Originally posted by cornerbalanced
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Fitting 18x10.5+22 squared on E46 M3
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Gearhead55 View PostI run 10.5 +22 with 265/35s. This is primarily a track car but I street drive it frequently. I'm not that low but I plan on going a little lower soon. I track it with this set up and it does not rub at all. I'm not even running particularly high spring rates, but I am running -3.8* front and -2.5* rear camber. I can run a 10mm spacer in the rear on the street at this height. Front fenders are rolled and the rears are shaved. Tuners in Japan run this size all day long.
I'm wondering if an 18x11 et25 will fit. Don't Ohlins reduce the inner wheel clearance a little bit more than most other coilovers? I have TC Klines...I think those are relatively wheel friendly.Last edited by bigjae46; 10-10-2023, 05:21 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gearhead55 View PostI run 10.5 +22 with 265/35s. This is primarily a track car but I street drive it frequently. I'm not that low but I plan on going a little lower soon. I track it with this set up and it does not rub at all. I'm not even running particularly high spring rates, but I am running -3.8* front and -2.5* rear camber. I can run a 10mm spacer in the rear on the street at this height. Front fenders are rolled and the rears are shaved. Tuners in Japan run this size all day long.
- a 265 on a 10.5 is an optimum stretch for predictable grip and breakaway
- I don't rub at all, even on track
- it looks good
- people still say they "don't fit"
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cronenberged View Post
It's definitely aggressive, but at the end of the day to each there own. I don't understand why people care what other people run on there car, they don't drive it, own it, or plan to buy it. It's definitely not for me, I think the 265 on et35 looks best. Looks like high negative camber will work best to get everything to fit looking forward to pics.
Back to the regularly scheduled program.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by cornerbalanced View Post
Thank you!! There's something to be said about the "old head" forum mentality--so many people are ultra conservative when it comes to wheel and tire fitment, it appears as though we're stuck in 2006.
Looks incredible. Appreciate the info, looks like I'll need a decent amount of front camber but will be fine otherwise.
For you I say get some camber plates and send it. We need to run this much negative camber up front with this chassis anyway, it's not a cosmetic choice just to fit wide wheels. Based on my tire wear I should actually start running MORE negative camber up front. Obviously how much you are street driving the car changes that choice. The static camber needed up front is an inherent downside to the front suspension design of these things.​
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jimbo's M View PostSomething to be said? LOL! Please, share your infinite wisdom. I imagine one or two of us think this already classic is fine without clown wheels.
I swear old BMW guys are getting just as prissy as porsche owners. Let people do what they want with their own cars.​
Originally posted by bigjae46 View Post
What kind of tires? I've been thinking about trying something wider than 275 on a 10.5" ET22 wheel. I'm running -4.0 camber front and -3.0 in the rear...I might have more of an issue with the rear. I'm going to have to figure out a way to get the inner lip flat.
I'm wondering if an 18x11 et25 will fit. Don't Ohlins reduce the inner wheel clearance a little bit more than most other coilovers? I have TC Klines...I think those are relatively wheel friendly.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gearhead55 View Post
My infinite wisdom is that I went 1:58 at Buttonwillow CW13, full weight, full interior, no aero, with flat-ride spring rates on a 200tw tire on "clown wheels". The proof is in the pudding.
I swear old BMW guys are getting just as prissy as porsche owners. Let people do what they want with their own cars.​
"There's something to be said about the "old head" forum mentality--so many people are ultra conservative when it comes to wheel and tire fitment, it appears as though we're stuck in 2006."
So, who's doing the judging? As usual, it's my way or the highway in certain "circles". I'll leave it at that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jimbo's M View PostSomething to be said? LOL! Please, share your infinite wisdom. I imagine one or two of us think this already classic is fine without clown wheels.
It’s just funny when you go to the track, or to the canyons and see people running WILDLY different setups than what is commonly propagated by a lot of people on the forums. Not to say one camp is wrong, and the other is right—more so to say that we all have different preferences when modifying, and driving these cars. It’s a disservice to the car itself to say (x) objectively wont work when it in fact can, and may serve some performance benefits.
On a separate note, I never started this thread with the intent to upset anyone, apologies if that has been the result.
We ultimately learned that 10.5+22 squared will easily clear the rear, and *will* fit up front, just with more than -3 degrees of camber and rolled fenders (YMMV re: spring perch clearance). I was previously unable to search this information, so I hope it may be of some use to someone down the road.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by 9kracing View Post
..Last edited by Gearhead55; 10-10-2023, 09:09 PM.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
That's another example of old-head forum thinking that has not adapted to the real world. "These brands are 'good' tires and these brands are 'cheap' tires", without any real world experience of what tires actually perform better nowadays. Tire technology changes faster than any other aspect of these cars and clinging to old stereotypes is just going to leave you with a less-than-optimum set up.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
So if a traditionalist opts for Michelins then he is left with a less than optimal setup in your opinion because he is clinging to old stereotypes and not new thinking adapted to the real world that the cheap tire brand is better now?
2003.5 MT JB/B - CSL SCHRICK SUPERSPRINT EISENMANN JRZ SWIFT MILLWAY APR ENDLESS BBS/SSR DREXLER KMP SACHS RECARO AR SLON MKRS GSP DMG KARBONIUS CP AUTOSOLUTIONS KOYO
Comment
-
I hope I can clear up the assumptions here without causing further debates. I think the issue is that nankang was quickly dismissed because it doesn't have the reputation of the big conglomerate companies without even considering it's capability. This becomes a conversation between guys who track and guys who don't, which will not likely see any middle ground if one side assumes that a certain brand is a joke. I can safely say majority of track drivers I know who have tried Nankang CRS have been happy with them. I tried cup 2 tires myself and they don't have the grip a falken rt660 has which is a smaller company. Brand reputation really has a hold on consumers. Which I completely understand but doesn't mean smaller companies should easily be dismissed without consideration.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by jet_dogg View PostSo if a traditionalist opts for Michelins then he is left with a less than optimal setup in your opinion because he is clinging to old stereotypes and not new thinking adapted to the real world that the cheap tire brand is better now?
I run PS4S on my X3M because it's a daily and that's a good street tire, but I'm not married to the brand just because other people use it. If someone makes a better street tire in the sizes I need I'd happily switch it up.
Last edited by Gearhead55; 10-11-2023, 01:14 PM.
- Likes 4
Comment
Comment