Thứ Hai, 30 tháng 1, 2017

Different tires and wheels? Lower profile? Wider? Taller? part 1

  • Jun 19, 2007
    TEG
    Over the years, the sizes and aspect ratios of tires has changed quite a bit. Isn't there one school of thought about how to do it right? Apparently not, as it appears to be "fad driven" to some extent.

    Just as a quick example, sports cars of the 1950s/60s/70s tended to have what we would consider (by today's standards) small wheels and very high profile tires.
    [?IMG]

    These days you find that sports cars have much bigger OEM wheels with much lower profile tires.
    [?IMG]

    These changes were gradual rather than sudden. Customizers have tended to do aftermarket resizing which sets a trend that the factory eventually follows.
    Aftermarket tire and wheel shops advertise "plus" packages to get larger wheels.
    http://type2.com/library/tires/tirefaq.htm
    "3.D. What's a Plus One, Plus Two or Plus Three conversion?
    Also shown as +1, +2 or +3, these designations indicate switching from stock rims to rims of 1, 2 or 3 inch larger diameter. Going to a larger diameter rim while keeping overall tire height about the same can allow for a significantly wider, shorter tire which can have a dramatic effect on a car's handling, ride and appearance. "

    For various reasons the manufacturers tend to say that they do not recommend or endorse these changes, but people go ahead and do them anyways. For instance, on old muscle cars it is typical to find them lowered, with much larger (than stock) wheels and much lower profile tires.
    [?IMG]

    I have heard some people say that doing the "plus" conversion is a good idea because the factory is overly conservative for reasons that don't really matter.
    For instance, they think:
    * Wheels are smaller than they need to be so snow chains can be fitted. (Yet I never drive the sports car in the snow.)
    * Wheels are smaller than they need to be because the factory was trying to save money. ( Yet I want to spend extra money to improve my car. )
    * Tires are higher profile than needed so they can absorb speed bumps. ( But I always drive slowly over speed bumps. )
    * The car is higher than it needs to be to meet USA headlight and bumper height standards, but the European version is lower (as it is "meant to be") so we should fix the problem.

    So given those sort of thoughts, are the Roadster tires and wheels already "perfect", or would someone be incllined to try to improve them with aftermarket parts?
    The market for aftermarket wheels is HUGE. Sometimes people change them just to have a different style, but could there be room for improvement?

    When lowering or changing tires sizes it is common to introduce problems that weren't there with the factory package. Common problems include:
    * Improper speedometer calibration.
    * Improper brake dive calculations for headlight leveling and/or electronic brake force distributions controls.
    * Heavier and/or less strong wheels (are they forged?)
    * Improper alignment
    * Rubbing / scraping
    * Excessive road noise, or vibration

    Is this an improvement?
    [?IMG]
    [?IMG]


    =================================================================

    For reference, the Roadster's OEM wheels are
    Front=175/55 R16
    Rear=225/45 R17
    [?IMG]
    �
  • Jun 19, 2007
    tonybelding
    Also they were narrow by today's standards. I remember when I was looking at cars in the mid-1990s and being impressed with how wide tires had become, compared with the older cars. But I think it's one of those trends which has probably now been carried beyond the point of common sense.

    I tend to be very conservative in these matters.

    For example, in the almost two years I've had the Esprit V8, I've done nothing to it -- no customization at all, not even a "chip" for earlier boost and increased torque, which many Esprit owners tell me is a must-have upgrade. Well. . . I did a little research, and it turns out the transmission on the older cars can't handle as much torque, that's why the Lotus engineers programmed the chip the way they did. If you upgrade the chip, then you risk damaging the transmission, or else you have to upgrade the transmission components too, and then it becomes a much more expensive and involved project.

    I can understand the guys with the relatively cheaper and lower performance cars, like a Miata for example, wanting to bolt on a supercharger or something like that. But if you already have a $100,000 supercar in your garage, I reckon there's little to gain by second-guessing the engineers who designed it.

    Regarding tires and wheels. . . I don't see anything wrong with the Roadster's wheels, they look good to me. The tires are Yokohama Advan Neovas, they're possibly the most advanced tires available for a sports car. Why fix something that isn't broken?
    �
  • Jun 19, 2007
    danny
    One of the issues is making sure you have a good match of tire width in the front with the width in the back.
    If you look at most sports cars, they tend to have wider tires in the back. If you make tires wider without thinking about the technical side that the factory thought about, could you possibly introduce handling problems? I'm not sure of this, but i think based on the drivetrain and the weight distribution, you need a certain ratio of front to rear tire width. This can be calculated i believe by people who have far more idea of what they are talking about then i do.
    This also applies to brakes, I believe you can negatively affect brake performance by just going for some random bigger size discs. You need to get a certain ratio of front to back. Does this make sense to you? its easier to explain with a car infront of me.
    �
  • Jun 19, 2007
    danny
    Tony, i don't think hes talking about changing the brand of tire, rather the width and sidewall of the tire.
    Would wider tires on the roadster not give it more grip and there for better performance?
    I think yes, but there was obviously some engineering and balance decisions that had to be made.
    My guess would be that they are the size they are for a reason.
    �
  • Jun 19, 2007
    TEG
    I went though the whole process a while back with my 1st gen Rx7 Autocross car.

    The car started out with 185/70R13 tires all around which seem to be rather high profile for a "sport car".
    When all was said and done, I ended up with 285/45R15s in the rear, and 225/50R15s in the front.
    It was quite a transformation, but I think I had overdone it on the rears. I ended up with fiberglass "IMSA" style body flares on the back to fit the big tires.
    (I started out with Pirelli P7 tires, then Yokohama AVS intermediates)


    The car had tremendous straight line and lateral grip, but I got this feeling like I was dragging the rear end around with me everywhere I went.
    The 350hp 13B propane turbo was good fun to power slide the rear end through corners, but it wasn't very competitive time wise to do it that way.

    Since then, having driven many other cars, and having a penchant for mid engined two seaters, I have come to the conclusion that the best handling cars have near 50/50 weight distribution and the same size tires on all 4 wheels.

    By the way, as has been stated, if you upgrade one thing you may find the limits of other parts.
    After I added the bigger tires and more powerful engine then I ended up breaking the rear differential a couple of times before buying a race part instead. The race part was rather noisy so wasn't very pleasant for street use.
    Also, the brake system needed to be upgraded to deal with the higher speeds and performance.
    (Amazingly the stock 5 speed transmission held up with 3x power and torque without a problem).
    �
  • Jun 21, 2007
    W8MM
    After doggedly and unsuccessfully trying to outsmart car designers all through my youth, I now find it very amusing to watch others try it today.
    �
  • Jun 21, 2007
    AGR
    First blush the Roadster's wheel and tires are on the small side. The front one are quite small probably due to the lack of a power steering, and to make it somewhat easy to park the car.The rear one are almost acceptable.

    They are the same size tires from the Lotus Elise which weighs quite a bit less.
    �
  • Nov 18, 2007
    TEG
  • Nov 18, 2007
    tonybelding
    To me those custom wheels don't look any better than the originals, or even as good. I really like the factory wheels.

    If I were going to make any changes to the wheels, it would more likely be some sort of dorky-looking but aerodynamic wheel cover.

    BTW, isn't it odd how the same car can look so different -- I mean the color -- in two different photos?
    �
  • Nov 18, 2007
    TEG
    Yeah, that first photo looks too pink.
    Color and white balance can differ a lot from camera to camera.
    (Some of it might be user error on the settings, and some might just be camera differences).
    �
  • Jan 4, 2008
    neo914
    IMHO the Tesla roadster is a big improvement to the 2nd generation Elise design but could use something to make it stand out in the supercar arena. Larger diameter wheels and lower profile tires can enhance the look and improve performance. A taller and narrower (low rolling resistance) combination should even improve mileage. If anything they should have the lightest wheels available.

    There's high demand for wheels & tires which is why SEMA devotes a building to them. Of the many wheel designs, there are very few designs that stand on their own. Notable designs are Porsche Fuchs, BBS basket weave, Mercedes AMG monoblock, and some of the newer BMW wheels. Personally I would like to see a wheel design that mimics the electric motor rotor and windings.

    The collectors and conservative owners won't deviate from stock but the performance and youthful minded owners will likely want 18's or 19's maybe larger if they can be made to fit with the suspension height and other aspects compensated.

    My guess is the factory engineers have leveraged the Lotus specs and haven't had the time or need to test other sizes and components. If it's ever raced, more sizes will surely be tested. Maybe the factory or an independent group will create a "tuning" company that will offer more options in the future...
    �
  • Jan 4, 2008
    Kardax
    neo914, there's a certain balance to be obtained. Sure, you can put 19" rims on a little car like this, but you're probably making tradeoffs in ride comfort and handling if you do.

    Efficiency is important for the Tesla Roadster, but equally important is performance. This is a $100,000 sports car; it needs to drive like one if they want to break out of the rich greenie niche. This is why they're going through all the pain of developing their own transmission, using sport tires, and making aerodynamic compromises to keep the look good.

    -Ryan
    �
  • Mar 14, 2008
    TEG
    In NYC (I think):

    2332064692_26c7578dff_b.jpg
    �
  • Mar 16, 2008
    Hunter
    hmmm

    Wasn't there a bunch of talk a year or more ago concerning the wheel/tire design and how it was a carefully-selected balance between rolling resistance and handling performance? Seems like you could trade one for the other, but I'm guessing the Tesla engineers have already chosen what they consider the "sweet spot." On the same note, I doubt they got Yokohama on board for a new tire design without appropriate size/aspect choices.
    �
  • Mar 17, 2008
    siry
    same tires (yoko advan neova), same tire and wheel dimensions, different wheels (aftermarket testing) in this shot. These wheels are forged aluminum like the stock wheels but look different and are lighter. They are being testing for durability.
    �
  • Mar 17, 2008
    TEG
    I like the looks of them more than the stock wheels, although black isn't necessarily the best finish to go with all colors.

    It would be nice if they were offered in a "gun metal gray" color.

    DSCN0106.jpg
    �
  • Dec 11, 2008
    doug
    Some info about these wheels posted on Lotustalk:
    2332064692_26c7578dff_b.jpg
    �
  • Dec 12, 2008
    malcolm
  • Dec 12, 2008
    graham
    Sigh... It is obviously too early in the morning and I haven't had caffeine, yet. I read this as: "Edison-specific wheel design" and said out loud to my computer: "There is no way they called it that!" After pouring over the linked pdf, I finally figured out my mistake...
    �
  • Dec 12, 2008
    vfx
    I carefully read the quote:
    As a bit of hyperbole since we here all know that unlike other manufactures, there is no distinction between Tesla and Dealers.
    �
  • Jan 27, 2009
    TEG
  • Feb 1, 2009
    doug
    Any any actual photos yet with these wheels on the car? I'm pretty sure this picture is a photoshop job.





    .
    �
  • Feb 1, 2009
    TEG
    I can't find any other pictures of the new wheels on the Roadster.

    Here is another pic of the somewhat similar Brabus wheels though:
    1863610_tesla4.jpg
    �
  • Apr 4, 2009
    doug
    Here's an actual (non photochop) picture of the new stock wheels on the car.

    3411620301_aeea700ea9_b.jpg
    �
  • Apr 4, 2009
    vfx
  • Apr 4, 2009
    doug
    I've asked. I agree they definitely look better in gunmetal. Then again, we haven't actually seen a proper representation of them in silver yet, either.
    �
  • Apr 4, 2009
    TEG
    Yes, I like the "gunmetal" better too. Possibly not everyone's first choice though. Recall how people thought gray wheels on a gray roadster looked "dirty" somehow. Maybe a slightly reflective finish works better though. I think that other gray roadster had matte (flat) finish paint on the wheels, unlike this new one which seems shiny/glossy.
    �
  • Apr 4, 2009
    vfx
    We agree!

















    !
    �
  • Apr 5, 2009
    Kevin Harney
    These are a BIG improvement. But then again I never really liked the directional ones that they had standard anyway. :rolleyes:
    �
  • Apr 7, 2009
    TEG
    Seems like they are showing up in production now:
    3421852540_8cec220eaa_o.jpg
    �
  • Apr 7, 2009
    vfx
    Still like em'!
    �
  • Apr 7, 2009
    Kevin Harney
    what is that circle on the plug lid on the green car ? light? optical illusion ?
    �
  • Jan 20, 2010
    Roger Reid
    Its been a while since this thread has been visited.

    Has anyone come across a 5 hole wheel replacement for the Roadster. Sector 111 told me they would make a special run if we had enough buyers interested.

    My purpose would be a set of wheels for track use.
    �
  • Apr 19, 2010
    TEG
    4531191923_e947516708.jpg
    �
  • Apr 28, 2010
    PopSmith
    @TEG, what's a Roadster doing at a gas station? Teasing other cars? :biggrin:

    Those wheels look pretty good but I actually like the new stock wheels best so far.
    �
  • Apr 28, 2010
    dwegmull
    Gas stations are useful when there is a sudden shower and you need to put the roof on :biggrin: Plus, In California at least, a gas station must provide free air for your tires and free water for your radiator (or battery cooling system, I guess) even if you don't buy gas!
    �
  • Jun 7, 2010
    csummers
    short life tires?

    I've been surfing the posts and it seems to me that stock tires only last <10k miles?? Seems VERY low when compared to 40-50k for current car tires. Comments?
    �
  • Jun 7, 2010
    Tdave
    The Roadster uses very high performance tires. Considering the wear rating for the tires used, the mileage is what is expected from those tires. You have to remember this is a sports car, and one with an extreme amount of power. To handle that power, very sticky tires are needed. That's why the Sport model comes with R-compound tires, usually only used by racers and autocrossers. The Yoko A048 tires have a wear rating of 60, compared to a wear rating of 300 or higher for the "current car tires" you're comparing to. A shallower tread depth is also needed to avoid chunks of rubber coming off when you accelerate with that soft rubber. What you end up with is the performance you need for the car, but only 5000 miles of life on the tire (for the Sport), and 10,000 miles of life (for the non-Sport).

    You can use harder compound tires, and get longer life, but performance will suffer significantly, and you'll have the traction control light come on almost continuously if you floor the car while accelerating, even in perfect, dry conditions.
    �
  • Jun 8, 2010
    csummers
    Since I will be using the car daily, and not racing, I'd perfer a tire with much longer life and not too concerned with jack rabbit start performance, unless it comprimises the range/charge or significantly impairs handling. Thoughts??
    �
  • Jun 8, 2010
    Tdave
  • Jun 8, 2010
    Albern
    Where did you get the sizing for the fronts? I thought they were 175-55-R16.

    Unfortunately TireRack only shows the Advan AD07s.

    There are a lot more options for the rears though in the stock size.

    Also, what about plus sizing the fronts to 17s?
    �
  • Jun 8, 2010
    TEG
  • Jun 8, 2010
    Albern
    Ah thanks TEG, I stand corrected yet again!:redface:

    I guess going up to 17s in the front isn't the best idea too unless you want to order another pair from Tesla or go aftermarket. A set of OZ Ultraleggeras or Enkei RPF1s sound tempting in reducing unsprung weight. Of course this goes back to the original dilemma of calling to question Tesla's motives and research.

    On that note:
    - Does anyone know the current bolt pattern and offsets for the front and rears?
    - For fun, anyone try to weigh the wheel and tire together?
    �
  • Jun 8, 2010
    TEG
    Just keep in mind that one of Tesla's goals was efficiency/range, so absolute max performance wasn't the only criterion. Narrow tires tend to have less rolling resistance.
    �
  • Jun 9, 2010
    Albern
    Yes you are right, but I was trying to elude to the notion of reducing unsprung weight as much as possible. Asides from a less smooth ride are there any negatives to opting for light weight wheels? The Ultraleggera and RPF1s are some of the lightest wheels available via the aftermarket, I just wonder why automakers never opt for them more often.

    The reason why I asked about stock wheel weight on the Roadster was since part of Tesla's priority was efficiency and range, assuming that the tires are in the low to mid 20s (in pounds), can we expect the wheels to be around 13 to 17 lbs (which is the case for both alloys above)?

    OZ Ultraleggera:
    45471d1185771117-experiences-oz-ultraleggera-hlt-wheels-oz_ultraleggera_hlt_bs_ci3_l.jpg

    Enkei RPF1:
    Enkei%20Racing%20RPF1.jpg
    �
  • Jun 9, 2010
    TEG
    I think the main ones are more cost and (in some cases) less strength.

    Considering the range of costs and weights...
    You could go exotic with carbon fiber wheels.
    Forged aluminum wheels are desirable.
    Cast aluminum is common, less expensive than forged but tends to weigh more.
    Then there are the old cheap steel wheels that some low cost and trucks cars still use...
    �
  • Jan 23, 2011
    TEG
  • Jan 23, 2011
    Dragon
    Ugly.
    �
  • Jan 24, 2011
    TEG
    I think they tried those wheels on this car too:
    4463131540_9233435bc8.jpg

    And these too:
    4484539001_7e15174b76_z.jpg
    �
  • Jan 26, 2011
    Roger Reid
    I put the 205/50 16" (Hoosier A6) on the front of my Sport model for autocross purposes. That along with adjusting the sway bars and shocks reduced the understeer in corners. The "new Tires" setup in the main console was neccessary to get back my regen braking and worked flawlessly for this tire. I don't know how far off in diameter you can go and have the new tires setup work.

    Typically cars are set up from the factory with understeer. Understeer is where the front of the car resists turning even when you are trying to steer the car sharply. Oversteer is where the rear end spins out and can cause total loss of control. For the average driver understeer is safer and will result in less accidents.

    Are the 205 wide tires neccessary for a street application? In my opinion, no. Just drive the speed limit and there are no problems. On the other hand if you are "playing" with the speed limit around a high speed turn with a cliff on the outside and the front end pushes, your only choice is to slow down or get lucky.
    �
  • Jan 26, 2011
    dsm363
    I finally got a call back from someone at product planning at Yokohama Tires about getting the front tires for the Roadster in the new AD08s (175/55 R16). He called HQ in Japan and basically they said it's not going to happen so stick with the AD07s. Oh well. They did say some people use the AD08s in wider sizes though.
    �
  • Feb 2, 2011
    Tdave
    Anyone consider buying another pair of the stock rear wheels and putting them on the front? The 17x7.5 wheel would fit a 205/45 R17 tire, which should indeed fit within the wheel well in the front. This arrangement would open up a bunch more tire options that are available in both 205/45 R17 (front) and 225/45 R17 (rear).

    Anyone know the offset of the stock rear and front wheels? That's the only part I'm unsure of with the above arrangement. Will the offset of the rear wheel work when mounted on the front?
    �
  • Feb 2, 2011
    stenkb
    Teg, had you noticed the mud flaps on this car? They are huge!! wonder if they keep the mud out of the door sills????
    �
  • Feb 2, 2011
    TEG
    Those big mud flaps seem to be on some Roadsters delivered to Scandanavia. I wonder if the local rep worked out something special for that Market.

    Here were similar on EuroSig250#30:
    [?IMG]


    ---

    Oh, and unrelated, but related to this thread topic, here is a photo of Brabus package wheels:
    [?IMG]
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    Alan
    At the risk of being slightly off topic, I often feel if my Roadster could accelerate faster with more grip from the back. Most cars with sub 4 sec 0 to 60 have much wider tires at the back.

    I saw today that the (wonderful) McLaren 12C has two options for tires, the super sticky ones drop the 0 to 60 down from 3.3sec to 3.1 sec. I wonder if part of the roadster sport / vs non sport acceleration difference is due to the different tires?
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    TEG
    I pondered the same thing. Some rambling ideas:

    I think some Roadster sports were delivered with the AD07 instead of A048, so I am guessing that the 0-60 difference can't be that great.

    Having 900lb of batteries over the rear wheels likely helps a lot with traction even if the tires are relatively skinny.

    It is my understanding that turning traction control 'off' doesn't actually fully disable it. I would think the Roadster drive-train with firmware changes could easily "lite up the tires" and do smoking burnouts, but they probably programmed it not to do that. Considering its' performance capability, the Roadster is very 'docile' to drive.
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    Doug_G
    I think the stickies are necessary to make use of the increased torque. As the mathematicians would say, stickies are "a necessary but not sufficient criterion".

    Wider tires do not necessarily grip better. Surface friction is proportional to the normal force (e.g. weight of the car on the wheels) times the coefficient of friction between the two surfaces (an empirical constant determined based on the materials used). You'll note that surface area is not a factor in that equation. The reason is that spreading the weight around more area reduces the normal force, so it's a wash.

    At least that's what physics has to say on the matter; I don't know if there are some second-order effects due to uneven surfaces, etc.
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    TEG
  • Feb 14, 2011
    Doug_G
    Thanks TEG. To summarize, if you want to make a softer tire, you have to make it wider in order for the tire to support the weight of the car.

    So wider tires don't grip better. SOFTER tires grip better. But due to the limitations of the materials, softer materials may require you to make the tire wider.

    Therefore tire width limitations may have an impact on how soft a tire you can install.

    That makes plenty of sense.
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    shark2k
    He seemed to easily light up the tires in this video: http://www.oncars.com/video/268/Tesla-Roadster-Directors-Cut

    -Shark2k
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    TEG
    I have a suspicion that there may be a firmware "mode" you can activate if you want to completely turn off traction control.
    Perhaps only known by people within the company? Just a guess though... If so, it is probably for the best (for safety/durability reasons) if they kept that only for "testing" and showing off.
    �
  • Feb 14, 2011
    shark2k
    Good point. Wouldn't surprise me if that was true.

    -Shark2k
    �
  • Feb 17, 2011
    pgwoosley
    Commuter tires

    One brand/model of long wearing tires available in Tesla sizes: Continental Extreme Contact DWS. (In the case of the front, the 195 width used on the slicker optional tires from Tesla, rather than the standard 175.)
    �
  • Feb 18, 2011
    shark2k
    I don't agree with you as it looks like he is definitely going straight for a little before that but since you don't seem to agree watch the first 15 seconds of this video: OnCars.com - Tesla Roadster Video Review: Performance Review.

    -Shark2k
    �
  • Feb 18, 2011
    Lloyd
    Put light pressure on the brakes, juice to the floor simultaneously (takes two feet), crank the wheel, and you will get the results in the video, with the TC off of course. I suggest you wait until you are on the way to the tire store for new tires!
    �
  • Feb 18, 2011
    gfs
    I will be getting continental brand all-weather tires on my 2008 tesla next week. I can get all 4 tires replaced ($140 each) for about the same cost as just the rear tires in yoko AD07's ($320 per tire).
    somewhere I read that the yoko AD07 is not upposed to be used below 14 degrees F. It certainly gets colder than that in Colorado! Anyone heard the same?
    Gary in Denver
    �
  • Feb 19, 2011
    tennis_trs
    Yes, see link:
    2.5 Roadster / Roadster Sport Tire Thread
    �
  • Feb 24, 2011
    Mitrovic
    A very fine mechanic from Tesla was with my car today. He changed the suspension setting to try to get rid of some of the understeer.

    But what I'm wondering is has anyone any experience how my tyres compare to other tyres on the Roadster Sport. Mine did come with:

    Continental ContiSport Contact
    Front: 195/50 R 16
    Back: 225/45 R 17
    �
  • Mar 21, 2011
    gfs
    The continental tires are working fine, and the car is definitely quieter which is nice. Cornering is not quite as tight, but I really had to push it to see any slip.
    On the 2008 there is no input on a screen to say "new tires". Ii just drove carefully for 30 miles or so, I only saw the TC light when I pushed it to 90 MPH.
    �
  • Apr 29, 2011
    richkae
    Has anyone actually purchased aftermarket wheels? What did you get and where?
    �
  • Jun 3, 2011
    TEG
    This is perhaps the best example so far of the original idea behind this thread:
    5740359047_ebb377ec12_b.jpg

    Those look a lot bigger than stock...

    What do people think of the look?
    �
  • Jun 6, 2011
    vfx
    Trying Falken tires on rear.

    The TC light does come on a lot so far.
    �
  • Jun 6, 2011
    S-2000 Roadster
    I did as much research on the Roadster as I could between 2008 and 2009. Tesla was very responsive to my questions and suggestions, sometimes saying that they were already looking into similar options. Here are the numbers I was given, and I hope they're not out of date since April of 2009:

    5 bolt pattern, 110 mm' pcd
    (this is in between the standards of 5x100 mm & 5x4.5" a.k.a. 5x114.3 mm)
    M12 x 1.5 bolt
    stock cast aluminum wheels: 10.2 kg each (total 90 lbs by my math)
    optional forged aluminum wheels: 7.7 kg each (total 68 lbs by my math)

    I run SSR Wheels on my older gasoline two-door, and I really like their SSF (semi-solid forged) Type-C model. With tires, they actually weigh less than the compact spare! But this is for the CRX Si.

    Now that I finally have a Roadster 2.5, I am trying to find a way to get SSR Type-C SSF wheels in a 5/110 bolt pattern. They do not seem to have a 16x6 wheel, but they do have 16x7 and 17x7.5

    $450 16x7.0J +42 offset 12.1 lb (normally 5/114.3)
    $510 17x7.5J +49 offset 14.9 lb (normally 5/100)

    A set of these for the Roadster would only be $1,920.00 and would total 54 lbs. That's a savings of 14 lbs versus the $2,900 forged Tesla wheels and a savings of 36 lbs versus the stock cast Tesla wheels.

    As to the discussion about "performance," I suggest that the handling differences of low-profile tires are only sometimes useful, whereas reducing your unsprung weight will ALWAYS be useful, thanks to physics. Provided you don't somehow drop the weight too much - which should be impossible with that battery pack - I favor lighter wheels much more strongly than low-profile wheels. Note that larger diameters are always heavier than smaller diameters, at least when comparing the same technology. My theory is that extremely large diameter wheels are only for show, not for setting actual records.

    If anyone has ordered SSR Type-C Wheels with custom Tesla Roadster bolt patterns, please contact me or leave a response here! I am just starting my research into whether these can be obtained, so any help would be appreciated.
    �
  • Jun 7, 2011
    vfx
    Which type of wheels are the strongest against potholes?

    Also,
    ??
    �
  • Jun 7, 2011
    TEG
    With larger diameter wheels you might be able to get a slightly higher top speed. (Up until something overheats or you run out of juice...)
    �
  • Jun 7, 2011
    S-2000 Roadster
    Thanks for catching my typo. That should be "not" for setting actual records.
    �
  • Jun 7, 2011
    SByer
    Indeed, with all the weight back there, the rear wheels can take quite a thumping on CA street (you would think, with the nice weather, that the roads would be in better shape...)
    �
  • Sep 27, 2011
    TEG
  • Sep 27, 2011
    PopSmith
    I actually think those wheels look pretty good, although I'd like them an inch or two smaller. Are those the Brabus wheels?

    The wheels in the post above mine like plastic or just "fake" to me. Almost like that Roadster is a non-driveable prototype (although I know it's not!)
    �
  • Sep 27, 2011
    TEG
    Yeah, I think these are the Brabus package wheels:
    5740359047_ebb377ec12_b.jpg
    3612847531_952989f394_b.jpg
    �
  • Feb 22, 2012
    TEG
    $(KGrHqRHJCYE7zBL6uH7BPCJkoTHLw~~_27.JPG
    $(KGrHqFHJCUE7zK)bsOQBPCJkomb-!~~_27.JPG
    �
  • May 10, 2012
    augkuo
    DPE wheels (17/18in) with Yokohama Sdrive tires -

    dpe_wheels1.JPG dpe_wheels2.JPG sdrive1.JPG sdrive2.JPG sdrive3.JPG
    �
    • Người đăng: vào lúc

    Không có nhận xét nào:

    Đăng nhận xét

    Đăng ký: Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)