i'm a newb.


are higher or lower backspacing numbers better when considering the issue of rubbing? for example, i want to put on 33" tires with 17" rims. would 3.5" of backspacing be better than 5.5"? or is it the other way around?

 

3.5" is going to make the wheel/tire stick out of the fender more (you will have more room between the backside of the wheel/tire and the frame.) The 5.5" will tuck the wheel/tire inside the fender more, moving it closer to the frame. Depending on how wide a tire you want to run, the 5.5" backspace may cause it to rub (i.e. with something like a 35x12.5x17 or a 315/70/17.) You need something in the range of a 4.5-4.75" backspace with 35's that are 12.5" wide.

 

how does all this translate to 33"s?

 

Actually, it doesn't as height is not the issue here. The question you need to be asking is, how does all this translate to 10.50 wide tires or 12.50 wide tires. With a 10.50 wide tire, you should be fine with the stock 6.25" of back spacing but if you go with a 12.50 wide tire, you should consider getting a set of wheels with 5.5" or less back spacing as this will give the inside of your side walls more room and prevent rubbing.

 

perfect. i think you hit it on the head. a lot of posts had me under the impression that 33" tires under almost no circumstances would be without rubbing at full flex/turn. thanks for clarifying. you guys are gonna turn me into a well-informed jeephead yet

 

Well, depending on how much lift you have, 33" tires will most likely rub your air dam at a full turn and possibly even your fenders at a full flex. And, the kind of rubbing you would get with wide tires and too much back spacing is your sidewalls on the rear sway bar and possibly the shoulder lugs on the frame rails up front or the lower control arms at a full turn. They're just different problems that'll need to be addressed accordingly depending on the height and width of the tires you ultimately get.