you're only talking 20mm difference, less than an inch...
An that's all it takes...
Another option is 265/40/18s. I chose the size because of price but I am very happy with them.
Odd size, I guess it may be more common to find a 18" vs a 19"
What is the obsession some people have with staggering F/R tires for aesthetic reasons when there is zero performance benefit?
More grip in the rear, less tramlining in the front. So there is a performance benefit.
If if it's placebo... it's just like placebo relationships with doctors... studies show that some people get better over long periods just based on the longer time they spend with their doctor. Have wider tires on back might make people think than can go faster, ok that it certainly looks better. Staggered is good on a fast car. I wouldn't stagger a v6 or anything less if it was a mustang. I don't think the v6 can break the stock tires anyways.. .not sure though.. I saw a tastefully staggered s2000.. he was boosted and needed it though. the higher end bimmers look good if they are the latemodel 5-7 series.
Ok. Ambien kicking in.... night!
Agree, if your not breaking out the rear end, no need, If you have traction issues in the first 3 gears, you may want to look into the staggered setup. I don't get to worried about rotations, as these car shred summer tires in 10-15k miles, if I only get 7k miles out of a rear set and 14k miles out of a front set, rotating seems pointless, just buy a new set for the rears when they wear out, and likewise on the fronts, unless you drive under 5k miles a year, dry rot should not be an issue. I ran on 285/35/19's on all 4 for almost a year, grip was insane, but tramlining the grooves was horrid. After that curb jumped out in front of me I decided to loof for a new set of 255/40/19's(stock) for the front, and left the rear with the 285's. I get all the accel traction from the 285 w/ none of the "sideeffects" of the placebo pill with the 255's up front.