Logical Progression

[Ivan]

Want proof that you need sort axles and fat rubber on a '67? The first photo is my '67 with long axles and 165 Michelins circa 1994. The second is the same car 14 years later with Sway-A-Way short axles and Dunlop 205/65s.

[Rennsurfer]

'Tis a matter of personal preference. I don't care (short or long axle) either way. Those wheels look perfect!

[javabug]

I rarely ever see anything wrong with long axles and 165s on a '67.  

[Rennsurfer]

I rarely ever see anything wrong with long axles and 165s on a '67.   

X2.

My long axles had 165 tires and now have 195 tires. I like the way both look.

[fredy66]

Ivan your car is the reason Way i,m inn to cal-look.
i after reading the cal look guide some years back in volksworld.
so if it wasn't for you i be home on the sofa drinking beer but now i,m at the garage hurting back and finger

more photos pleas

thanks for the inspiration

[flatfire]

I had a set of 205s on my 67 then saw a picture of the Hunsaker bug in the new Cal Look book.

Off with the 205s on with the 165s it looks and hooks so much better.IMHO 

205s


165s to follow

[Brother Lovedub]

135 and 165 combination on '67 long axles.

[benssp]

I think what you need to remember is original BRM's have a 5mm offset and the Burners on your NOS '67 will be 42mm......so, taking into account that the burners are 1/2" wider the should still sit 43mm further in than the berms so if you use them with short axles you will need to use spacers to clear the spring plates and fit the caps. My calculations might be out, why they can't just use backspace rather than offset the world would be a better place

Here's mine with 67 axles, 205/60's and 35mm offset wheels

[Rocket Ron]

I needed 15mm of spacer with the gas burners to get them to sit anywhere near where my deep 6 fuchs sat