Mazda CX‌-30 Forum banner
21 - 31 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
H&R wheel spacers are one of the best , if not the best you can buy . They are made in Germany out of an Aluminum/magnesium blend . Magnesium is 30% lighter than aluminum and is stronger. I would only use H&R or Eibach , no Ebay junk . The studs do stick out slightly past the 25mm spacer , but there are cutouts in the factory wheel for them to go into. Whatever spacer you buy always put a thin layer of anti seize or grease between the aluminum spacer and steel brake rotor . Then torque all 10 lugs(per wheel) to 100 ft lbs . Here is a link to the H&R's I bought.H&R Wheel Spacers Mazda CX5 (2017-2021) 6mm 7.5mm 15mm 18mm 20mm 22mm – Redline360
Thanks!
They are for a girl in the building where I work.
I told her to look into the "Bonoss", but she wanted to compare multiple manufacturers.
I'm fine since my 235's are flush with the front cladding.
Bonoss are highly recomended, and their website has a specific product line for the CX-30's.
Thanks again!
 

·
Registered
'22 2.5T JBM Stealth
Joined
·
175 Posts
Here are a few angles of top and front view . Maybe I should not of said Perfect . I believe the perfect fitment would be 20mm in the front and 25mm in the rear . My fronts do stick out slightly , the rears are perfect . Untitled
It doesn't appear you are taking the tire bulge into consideration with the overall fitment here so your estimates are incorrect. It also appears your camera angle is not properly lined up as well. Unless you have a one-off US spec CX-30, your current setup with 25mm spacers is giving you at least 14 mm (0.55") of tire poke in the front and at least 5 mm (0.2") of tire poke in the rear. In a game of mm, this is far from perfect (flush) on both accounts.

Below is a CX-30 with stock wheels and Firestone Firehawk 215/55r18 (stock sizing). The Firehawk 251/55r18 tires have the same section width specs as the stock Bridgestone Turanza EL440 so tire bulge will be the same.

Stock Rear Tuck: 18.5-19.5 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
Wheel Vehicle Sky Tire Automotive tire

Video of rear measurement

Stock Front Tuck: 10-11 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
Wheel Sky Tire Automotive tire Motor vehicle
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
It doesn't appear you are taking the tire bulge into consideration with the overall fitment here so your estimates are incorrect. It also appears your camera angle is not properly lined up as well. Unless you have a one-off US spec CX-30, your current setup with 25mm spacers is giving you at least 14 mm (0.55") of tire poke in the front and at least 5 mm (0.2") of tire poke in the rear. In a game of mm, this is far from perfect (flush) on both accounts.

Below is a CX-30 with stock wheels and Firestone Firehawk 215/55r18 (stock sizing). The Firehawk 251/55r18 tires have the same section width specs as the stock Bridgestone Turanza EL440 so tire bulge will be the same.

Stock Rear Tuck: 18.5-19.5 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
View attachment 4589
Video of rear measurement

Stock Front Tuck: 10-11 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
View attachment 4588
Didn't realize it was a game, LOL . Who gives a rats ass about a few mm of sidewall . You want the tread of the tire , or the part of the tire that contacts the road to be inside the fender . That way your not throwing stuff down the side of your vehicle . Since we are being so critical on mm for god sake , it is perfect IMO for me .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
It doesn't appear you are taking the tire bulge into consideration with the overall fitment here so your estimates are incorrect. It also appears your camera angle is not properly lined up as well. Unless you have a one-off US spec CX-30, your current setup with 25mm spacers is giving you at least 14 mm (0.55") of tire poke in the front and at least 5 mm (0.2") of tire poke in the rear. In a game of mm, this is far from perfect (flush) on both accounts.

Below is a CX-30 with stock wheels and Firestone Firehawk 215/55r18 (stock sizing). The Firehawk 251/55r18 tires have the same section width specs as the stock Bridgestone Turanza EL440 so tire bulge will be the same.

Stock Rear Tuck: 18.5-19.5 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
View attachment 4589
Video of rear measurement

Stock Front Tuck: 10-11 mm (depending on level's bubble center within center lines)
View attachment 4588
And I show the Firehawk as having a 7.2" tread width . My tire's have a 6.8" tread width . That is about a 10mm difference . Your comparing apples to oranges , as tires of the same size by different manufactures are not going to be the same mm wide . Do your test with the same exact tire before calling people out .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Some Turanza el440 tires have a 6.6" tread width , that would be 15mm narrower than a Firehawk . The Firehawk is a high performance all season tire . A Turanza is a grand touring all season tire . Again Apples to Oranges . A Firehawk tire of the same size as a Turanza is going to be much wider(10-15mm), and that's just the tread , I would bet the farm , the entire tire is at least 20 mm wider .
 

·
Registered
'22 2.5T JBM Stealth
Joined
·
175 Posts
Didn't realize it was a game, LOL . Who gives a rats ass about a few mm of sidewall . You want the tread of the tire , or the part of the tire that contacts the road to be inside the fender . That way your not throwing stuff down the side of your vehicle . Since we are being so critical on mm for god sake , it is perfect IMO for me .
Many care about a few mm of sidewall, obviously not you but others take advice from forums, spend their hard earned money on a modification and then find out the forum advice was not accurate. I would be more than furious to see over a half inch of poke in the front (your original claim, now corrected) and 5mm in the rear, although small, would likely annoy me... claimed as "perfect". I've got about a 1-2mm of tolerance and I'm likely not alone. As such, I feel it's necessary to correct any miscalculations or estimates here. No offense to you personally, I just don't throw the word perfect around loosely without context. Now that you have clarified your stance, future forum members will understand what you mean.

And I show the Firehawk as having a 7.2" tread width . My tire's have a 6.8" tread width . That is about a 10mm difference . Your comparing apples to oranges , as tires of the same size by different manufactures are not going to be the same mm wide . Do your test with the same exact tire before calling people out .
I'm fully aware that tires of the same size from different manufacturers may have different measurements. Again, you are mistaken. I neither mention tread width nor am I measuring tread width in the photos and video I shared in my previous post. I mention and measure section width as this is the portion of the tire that will visually POKE out beyond the top of the cladding in this situation. Both have a 8.9" section width... apples to apples.
 

·
Registered
'22 2.5T JBM Stealth
Joined
·
175 Posts
Some Turanza el440 tires have a 6.6" tread width , that would be 15mm narrower than a Firehawk . The Firehawk is a high performance all season tire . A Turanza is a grand touring all season tire . Again Apples to Oranges . A Firehawk tire of the same size as a Turanza is going to be much wider(10-15mm), and that's just the tread , I would bet the farm , the entire tire is at least 20 mm wider .
Your consistent reference to tread width is giving the impression that you are not familiar with section width. Section width and tread width are 2 different measurements of a tire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Your consistent reference to tread width is giving the impression that you are not familiar with section width. Section width and tread width are 2 different measurements of a tire.
I'm well aware of what section width is , and there is no way in hell our Turanza tires have a section width of 8.9 " . Try 215 mm which is 8.465 " . Which is almost a half inch difference from your firehawks . In the mm game you seem to want to play , that is 11 mm . Again Apples to Oranges . Do not attempt to prove this unless your using the same exact tire on the same exact wheel and inflated to 35 PSI .
 

·
Registered
'22 2.5T JBM Stealth
Joined
·
175 Posts
I'm well aware of what section width is , and there is no way in hell our Turanza tires have a section width of 8.9 " . Try 215 mm which is 8.465 " . Which is almost a half inch difference from your firehawks . In the mm game you seem to want to play , that is 11 mm . Again Apples to Oranges . Do not attempt to prove this unless your using the same exact tire on the same exact wheel and inflated to 35 PSI .
If you were well aware you wouldn't be referencing tread width in this discussion. You are also not aware that when tires are put into categories, 215 mm for example, that the section width doesn't necessarily equal 215 mm, right? This will be my last post on this thread as I have grown tired of repeatedly correcting your errors.

Apple 1:
Tire Wheel Automotive tire Tread Synthetic rubber


Apple 2:
Product Tire Automotive tire Wheel Tread
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Your consistent reference to tread width is giving the impression that you are not familiar with section width. Section width and tread width are 2 different measurements of a tire.
I was referencing tread width because I was having a hard time finding the section width of the Turanza tire . I didn't think it would matter because 99.9999% of the time , a tire with a wider tread width will also have a wider section width .
 
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
Top