Ordering wheel spacers / adapters ( comparison and review )

bubaloo1983 · Post by **bubaloo1983** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:36 pm

im going to order some spacers form that aim place that i saw on the mod page...one question...do they send you 2 or 1? in other words is the price for 2 spacers or one? cause i obviously want 2 but if the price is only for one then i will order 2. thx

Edited the title to make it easier to find-HJ

Post by **HenryJ** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:08 pm

That price is each.
You might hold off a few days. I have ordered spacers from that dude on ebay (Thread in classifieds) . I want to see how the quality is before I recommend them.

Conman is sending me the PW spacers that he had and I am running the AIM spacers right now.

By next week some time I should have a better idea of where the best deal is for a quality product.

The best price so far is the "buy it now" on ebay.

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:49 pm

OK, I have not yet assessed the spacers from Conman, but have an opinion on the ebay spacers from Dwight Long ( Completevalue@cox.net).

The machine work looks good. The 120mm studs are zinc plated, as are the nuts. This means that they are not hardened and likely grade five or less. The nuts and studs are the same size so the nuts can retain the stock black caps.

The AIM spacers use hardened studs and I do like the 1/2" studs for the "beef" they offer. The AIM spacers is a "more finished" product, IMO.
The larger studs require larger nuts , on which the black caps press on instead of thread on.

Summary of the two: I really do like the AIM spacers for the quality and extra security. Is it worth twice as much or more than the ebay spacers? Not in my opinion.

I think the ebay spacers are going to be just fine and at half the price.

Retep · Post by **Retep** » Thu Apr 15, 2004 5:55 am

Brule, I don't know about Conman's spacers, but I got mine from the Gauge Magazine group purchase we had about a year ago. The studs do not look at all like the stock ones. Instead, they have shiny silvery looking studs which I believe are zinc plated. Should I have those replaced with hardened studs? When it comes to these spacers, I want the safest possible option.

Thanks,
Pete

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Apr 15, 2004 9:35 am

Retep wrote:...they have shiny silvery looking studs which I believe are zinc plated. Should I have those replaced with hardened studs? ...

I think you will be ok , so long as you do not over torque them. It would be real easy to bang them with an impact and stretch them.

I have installed plenty of zinc plate studs on stock fleet rigs when hardened were not available. I haven't run into problems.

I would check them intermitently for loosening. If you find them needing retorquing, then I'd consider replacement studs.

You know how the saying goes...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'll know more after running these a while.

Retep · Post by **Retep** » Thu Apr 15, 2004 9:49 am

HenryJ wrote: I think you will be ok , so long as you do not over torque them. It would be real easy to bang them with an impact and stretch them.

Cool... I torque all wheel and spacer lug nuts to 100 ft. lbs. and check them every 1000 - 2000 miles.
A couple of times that I have had to take it to the dealer, I removed the spacers prior due to their use of impacts and so they wouldn't give me any heat about them and try to void a warranty.

HenryJ wrote: I'll know more after running these a while.

Keep us posted. I would like to know what you think.

2bunik · Post by **2bunik** » Thu Apr 15, 2004 6:22 pm

henry J .. is conmans spacer in ur hands yet? now that I got 31's I want spacers like you for the front.. I will wait for conmans and use them a while then when I get enough I wil get some bigger ones for the back and move the con spacers to the front..

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Apr 15, 2004 6:32 pm

2bunik wrote:henry J .. is conmans spacer in ur hands yet?

Nope.
With things as close as they are on your truck now, they may not work on the front of yours.

I guess you can try it.

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 5:38 pm

Ok here's my opinion of the three different sets of spacers-

I would say the AIM spacers are the best for overall quality and finish. The overall diameter is 6.5" The heavier 1/2" NF studs do use a larger lug nut that you must press the black lug caps over, and requires packing another lug wrench. But for worry free, I think they are the highest quality. There is quite a wait for these as they are built to order, not in stock.

Next the Ebay spacers from Dwight Long. The finish is not quite as nice, some sharper edges and the lug chamfer could be a little closer. The studs are 12mm x 1.5 , same as stock, and the overall diameter is 6.5".
I would say that they are a good quality spacer, and well worth it with the price savings over AIM, not to mention no wait for them to be built.

Last the GP spacers Comman sent them to me after having sheared a stud when they loosened up. I installed new studs and checked the surface for straight.
They would be my last choice , of the spacers that I have seen. The studs are stock replacement studs, which is OK. The finish is comparable to , or less than the Ebay spacers.
The biggest problem is the overall diameter, 6" they are actually 1/2" smaller than the rotor/hub mounting surface. I don't think that they are smaller than the wheel mating surface, but very close to the same. That doesn't leave much room for error, not to mention material around the outside. The recesses for the lugs that attach the spacers to hub are really thin at the outside.
The wheels Conman had mounted left an impression, or stain where they contacted the spacer. It appears that the area around the outside 1/2" is where the wheel contacts the spacer. The smaller overall diameter makes me a little nervous.

Summary:
First choice- Ebay spacers from Dwight Long (better price, stock stud size, good spacers)

Second choice- AIM (If money is no object and waiting no problem then #1)

Third choice- GP spacers (I think they will perform adequately, though bear watching)

My best advise would be , if you want spacers ask what the overall diameter is. I think the 6.5" spacers are better.

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 7:11 pm

Retep wrote:Brule, I don't know about Conman's spacers, but I got mine from the Gauge Magazine group purchase we had about a year ago....

These may be the same. The Picture of the "Adapt-it USA" Spacers on that website looks very close to the spacers Conman had.

Retep · Post by **Retep** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:46 am

Hmm... I will have to measure the diameter on mine next time the wheels are off. The diameter of the spacer does seem just a little smaller than the diameter of the mounting surface of the stock wheels. The stock wheels really don't have a lot of mounting surface due to some kind of under cut or counter bore around the lug holes. My wheels have left a pattern on the spacer surface as well. I do wish someone made some hub centric spacers for our trucks.

The whole idea of spacers makes me nervous at times, but I can't stand the narrow look without them. That's why I make sure I torque them properly and check them every 1k to 2k miles. Maybe I should just find a rear axle from a ZR2, that would give the extra track width without the need for spacers.

Pete

Conman · Post by **Conman** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:40 pm

HenryJ wrote:
Retep wrote:Brule, I don't know about Conman's spacers, but I got mine from the Gauge Magazine group purchase we had about a year ago....
These may be the same. The Picture of the "Adapt-it USA" Spacers on that website looks very close to the spacers Conman had.

I'm pretty sure it was that gauge place for the group buy.

Cheers,
Con

2bunik · Post by **2bunik** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:24 pm

sorry brule I couldnt make it this weekend to try them spacers out but I will make it next weekend for sure..

Retep · Post by **Retep** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:58 am

Yup.... mine are 6 inch diameter

, must be the same as con's. Only problem I have had with them is when they arrived new. The lugs looked like crap and were a little crocked. I sent them back and they returned with much better looking studs and the were straight this time.

Pete

Post by **HenryJ** » Sat May 01, 2004 3:42 pm

Art is now headed home with the spacers installed, Thanks Conman

We did learn a little too:
As I feared the mounting area of the spacers is smaller than the surface of the wheel.

The spacer is actually about an 1/4" smaller diameter than the mounting surface of the wheel.

This area is important , because the wheel only touches around the outside of its mounting surface.

You can see the recesses around the lug stud holes and the rusted colored area is recessed also, so the outer portion of the mounting surface is the only part in contact with the spacer.
With the smaller diameter spacers you are losing valuable contact area.

Art will be careful with them and watch them closely. I'm pretty sure that they will be OK, but if you are going to order spacers, make sure that you buy 6.5" OD...I like to have as much contact area as possible.

Conman · Post by **Conman** » Sat May 01, 2004 8:07 pm

Yeah, def. be carefull. I'm glad I felt it and pulled over before the wheel fell off.

Cheers,
Con

2bunik · Post by **2bunik** » Sun May 02, 2004 12:22 pm

thanks conman for the nice reminder.. OOOH and very many thanks for the spacers.. thanks brule for everything..

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:37 pm

What about Performance Wheel brand spacers, that's what I have.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:55 pm

Jim wrote:
HenryJ wrote:...My best advise would be , if you want spacers ask what the overall diameter is. I think the 6.5" spacers are better.
What about Performance Wheel brand spacers, that's what I have.

Stock stud size? What is the overall outside diameter?

Jim · Post by **Jim** » Sun May 02, 2004 7:12 pm

HenryJ wrote:
Jim wrote:
HenryJ wrote:...My best advise would be , if you want spacers ask what the overall diameter is. I think the 6.5" spacers are better.
What about Performance Wheel brand spacers, that's what I have.
Stock stud size? What is the overall outside diameter?

They have the stock stud size & are bright finish & they are 1/8" smaller than my ZR-1 wheels. I don't know how that compares to the stock wheels.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun May 02, 2004 7:19 pm

Jim wrote:... they are 1/8" smaller than my ZR-1 wheels....

I assume that is 1/8" on each side for a total of 1/4" smaller in diameter.
If that is the case, then they are probably the same as the "Adapt-it USA" spacers, 6".

I think they will be OK, but as I have said before , hind-sight being 20-20, If you are going to buy spacers.....make sure the OD is 6.5"

It just makes sense to have as much of the wheels contact as is possible.

Retep · Post by **Retep** » Mon May 03, 2004 12:23 pm

Conman wrote:Yeah, def. be carefull. I'm glad I felt it and pulled over before the wheel fell off.

Cheers,
Con

Con, How did you break one of your lugs? Was it over or under torqued? What did the ride feel like after it broke? How fast were you going? This is obviously the thing that concerns me about spacers.

Any more questions.....nope, I think thats all of them.

Thanks,
Pete

KCustom · Post by **KCustom** » Mon May 03, 2004 1:41 pm

I received mine today (the ones from Ebay) they look very good $72 dollars including shipping. ordered them on the 28th,shiped on the 29th and received them on the 2nd.....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... 2476453052

Scott03 · Post by **Scott03** » Tue May 04, 2004 7:16 am

KCustom - Are you using the 1.25" for the rear? If so, do they match up the front/rear pretty well?? I just asking because most have bought 1.5" for the rear (The ebay guy, unfortunately does not sell 1.5")

Thanks

KCustom · Post by **KCustom** » Tue May 04, 2004 7:33 am

This the information that I got from another thread....

"I believe the front track is 2 inches wider than the rear. 1.25 to 1.5 spacers would be good to even it out. I think they make them as thick as 2.5 inches, so the choice is yours.
I have 1.3 inch spacers and it looks much better than without. "

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:30 am

HenryJ wrote: The hub centric is just a nice addition, but not required. Choose either.
The 6.5" overall diameter is important, as that is the "footprint" of the wheels mounting surface and it gives you more material on the perimeter, which is important to prevent distortion when tightening the lugnuts. . All the wheel adapters that I have seen from "completevalue" are the larger diameter stock.
It is pretty easy to tell the difference in a picture. If you look at the holes that are recessed for the lug nuts, the smaller diameter 6" billet stock leaves very little, maybe 1/8"? It looks thin at that point.
The larger 6.5" diameter billet stock has about 3/8" at the thinnest point around the perimeter.

EDIT: Make sure you are getting the "Mushroom" lug nuts with the spacers.

These are the same as the stock design, except they do not have the threads for the caps. Some were sold with out. I am told that these without exert undue stress on the taper resulting in deformation in some cases.

Post by **HenryJ** » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:14 pm

Just installed a new set of 3" rear spacers from Dwight long ( completevalue - ebay )

Service was great as usual. Ordered on Dec. 11 , arrived today Dec. 16. That is pretty quick.

They look really good, but one took a hit right on the corner of the mounting surface. This did swell the face a little. I laid a flat file across the face and leveled it out. There was an area about half the size of a dime where material was removed to smooth it out.

Check things over carefully. This was not the sellers fault and was easily corrected. It may not have been enough to cause a wobble, but you never know.

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:11 pm

I just received a set of spacers that I got off E-bay from CJ Bargains and so far I'm happy with the excellent machine work and price. These spacers are 6.5" in diameter and include the correct lug nuts to mount the spacers to the hub, and the lug nuts to mount the wheels to the spacer, even though I re-used my chrome lugs & locks. The studs are zinc plated, so I assume they are only grade 5 like HJ mentioned above, but I think they will hold up fine. The shipping was fast and the spacers were well protected.

In case anyone is wondering these are only 1" spacers which are the smallest you can use. I am experimenting with them on the front to see if a 5" backspaced wheel with a 31x10.5/15 tire will rub on the inside fenderwell. If this works out I will be putting the spacers on the rear and ordering some custom made black rock crawler style rims with 5" backspacing.

These spacers are very similar to the Complete Value spacers on E-bay except they are only hub centric vs. hub and wheel centric.

Steve

Post by **HenryJ** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:30 pm

killian96ss wrote:I just received a set of spacers that I got off E-bay... these are only 1" spacers ...

??? Wont the wheel studs hit the back of your wheel?
The reason we use the 1.25" spacers is to clear the wheel studs. Mine are very close, and I can't see a 1" spacer having enough room unless the wheel has recesses to clear the studs.

If you can take a picture of one installed so we can see the clearance

Those do look like good ones, and the price is good as well. Do they provide the correct "mushroom" nuts?

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:39 pm

HenryJ wrote:
killian96ss wrote:I just received a set of spacers that I got off E-bay... these are only 1" spacers ...
??? Wont the wheel studs hit the back of your wheel?
The reason we use the 1.25" spacers is to clear the wheel studs. Mine are very close, and I can't see a 1" spacer having enough room unless the wheel has recesses to clear the studs.

I'm using stock wheels and I did have to file all 10 wheel studs down 1/8" in order to have 1/16" clearance when the spacer is fully tightened. I knew it would be close, but it only took an extra 20 minutes of filing and measuring the studs to make the clearance just right.

If you can take a picture of one installed so we can see the clearance

I will get a picture soon, seriously.

If I don't Reed will let me know about it.

Do they provide the correct "mushroom" nuts?

Yes as long as you tell them the year and make of your vehicle. The lug nuts pictured on the spacers are the ones you use for the wheel to spacer mount.

Steve

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:25 pm

Here is a picture of the 1" spacer on the rear.

After looking at the backside of the stock wheel I realized that I didn't have to file the studs down because there is already a sufficient recess built into the back.

Here is a picture from the front with the 1" spacers on the rear and my brand new MT/R's.

Steve

Post by **HenryJ** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:48 pm

Thanks! Wow those are some seriously low profile lug nuts.
Looks like it can be done.

T-bone02 · Post by **T-bone02** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:16 pm

Will these fit my crew, you'll said hub-centric provide a better fit and the way to go for a few xtra bucks!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... AMEWA%3AIT

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:49 pm

I am unfamiliar with the seller but, on the surface, they look like that they will fit. It never hurts to ask the seller any questions that you may have. If anything, they look really good.

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 4:54 am

T-bone02 wrote:Will these fit my crew, you'll said hub-centric provide a better fit and the way to go for a few xtra bucks!!

Ebay spacers

Those are Dwight Long's (Completevalue) and the ones in the above posts.

kwalsh · Post by **kwalsh** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:04 am

I bought Dwight's spacers. I find them to be very well machined & I am happy with them.

Blaze One · Post by **Blaze One** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:18 am

Just a little info for the Canadian people on this site , if you are interested in ordering spacers from completevalue off of ebay , i was just quoted
*** $94 *** freakin dollars for shipping costs to Vancouver Canada . That shipping cost was for 2 1.25" spacers and 2 3" spacers .
Now I am off to find a local distributor for a comparable product .

Post by **HenryJ** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 8:45 am

This information is relevant and important understanding for this thread , so i brought it here from TXZR2.com:

Muslhed wrote:...Is all Billet 6061 aluminum created equal, or is there actually a difference? Performance Wheel & Tire touts their billet spacers as being "aircraft quality", and not just Billet 6061 aluminum...but Billet 6061-T6! The eBay ones say that they are "high quality", but that they are a Billet 6061 aluminum alloy. Is there a difference between this "aircraft quality Billet 6061-T6" aluminum, and the "high quality Billet 6061 aluminum alloy"?

AA 6061 properties

Aluminum alloy data sheet

MatWeb wrote:Aluminum 6061-T6; 6061-T651 - Subcategory: 6000 Series Aluminum Alloy; Aluminum Alloy; Metal; Nonferrous Metal

Aluminum Alloys for racing applications

Burns wrote:6061 is the least expensive and most versatile of the heat-treatable alloys. It is a favorite alloy of many fabricators as it is a weldable alloy with moderate to high strength in tempered condition. It also has good formability in the annealed condition. It is the best choice for intake manifold and inter-cooler plumbing due to the weldability and formability of the alloy. 356 aluminum is an excellent weldable, heat-treatable casting alloy. It is used for a variety of applications including pump housings, transmission cases, cylinder blocks.

Burns wrote:The temper designation system is used to specify the condition, or temper, of a heat treatable alloy. The most common designations include O (sometimes erroneously referred to as TO), F, T4 and T6. O refers to soft or annealed condition and is the preferred temper for forming processes such as tube bending. F refers to the condition of the material following a forming process during which work hardening occurs, and is the official designation of tubing bends. T4 designates that the alloy was solution heat treated and naturally aged. T6 is sometimes referred to as fully "heat treated" and is the result of solution heat treating and artificial aging.

6061 is an aluminum alloy. It is one of the wrought aluminum alloys. They are designated by four digit numbers in series from 1000 to 7000.

It contains
Component Wt. %
Al 98
Cr 0.04 - 0.35
Cu 0.15 - 0.4
Fe Max 0.7
Mg 0.8 - 1.2
Mn Max 0.15
Si 0.4 - 0.8
Ti Max 0.15
Zn Max 0.25

6061 is incomplete. The suffix is missing. Example: 6061-0 would be 6061 aluminum alloy with no temper and 6061-T6 is heat treated and artificially aged.
Aluminum Alloys and their Classification

6061 alloy is created equal. That is what it is composed of. The suffix (0 through T) designates a treatment it has under gone such as hardening.

It looks to be one of those overlooked things. Many forms of 6061 are referred to as such without relating the treatments it may have received. While the composition of elements is the same, the molecular alignment may differ.

This new understanding does not change my opinion in my review of the wheel adapters.
I have wheeled the 2" and currently the 3" spacers from completevalue. I may not rock crawl, but high speed offroad, and some technical climbs are under my belt. I kept the CG low on my truck for a reason. Off camber situations are also frequent in my terrain. They have been hammered pretty hard at times. I would buy them again , and still recommend them.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 8:52 am

So anyone going to contact Dwight to see what treatment version of aluminum he's using?

Yes message sent-HJ

Post by **HenryJ** » Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:38 pm

Finally received word from Dwight.

Completevalue wrote:Yes, sorry for the delayed response. I was 90% certain the alloy was 60601-T6 but was checking with my supplier to confirm. Just heard back from theme and yes, the alloy of the spacers 6061-T6 Thanks for your interest.

MARBLEYARD · Post by **MARBLEYARD** » Wed May 16, 2007 4:56 am

Okay, I'm here to beat the dead horse. I keep seeing that you have to have the 6.5" diameter spacer. From what I found on ebay (ends Wed. 5/23) says something about a 4.75" bolt patern is that what I'm looking for? Here's a pictue of what's listed

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayI ... :IT&ih=018

WVHogRider · Post by **WVHogRider** » Wed May 16, 2007 6:34 am

Yes, that's the ones you want, if you want the 1.25" spacers.

MARBLEYARD · Post by **MARBLEYARD** » Wed May 16, 2007 6:51 am

You say if I want the 1.5", is thet too much?

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Wed May 16, 2007 7:29 am

If you want an even track (front & rear the same) you need 1" spacers, however most of the members here are running 1.25" spacers which will give you a rear track that is wider than the front, but it will line up with the rear fender bulges a little better than a 1" spacers.

I had 1" spacers on the rear of my CC and liked how they looked.

Edited to a split topic-HJ

Steve

WVHogRider · Post by **WVHogRider** » Wed May 16, 2007 7:48 am

1.25" is not too much. It's exactly what I'm running right now. It was just that CompleteValue also offers other widths.

jmb222 · Post by **jmb222** » Fri May 25, 2007 5:26 pm

Been a long time since I've been on here. Ugh No time...

Any whos, I had 1.25" spacers on the back of mine. I really liked the look and the fact that it made the truck handle better. Unfortunately, I got into an accident and the truck got hit on the left rear wheel (bent the wheel and axle). It bent 2 of the studs on the spacer.

Does anyone have a source for replacement wheel studs or want to sale 1 spacer?

Post by **HenryJ** » Fri May 25, 2007 5:40 pm

Most part stores should be able to get you new studs. They are nothing special. The 12mm studs are for an s-series IIRC.
I have replaced a few. Plan on about $1.50 each for the studs. They should be pressed in , but with some care and a brass punch you should be able to install them.

If it was hit that hard the spacer may be damaged. You may try one of the ebay vendors for a single, or just buy a new pair.

jmb222 · Post by **jmb222** » Fri May 25, 2007 5:52 pm

What would be damaged? I maybe missing something. The wheel was bent away from wheel flange and the spacer is trapped between the wheel and hub. I never thought of it, but I'll take it into work and have one of the guys measure the run out on them both.

Thanks for the warning/heads up, HenryJ

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Sat May 26, 2007 6:59 am

HenryJ wrote:If it was hit that hard the spacer may be damaged. You may try one of the ebay vendors for a single, or just buy a new pair.

This was my thought as well.

jmb222 wrote:I'll take it into work and have one of the guys measure the run out on them both.

Good idea and also make sure to check each stud and/or stud hole for any damage.

If you find anything wrong like a bent stud or warped mounting flange then just get a new set of spacers.

Your safety is way more important than the price of those spacers.

Steve

PSUJimm · Post by **PSUJimm** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:14 am

I've got a quick question. I see there is alot of talk about which spacers to get which is extremely helpful, just wanted to double check if I'm assuming the spacing size that I will need.

I just picked up a set of 31x10.5 tires mounted on stock s10 15" rims. I'm going to running the 6" superlift when all is said and done. Is a 3" front spacer and 1.5" back spacer the correct size? I'm guessing that with the wider tire on a stock rim I'll have some rubbing issues so I figure'd I would need spacers. I would like to go with the smallest spacer I can get without rubbing since the LEOs in my area can be rather harsh with tires extending away from the truck.

Any advice is much appreciated.

Jigg · Post by **Jigg** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:58 am

You'd probably want to reverse that... 3" rear, 1.5" front.

PSUJimm · Post by **PSUJimm** » Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:48 am

Jigg wrote:You'd probably want to reverse that... 3" rear, 1.5" front.

Haha, thanks! That definitely would have been a big mistake on my part. Assuming that I didn't mix up the front and back spacings, do they sound about right?

green02crew · Post by **green02crew** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 8:43 pm

I know this has been beat to death but I found some spacers on ebay I was looking at. I would prefer 1" spacers as our track is 53mm wider in the rear than the front from specs online. However I cranked my TBs so does that change the front to make it closer together? I'm just looking to have the front and rear lined up in track together not one wider than the other but as close to dead on as possible but I think it has changed the front due to the TB crank pulling them in closer.

The spacers on ebay are good aluminum with pressed in grade 8 studs and hubcentric. I just don't know of their diameter.
ebay
Let me know what you guys think of the quality/look. I just emailed to find out what diameter they were.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:24 pm

I'm with ya on the 1" spacers for the rear. I also agree the tb crank will narrow front stance slightly. How much depends on how far you crank it. I raised mine 2" but haven't measured front to rear comparison yet. I think somebody else mentioned this e-bay supplier in another post and general consensus was good product. I plan to get a set also (1"). I don't know why they ever made the rear track narrower than the front. Pushing wider tracks in mud or snow is stupid in my book! Not to mention harder to stay in existing ruts if neccessary in some cases. Rear end wants to "hunt" too much if slick at all. JMO from experience.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Keep in mind that the studs are over 1" long. They will extend beyond the face of the adapter. This is not a problem as most wheels have a void in that area. Aftermarket wheels may be a problem. the track width difference is specified at the recommended Z height dimension. I am sure there are variances. Our page lists the difference as 2.1"
I would recommend going more rather than less. Don't forget the Isuzu fender bulge. Our rear will look narrower than the front due to the wider box. 1.25" spacers are about as much as you would ever want on the front. That is why I chose them for my first set on the rear. later when I did the Mystery Lift, I moved them to the front.

I would probably buy from Dwight Long (completevalue) again if I were to buy another set. It is worth the $10 to me for the peace of mind, in what experience I have with his product.

I would suggest 1.25" as they would be more desirable , IMO.

green02crew · Post by **green02crew** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:41 pm

I'm just trying to keep everything lined up and I would estimate now, from rough measurements, its about 1" wider in the front than rear due to the tb crank. My goals are like mentioned above traveling through snow and the like I want to make 1 path not 2 and it couldn't hurt fuel economy to make the same amount of paths through air. But 1" off inward is going to make me go 1" off outward in the end if I do straight 2" so I can't see it making a difference. But would adding the extra rotational mass have a negative effect on mileage seeing as I'm not changing wind characteristics? Also are completevalue grade 8 pressed studs and 6.5 diameter?

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:41 am

Aerodynamics will not play a part here. The two are too far separated. Having tracks offset actually improves the track as I understand it. The narrower rear tends to hold the line better. That is one story I have heard.
Check your measurements again. I am pretty sure the front is more than 1" wider than the rear. It should be closer to 2" overall.
Rotational mass is not going to be enough to be measurable.
The completevalue spacers use the stock wheel studs and are the larger diameter.

I am running AIM front 1.25" spacers and completevalue 3" rear spacers. I see no way this will alter gas mileage. I regularly maintain window sticker mileage with all my modifications.

green02crew · Post by **green02crew** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:37 am

Sorry to be a pain but basically, what would the major overall benefits of getting spacers on the rear be? Just for looks?

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:56 am

Yes and improved stability.
For every inch of lift add two inches in trackwidth.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:38 pm

HenryJ wrote: Having tracks offset actually improves the track as I understand it. The narrower rear tends to hold the line better. That is one story I have heard.
Check your measurements again. I am pretty sure the front is more than 1" wider than the rear. It should be closer to 2" overall.

I am running AIM front 1.25" spacers and completevalue 3" rear spacers. I see no way this will alter gas mileage. I regularly maintain window sticker mileage with all my modifications.

I'll stick to my belief in both front and rears running in the same track being better. I think this would be especially true in mud.

Brule, I assume you've cranked your t-bars some. Given that, and assuming you haven't offset any of the difference with different rims front and rear, my math on the dimensions you've given it appears your rear track is now somewhere around 1.5" wider than your front. Could you tell any difference in handling or snow/mud driving handling? Just curious as I have driven postal vehicles where the rear track is several inches wider than the front and they suck in snow or mud. They were only rear drive and not 4x4. According to the "story you heard" your truck should handle noticeably worse now than when it was stock. Have you measured what your front and rear tracks are now? Not pickin at ya just looking for all the info I can aquire before buying.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:58 pm

roadrunner wrote:...I'll stick to my belief in both front and rears running in the same track being better. I think this would be especially true in mud.

I find it hard to argue with you logic, but would offer that a staggered track would allow the side lugs to chew some untouched material. This may be an advantage. Instead of sinking in the track created by the front tires the sidewalls would be able to grip some new material.

...your rear track is now somewhere around 1.5" wider than your front. Could you tell any difference in handling or snow/mud driving handling?

I have not, but I have done many things to improve the situation, so it is not a fair comparison on my part.
I would say it is much more stable with the wider stance. That was needed for all the lift and big tires.
It does look much better. You can not imagine how terrible the big flares look with the rear tires tucked in so far. The narrower rear is magnified 100 times. The stability of the wider track was need in my case.
I ran 2" spacers on the rear for a little while. Those were a close match for track width. They just looked funny. Most that add rear spacers to these trucks add 1.5" or more to the rear. The fender bulge and that fake rear flare just make them look funny. The ZR5 flares do a better job of hiding the difference, but when you add a body lift the difference become noticeable again.
If you are all about function. Don't add spacers. There is no noticeable gain in performance for a stock vehicle.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:45 pm

Thanks for the input Brule. I would appreciate if you get the time sometime to give me a front/rear width measurement comparison on your truck.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 7:50 pm

roadrunner wrote: I would appreciate if you get the time sometime to give me a front/rear width measurement comparison on your truck.

Rear is 1.4" wider.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sun Feb 24, 2008 8:04 pm

HenryJ wrote:
roadrunner wrote: I would appreciate if you get the time sometime to give me a front/rear width measurement comparison on your truck.
Rear is 1.4" wider.

Thanks again Brule. Good to see my "math" skills still function like they should.

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:56 pm

The rear track should be the same as the front or narrower.

You do not want a rear track that is wider than the front because of tire scrub (accelerated tire wear) and reduced handling (more understeer).

Steve

04crewvt · Post by **04crewvt** » Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:29 pm

Somehow I really doubt that 3/4 of an inch one way or the other per side is going to make any difference in the handling or tire wear. I did set mine up even with 1" in front and 3" in the rear and it looks much better than with the tires pushed all the way inside the fender bulges.

HCO4x4 · Post by **HCO4x4** » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:23 pm

i have 2'' spacers and for the 5000 theyve been on theyve been great. no accelerated wear signs or anything. they look perfect too. i hated how far in they were stock.

sonomadude4x4 · Post by **sonomadude4x4** » Fri May 23, 2008 4:53 pm

can some one send me the right link for a 1.25inch wheel spacer for my crew cab.... cause i cant seem to find the right one

Post by **HenryJ** » Fri May 23, 2008 5:26 pm

sonomadude4x4 wrote:can some one send me the right link for a 1.25inch wheel spacer for my crew cab.... cause i cant seem to find the right one

Click one of the six the ebay links in the posts above.

philippe · Post by **philippe** » Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:31 pm

i just order a st of weel spacer from matswheel@hotmail.fr and it's cheap.fast service

newbie · Post by **newbie** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:03 am

Just on a side note, My research has found the main reasoning for the rear wheels being spaced inward on 4x4 trucks is that when driving offroad or in snow and such, the front wheels are set farther to ope a wider track for the rear wheels to ubtain more traction and have more of a clear track to grip in.

In Short, the front tires push mud and snow ect. out of the way for the rears to keep grip and keep you moving forward.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:59 pm

Since adding spacers to the rear of my CC it handles much nicer in mud/ruts. No more "whiplash" from the rear end constantly hunting back and forth in and out of existing ruts. Do whatever works for your situation. This is what works for mine.

green02crew · Post by **green02crew** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 6:34 pm

Well I got an alignment today, I can never seem to keep this thing aligned well. Anyways I got a print out of all the angles and everything, turns out the track width difference from front and rear is exactly 1.1" I guess my 1" rough measurement wasn't far off! Thats with cranked tbars. I was looking at spacers again to get a wider look but It would put the tires out further than my front fenders which is illegal in this state. Right now they seem about lined up.

green02crew · Post by **green02crew** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:57 am

Those of you that have the 1.5" spacers, where did you get them? completevalue on ebay does not sell the 1.5s only 1.25 and 2". I do like the design of their spacers, hubcentric and wheelcentric and a large OD. I am looking to get 1.5s for the rear but am having difficulty finding them.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:10 pm

Just a little update. I love my 1" rear spacers. They have made a world of difference on driving in the rutted roads I have to drive around here. No more "hound dog" rear end issues now that both tires front and rear are running in the same tracks.

S-10CREWCAB.NET

Ordering wheel spacers / adapters ( comparison and review )

Ordering wheel spacers / adapters ( comparison and review )

got mine today...

spacers