On the topic of track width

[Shovel]

So....

I'm contemplating wheel spacers for the rear of my ZR2, and just wanted to bounce pro's, cons around here first before spending the modest coin.

The factory track width on a ZR2 is appx. 1.5" narrower in the rear than in the front. According to a GM engineer, this is simply so that they wouldn't have to engineer/stock a whole separate axle to match the limited-production model's oddball front end.

I'm thinking, either leave it stock - or add 1" spacers to rear so that the rear is almost exactly inline with the front - or adding 2" spacers to the rear plus 1.25" spacers to the front. According to other ZR2 owners (who install these spacers typically just for looks) - there will be no concerns of fender interference with those sizes or smaller. Cost is negligible.. about $120 for the whole enchilada or half that for just the rears.

First things first, I'm not even the slightest bit concerned about the mechanical fitness of the spacers themselves nor the increased leverage on the axle end bearings, for the purpose of this thread.

So... what I can think of so far for pro's:

• Wider stance presumably means more stable, right?
• Wider tire offset typically offers better sheet metal protection in rocky or wooded terrain.
• longer suspension lateral arc length (on a live axle) = effectively more travel, right?
• more leverage outside spring position = more forced articulation (more weight on drooped tire)
• will partially expose rear brake disc to fresh airstream, better cooling?
• looks cool :P

And, cons:

• Putting rear tire exactly in-track with front may reduce flotation
• more tire exposed to wind while driving may increase noise, decrease fuel efficiency
• will partially expose rear brake disc... to destruction?

Any other thoughts on the topic?

[etbadger]

Effective inside clearance turning radius will be reduced (e.g. your right rear tire will track further inside on a right turn, so you may need to turn wider around some obstacles)

-e

[tacollie]

I bought some spidertrax 1.25" spacers on my taco recently. It took a lot of hammer work on my front wheel wells to clear my 255/85's. I had no issues in the rear. The reason I did it was I want to run cables this winter in the mountains and my tires used to rub on the frame bad. I actually don't like the look with them, but it was worth it for me to be able to turn my wheel all the way when turning. The width is nice, especially since I don't run a sway bar, but if I wasn't doing it for turning clearance I probably wouldn't do it again. I wouldn't do it if I were you.

[Shovel]

ETbadger - I hadn't thought of that... though I can't precisely call that a con or a pro, just something to take note of.

Tacollie - apart from the fitment issue you ran into, and the "look" - was there anything else you didn't like about having a wider track?

Anyone else?

[Ursidae69]

They might have brand specific advice at zr2usa.com. I never tried the spacers on my ZR2.

[Shovel]

They might have brand specific advice at zr2usa.com. .

I'm a member there, and they have brand specific advice concerning fit, durability under assorted use, appearance...

At this point I'm interested in practicality, as applicable to any vehicle - so I figured here in the "General Vehicle Modifications" forum we could discuss it in case someone wanted to do the same thing to their Tacoma, Sportmobile, or whatever else ride they're rockin' (well, maybe not motorcycles.. )

[Schattenjager]

I have to think that the advantage of having the front and rear track the same would justify the job. How much more resistance are the rear wheels running into in mud, snow, gravel, vs following the front tires? It might be a little harder (for a dummy like me, anyway) to pick a line that would accommodate two different axle widths. I will be curious to see what others have to say on this...

[grouch]

How much more resistance are the rear wheels running into in mud, snow, gravel, vs following the front tires?

That's what I was thinking. It seems that there would not only be a small hill of sand or mud or what ever that the rear tire would have to climb anyway but also a bit of one from the side. On the plus side, the tracks you leave would look like there are two of you out there so the bad guys would be less tempted to track you down. But the again, if they wanted to it would be easier for them to find you having left two sets of tracks. I'm just saying.

[tacollie]

The two foot print issue is hard to say. That could maybe be good in some conditions. Look around and see if you can find them on sale. Spidertrax puts one with anodization flaws on ebay a lot. I definitely wouldn't do the front. I think all the issues in discussion are minor but if you want the rear wheels to track the same as the front get some. If you don't like it you can always sell them at a small loss. $15 or less maybe.

I try to keep my truck purpose built only. I run the stock alloys because they are strong and to replace them with something better is expensive for example. When I upgrade to a newer taco I will probably get wheel spacers again to clear the 255/85s. I am just not one for building up trucks for looks. It is just not my thing thats all. That is $200 bucks I can put else where. It is nice being able to turn my wheels all the way though. The width is nice to but not enough for me to buy them for that alone, just a perk.

[ntsqd]

GM has historically done this. I'm not buying the reported engineer's explanation as the sole reason. GM also has lots of accountants, so I will buy into it being part of the reason.

How often are you actually going dead straight in rough stuff?
I'll venture only for short stretches.
Now consider how often you driving a mild arc.
A LOT more often. Think about that mild arc. Where does the narrower rear track put the rear tire tracks relative to the front tire tracks?