polished. So let's hear it; what are the pros and cons of each: 15x10 and 16x8? Thanks

Zach

 

10" wide wheels are a no go. That should narrow it down.

 

did your 4R come with 16" rims? If so then it may be harder to fit 15 inchers on there.

 

16x8

 

16x8

 

16x8 it is! Yes, it did originally come with 16" wheels.

Zach

 

285/75r16 will fit on the factory wheels.

 

but it is not recommended by most tire manufacturers. 16x8 is the narrowist one they suggest. it is a safety thing having to do with "squeezing" the tires onto a wheel. also, 285/75r16's WILL rub, I don't care what anybody says, at full articulation, they will rub in the rear. If somebody tells you they don't rub, they are not fully flexing their rearend: {the wheels in the pics are 16x8's}

 

Depending on backspacing, 16x8s will cause the tire to constantly rub on the upper A arm/ ball joint area. Like Darren said, forget 16x10s unless you run wheel spacers and bash the heck out of the front fenders.

I've seen stock wheels on 3rd gen Runners where the top of the front tire is so close to the upper A arm that you can't fit your little finger in between.

 

yep, I agree. mine are 4" backspacing and I have about an inch between the tire and the arm. I think stock alloys are 4-5/8". I think it might look funny to have such a wide stance with spacers and 10" wheels. haha.

about the 3rd gens, I've seen the same thing too. isn't that on the ones that use the stock wheels and cram the 285/75's onto them? I know that was one thing I looked at and one reason I got different wheels. according to my measurements I was increasing my section width by 2 inches and with my 265/75's I was only about an inch from the arm. that means the 285's definately would have touched at least at one point during flex.

 

I'll double check but I have tons of room with the 2002 wheels and my 2nd gen arms. Finally something we 2nd genner s have on you supercharged demons!!!

 

it's not the wheels that are going to hit, it's the tires. plus, you have a different setup so comparatively I doubt it would mean anything to the 3rd gen 4runner/3rd gen wheel/tire combination. btw, in my opinion you 2nd genners rock! you have so many more good options for lifts and offroad stuff.

 

I was merely celebrating that I don't have to envy you 3rd genners in one category. You guys have the better engine, supercharger, and the electric locker. Those are all things I'd love to add to my truck someday.

 

Wider stance = better. Wider tires = worse. Where to find wheel spacers = I don't know. Yotatech = answer (hopefully).

Zach

 

http://www.allprooffroad.com/wspacer.html

 

I can't believe no one asked if he had the sport package. If so, he CANNOT use 15 inch wheels at all, in any width. The brake caliper is just too big on the sport and highlanders to go down any wheel size at all. That is why they come with 16s to begin with.

16s look better anyways

 

huh???? I thought I was, and most of us were, talking about the 16's.

 

wider stance is equally as bad as wider tires. put them together and that is even worse. anytime you add spacers or wider tires or lower the backspacing it is a trade off from the a-arm to the edges of the fender and valance. when you add a wheel spacer the tire will turn on a longer radius arm so the edges of the tire will get closer and closer to the edges of the fender and valance. so a wider stance is not exactly "better." I've had to trim my valance and bang some fender lips and I only have wider tires and 5/8" less backspacing. add spacers and I'd be really ˟˟˟˟˟ed.