Thanks to the whole “stance” movement and its numerous conglomerates, the new trend nowadays for kiddos is “hellaflush.” To describe this with the most blunt of terms: lowering a car severely, thus skewing suspension geometry out of specs, and running aggressively wide wheels with unsafely stretched tires.
I don’t want to say I’m a hater or sound like an elitist, but I must raise the question of where the limit is… and whether it’s prudent to value form over function? Being flush and low does look cool… but of course, opinions on aesthetics are purely subjective.
With that said, what is your preference on tire fitment? Do you like a tire that’s almost about to pop off the bead, or are you at the other end of the spectrum and want as much rubber as possible? Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and diversity is a plus… but make sure you’re thinking for yourself and not following the herd.
Let’s start with Exhibit A, meaty:
B, less tire than A, but still relatively fat:
C, more “squared-off” tires:
D, slight stretch:
E, a bit more stretch, you can see even at this stage the tire is already taking on that “ballooned” look:
G, super stretched:
My old RX-7’s tire fitment was close to example E. I quickly grew out of it, frankly, even though it wasn’t aggressively stretched, it still had that ballooned shape. Might as well have just stretched it more and gone the whole 9 yards at that point, like in example F.
For me personally, if I were to rank these tire fitments in order of good to bad, it’d be – D, A, F, C, G, E, B. I like it when tires are just slightly stretched because it’s functional too.