DSLDave

The main factor that made me let the dealer sway me to the 215s is that they should protrude a little over the rim (he says), whereas the 205s were stretched and left the rims very prone to kerb-scraping while parking, no matter how careful one tries to be. I'd hate to mess up my newly refurbed rims with a few stupid scrapes!

Yes I just checked, you're right. So is it potential rubbing issues then? Have you heard of 215/40s on a 17"?

The 215s have already been ordered for me. Would you be concerned about rubbing (car already 40mm lower), or speedometer error, or just form a 'purist' point of view? Speedometer already reads slightly over (as is the case in pretty much any car anyway), so slightly larger radius might even correct that error I suppose. I suppose an error in the milometer would be something you wouldn't want. I just checked an online calculator now, which says the difference in speed/milometer reading between the 215s and 205s is 1.3%. Tolerable, or not? Are 215/40-17 unusual, and/or potentially problematic for a Corrado, do you think?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]80974[/ATTACH] Maybe this will work - photo of the Corrado with the RS4s

Theyre 17" RS4 replica, 9-spoke ones, photo attached to my next post. They might have been on the car for 10 odd years I reckon. I only have the car 2 and a half years. I guess the ones that are buckled may have got a hard knock at some stage, but they have quite a few miles under their belt at this stage anyway, so maybe just age. However the Alloys guy said they were a better wheel than a lot of the crap on the market now, and I'm no expert so I'll take the advice of a respected and trusted expert in the trade! So, worth spending money on refurbishing. I'm putting a new set of 215/40-17s on them (previously 205/40-17s) so I hope that'll work out ok.

I've just been to a good alloys shop, since my last post this morning, who sell and refurbish rims. The owner is experienced and knowledgable, and soon changed my mind about those cheap Chinese TTRS replicas, cos he says they're crap basically. So it turns out that the current wheels (on the car since buying from VeeDubHev), are good quality, and I've decided to go for a full refurbishment including straightening out buckles. I'll end up with much better quality wheels (than those pictured by OP), which will look fantastic, even though I do think those TTRS style ones would look really good too.

Hey what a coincidence! I have been thinking about changing from RS4s to those EXACT rims over the past week! I was looking in an alloys shop, spotted them in 5x100 17" on the display, and really liked the look of them. That's exactly why I came on the forum today, to check out comments and suggestions for 5-spokers (I don't like speedlines). Jim please let's see that pic you're doing for Gwr. Mine is aqua blue, but seeing them on the green one will do! I just liked the look of these when I saw them, not realising til later that they belong on an Audi TTRS!

Have you sold those spacers or do you still have them? I would be interested. 2 questions: How come you only used them for a week and didnt want them any more?? I have 205 45 17's on my VR6. Do you reckon that 15mm extra width either side of the car would be pretty noticable? Thanks.

Pulse and Glide is just a method of driving where you choose a speed you'd like to drive at, say 60mph or 75mph, or whatever, and instead of just driving steady at that speed, you drive in a series of 'pulses' where you accelerate gently to a speed above your target (I ususally go to 10kmh above target) and then shift to neutral and let the car glide (free-wheel) to a speed below your target (I let it go to 10kmh below target), then you shift to 5th gear and accelerate back up to your above-target speed and repeat the cycle. If I am doing it, I use it on flat and downhill stretches of road, and when climbing hills I just use the power to stay at constant speed as in normal driving. It works well on long journeys on relatively quiet roads. Definitely not a good idea where you have vehicles behind you getting frustrated at your wavering speed. Last week on an 80mile round trip the MFA read 50mpg over the whole journey. That was on country roads with a 50mph speed limit, so the slower driving was more fuel efficient than if I was driving 60 or 70mph. It might sound tediouos, but I was surprised to find that I found long 300-400 mile journeys less monotonous driving this way than if I was driving 'normally'!

And by the way Jim, I dont always drive my VR6 like a granny! I had the privelege 2 weeks ago of being able to take it for a few laps of the Nurburgring Nordschleife (first, but hopefully not last, time), and the MFA told me it did 16mpg!! Allowing for MFA error that was probably really 14 or 15mpg! I thought that doing it would satisfy me, and I'd be content that I'd been there done that. But now I just want to do it again even more!! Cheers.

Are you asking me seriously, like you don't believe me? LOL! If you look at it for a moment its not that hard to beleive. Remember I started with a full tank, and drove til it was empty. It gave me 45mpg using super-economical 'pulse and glide' driving (but never turning the engine off while driving - very dangerous!). I've got 40mpg before on a long journey doing steady 50mph just for the sake of research! 50mph steady speed is MUCH MUCH more tedious than 60mph pulse and glide, believe me! If you're MFA works, you should give it a try on some journey just to see the results for yourself. Just remember you won't be maximising your mpg til your engine has warmed up. I reckon you save 20-25% fuel compared to driving at the same constant speed. I only tried this stuff out for the first time 2 weeks ago and I was amazed! I had to do a 3,500 mile round trip, and I thought for a moment how much fuel that was going to burn, so I decided to experiment with this technique.

690 miles (1106km) from 1 fillup! Update on my 'VR6 economy tank'. This is NOT A JOKE, and NOT A MISTAKE !!! Today I filled the VR6, after she started to splutter a bit with 689.8 miles on the tank. I cut the engine, popped in a can of 5.0 litres which I had with me, and took her a mile down the road to fill her up proper. The MFA read 47.6mpg for the total miles driven on that tank, but after filling her, the calculation gave a 'true' mpg of 45.3mpg. The journey was: Filled up in Luxembourg City on 16th April (normal unleaded 95 petrol), drove across France, around Paris, up to Cherbourg, then from Rosslare up to Dublin, and another 90 miles around home until I had to fill her up this morning. It was mostly long journey driving on motorways and decent country roads at average 60mph, and some sluggish driving around and through towns. I drove the whole tank using the 'pulse and glide' hypermiling technique, and didnt floor the throttle at all! This has created a brand new challenge for me now - to get 700 miles from a fill in a VR6!

Had my VR6 (previously owned by Veedubhev) on a 3,500 mile road trip to Europe, (including 4 laps on the Nordschleife!) and got back home to Ireland at the weekend. 'Discovered' a new way of driving it to save fuel ("pulse and Glide"). Filled her up with cheap petrol in Luxembourg, drove all the way to Cherbourg, and home to Dublin from the port in Rosslare (south-east of Ireland). There's 580 miles done on the tank, and probably still about 40 miles left in the tank, and the MFA shows 47.7mpg so far for that tank! And that's driving average 60mph where road conditions permitted. And with a payload of about 250kg of stuff! I'll post the true mpg when I finally fill up the tank again.

Since removing the snorkel on the VR6, I havn't driven the car a whole lot, but enough to know now that I definitely prefer the sound! The sound seems nicer even just cruising at relatively low revs, but noticably nicer when accelerating.