(I would prefer something under $50.00 or so also).
Well, Blaze the idea behind it is better handling...i.e. cornering. You(people in general, not particularly just you) have to remember that this "handling" idea can only go so far with SUVs. Some want it for handling, others are looking to spend $4K+ just for the style...it's up to the person in question. 17" wheels aren't all that big and are still within reason for running on a bronco and still looking like a good 4wheeler. Take the 1st gen. Lighting for example 15" alloys available for your ho-hum 150's and Bronco's but the Lighting built with performance in mind came with 18" alloys stock. Now the lightning's suspension has improved along with power so the rim size increased...also just like what was said previously bigger brakes can be added then for braking power. Sometimes bigger rims are for performance other times it's just for show.Blaze said:Have you tried Bart or Eaton??:shrug
While we're on the subject, can anybody tell me any real benifit of bigger wheels?? I don't understand...I always thought it was people wanting that low profile tire look, and then the tire and wheel companies capitolized on it so they could make more money, and then it bled over into the truck market. I realy can not think of the benefits of it....somebody help...
No, it's just the 16.5" wheel that doesn't have the safety bead retention.bigdave said:But with less sidewall, you have less sidewall flex, and less sidewall to absorb impact. Don't forget, any size above 16", the wheel is missing a lip that helps keep the bead seated, so you can't go as low air pressure than 15 or 16" wheels without a beadlock.
wouldn't a 37 on a 17 have roughly the same size side wall as a 35 on a 15? 35s on 15 seem to be a good combo. makes sense to me, especially if you are running MTR because they flex so well.Keith_L said:17's make perfect sense when running a tire 37" or larger IMO. It's just less sidewall, but still plenty of sidewally.