For looks - Staggered vs Square

[Skraight.]

Just had a conversation with a friend about this.

Figured it would be a good question to ask this community.

Say you had a vehicle that was capable of running 10.5 or 11" wide wheels on all 4 corners with the same offset and be flush.

Would you prefer to have the front wheels with a more concavity in the rear than front / 2-3" lip and 3-4" (staggered) in the rear with more tire?

Or would you prefer to have the same concavity all around / 3-4" lip (square) and equal tires on all 4 corners?

I realize a lot of guys here don't have this option, but in the domestic crowd they can fit 10-11" wheels up front but they all run 8-9".

[Daviticus]

Nice topic.

I dig staggered setups for the function aspect mostly. But, it looks killer on anything when done right.

That being said, I'll probably be running a square setup on my Starion, 10.5" all around once I get the new front and rear subframes in.

[JVC]

If a square setup can be fit, with the same exact wheel/tire setup and fitment front and rear (which I feel is pretty rare) then Square all the way.

But a lot of times the track width of front and rear is different, so running a square setup with the same offset would have front flush and back not, or vice versa. In my case, my car needs at least 10mm more spacing in the back than the front or it just looks stupid. So it makes more sense to run staggered setup for dish instead of the same dish and a bunch of spacers.

[Crankey]

I like staggred if I can get it. it's a pain but I like the deeper lip on the rear so it's worth the effort of hunting down a pair of deeper lips and rebuilding.

[Dr.AK]

Imho, I strongly prefer staggered setups for RWD cars and square setups for FWD or AWDs. I love the looks of a staggered setup, but somehow it doesn't feel 'right' on a FWD or AWD to me.

[Skraight.]

I think a lot of people are misunderstanding part of the question I'm asking too

The example I'm trying to portray is a car that you have the widest, best offset wheel already on the rear,can't get any wider, and you can fit that same size on the front. You would rather have the front wheel be narrower?

[Byron]

No way. Run the widest you can all around (unless the front can fit wider wheels then the back, then run square).

[bobbyjones]

i don't think you can fit 11s on the front of your camaro. now prove me wrong. (insert smiley face that shows this is friendly banter.)

i run the same size wheels 9" all around (front offset +5 rear offset +28) if i had the money maybe i could fit 9.5" up front( which would change the offset to +18ish?) still not square, but at the end of the day the car still has to be able to make turns and nothing makes me more mad the rubbing the fuck out of my fenders trying to make k turns.

basicly
if you can do it, do it...

[Skraight.]

It isn't an issue believe me, this guy is running 18x11 wheels with 315's on all 4.

[Stupid Kid]

Staggered for rwd all the way. Look better and there's probably some performance aspect to it.

[bobbyjones]

then 11s front 13s back

[metalmonkey47]

Imho, I strongly prefer staggered setups for RWD cars and square setups for FWD or AWDs. I love the looks of a staggered setup, but somehow it doesn't feel 'right' on a FWD or AWD to me.

I second this. I feel like only RWD cars can pull off staggered.

I just couldn't see a Jetta or an Accord etc looking good staggered, if you got my drift.

[a112]

Staggered setup for RWD cars with staggered track width. Square for RWD car that has performance oriented suspension (ie. W201 or E36 suspension geometry). Square for FWD cars that are stanced, staggered for FWD cars for track (more aggressive on the front), Completely staggered for MR cars and completely square for AWD cars.

Regarding Your Camaro case, I would go staggered.