Here is what I ended up with. The 225/60r15s were just WAY too much tire. Bought a Percy's tire fitment tool, and couldn't get it to work correctly because unless the weight is on the hub, the suspension unloads a little and a little is all I needed to mess up my measurements. So I took the two front rims in to a used tire shop, and had him put a 215/60 on one, and a 205/60 on the other. I mounted them and turned the steering wheel chock to chock. The 215s did not rub, but go close enough that I could not get a finger between wheel and fender, in fact about half the width of my index finger. I was afraid that if I drove on that it would rub on sharp turns under speed or if I hit a bump. The 205s have plenty of clearance all around with lots of extra room. In pictures below, 205 is on passenger side. So I ordered a set of new BFG T/A 205s which will be delivered and installed tomorrow. Still have plenty of ground clearance since the exhaust is tucked up so well. In my opinion, I think the 215s even LOOK too big and too much tire is tucked up. The 205s have an inch or so up in the wheel well, which more evenly matches my rear tire tuck.
I tried 205*70*14 on my front wheels when I had modified coils on the car. They rub fender B4 I cud leave the tire store. I have since put stock height springs on the car and cud probably run the 205's. I had put on the car 195's as soon as we discovered the problem. Anyway, I am satisfied w/ the ride qualities thou I wud'nt mind the car sitting a little lower in frt. I assume u pretty much haave most of ur frt end issues resolved and ready for the road?
Good to hear you got it figured out. The 205's look great. I'm In the same dilemma right now trying to get the biggest tire in there while running a couple degrees of positive caster. For the price of mounting, trial fitting old used tires sounds like a great way to be sure of getting what you want.
A 205 is pretty skinny, and honestly, the front looks just slightly too low. A better solution than skinny tires would be wheels with the proper back-spacing. A 4-1/4" back-space would eliminate any fender rubbing problems. I think a 225 is an ideal width for the front of a Maverick. If you went with 17s, a 225/45-17 is 25 inches in diameter. If you can't run a 25-inch tire on the front of a Maverick, something is wrong. No offense intended. I think it's great that you lowered your car. Mavericks that sit high is a pet peeve of mine.
what all did you do to get that stance that's exactly the way I want mine to sit I haven't fooled with the suspension yet I am still in the body work welding phase it looks great
Even if I bought new rims, I was looking at torq-thrusts. 17X7 only come in 4" bs, which is what I have now. Don't forget...the 225 tire rubbed on the inside of the wheelwell, too, against the frame rail.
It hits the fender on turns where the wheel points outward about halfway, then if you continue turning, the inside rear of the wheel will hit the frame rail. Does that make sense? Hard to explain. When going straight, the wheel hits nothing. It is close to the fender, but does not rub, even if I hit bumps. Only when I start to turn it, then it rubs on the fender around 1-o'clock on the outer edge of the wheel, then if I keep turning, the 3-o'clock on the inner edge will hit the frame rail.
Yes, the 2" drop did not help with the large 225 tires. No steering stops, so it will pretty much steer until it hits something. But even without all that, even on my stock setup with 215/60r15s from back in january 2006 when I first put them on the stock setup, they were very close to hitting the front valence. So not sure if mine is a one-off issue or not, but larger front tires have been an issue with me since the beginning. So the R&C suspension and the 2" drop didn't cause the problem, but the 2" drop added to it when I had 225 tires on.
I wish I could remember who suggested to me, at the time, to just purchase standard non-drop Mustang II spindles because they also had some issues with the 2 inch drop