Thanks for the info Ron
What’s not clear in VSI9(and generally in all docs) is the interpretation and meaning of ‘model’.
From a compliance point, most normal people would take a wider view of model to be one of either a commodore sedan, Ute or wagon making upgrades simpler.
Sadly I suspect the regulators are not normal people and would take a bureaucratic view that the model is what the manufacture defines within the model designator shown on built plate (VF8EK69 for your SS or VF8EP69 for my MSE).
If the later view of model is true, that’s the crux of the problem.
Brembo’s were never an option of VF8EK69 (SS) while 275/35R20 rears tyres (9.5” rim) and 245/35R20 front tyres (8.5” rim) were the only tyre fitment option for my MSE.
Now stick with me for a bit, with the narrow bureaucratic view of model, I CAN NOT go narrower in rear width than 275 (little is mentioned about sidewall height / rim diameter so i’d assume it’s relatively free if rolling diameter is within allowed +/- limits).
So theory would say I can’t put narrower 8.5” width on the rear even though the spare is a 245/35R20 black forged alloy (like the front) BUT actually carries a temporary wheel sticker on it. The fact this spare carries a temp wheel sticker seems to reinforces the narrower bueaurocratic view of model (yuck).
It all sounds crazy.
Maybe as a last resort you can chat to those idiot bureaucrats and see how they interpret ‘model’ w.r.t reducing MSE rear tyre width so one can legally run same width front and rear. If the bueaurocrats take a sensible broader view of model for the tyre issue and say it’s ok, ask why the brakes are any different?
Mind you, that’s only if you haven’t had enough of banging your head against bureaucraticly stupid rules.
Me, for now i’ll stick with current 20” wheels though I may also ring VicRoads and ask about the tyre situation. I’ll put up with halogens rather than chasing self leveling HID lights with washers as that is much more of a mess than brakes