# Running a staggered setup on FWD cars



## Deception (Oct 5, 2000)

If one was to say, install wheels/tires with the following sizes on a MKIV GTI (or any other FWD car for that matter):
front: 17x7", 225/45-17
rear: 17x9", 245/40-17
How would the performance/handling of the car be affected? Will it understeer more with the wider track in the back? Quarter mile time will not be a big issue, not as much as everyday driving characteristics.
Thanks.


----------



## VR6guy (Apr 5, 2000)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (Deception)*

The "sky is falling" contingent will tell you that the car will push like nobody's business and you'll soon commit suicide as a result of excessivie understeer







Running big tires in the rear is kind of silly on a FWD car from a technical standpoint but it does look sorta cool--much like excessive lowering. Bear in mind that the understeer can be dialed out with other careful modifications to anti-roll bars and spring rates and whatnot. VWs are set up to understeer pretty drastically from the factory as it is so it is very safe to say that you can set up your car to look cool with large rear tires AND handle closer to neutral than a stock car. Just have fun explaining all this to the next holier-than-thou RWD guy you run into. 


[Modified by VR6guy, 7:17 AM 3-28-2002]


----------



## samcat67 (Feb 27, 2002)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (Deception)*

VR6guy is right about the technical aspects of a set up like this for a FWD car. It doesn't make sense to do it because the back wheels are not driven. The amount of understeer depends more on what is going on with the front end than it does with the back end. The back end is mostly going along for the ride.
One thing that the wider contact patches in back would do is to reduce the tendency to oversteer in combined cornering/braking situations. The bigger contact patches mean more total grip would be available, so there would be more grip available for the back tires to resist the car spinning around it's vertical axis during cornering. This is the reason most purpose-built (and RWD) race cars have bigger wheels in back. The increased total grip available at the rear with the larger wheels is intended to balance the total grip available at the front (due to weight transfer) when the car is under heavy braking.


----------



## Deception (Oct 5, 2000)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (Deception)*

ttt


----------



## syntrix (Aug 20, 2000)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (Deception)*

It'll understeer like an overweight pig. Problem is, these cars have too much understeer in the first place.
I'd poke it with a stick, but I wouldn't drive it on a daily basis.


----------



## blackdub (Mar 22, 2001)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (syntrix)*

yuo all are right to some degree I ran 225/45 in the front and 225/35 in the back and had no problem with it and it looked nice. Gave a nice Euroe look to it. And had no problems with understeer at all.


----------



## JoshmkII (Feb 15, 2002)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (blackdub)*

looks cool, and if you have a IQ higher than 5 you can solve the understeer issue without a problem.
either by stiffer spring rates, or by removing your front sway bar..
or in my case, stiffer spring rates and ditching the aftermarket front sway bar and using the(smaller) old stock one.


----------



## BananaCo (Sep 16, 2001)

*Re: Running a staggered setup on FWD cars (JoshmkII)*

ummm, i wanted to do this also.
i was wondering if you got fully adj suspension and sways, and if you run a staggered setup, is it possible to dial the rear end to have the most roll stiffness and stiffen the springs/shocks so to cancel the extra grip in the back?
well, it worked well on my F355 (currently living in my dreamcast)


----------

