Would 23 lb wheels (Miro) offset the advantages of upgrading to grippier tires?

[Ashikabi]

I didn't read the whole thread but I feel better traction is more important than the slight weight increase per wheel. If you can pick a lighter wheel, great but if you are choosing stock tire/light rim or sticky tire/stock rim and looks aren't a factor, then sticky tire wins.

The extra weight is not THAT big of a deal. More traction will let you maintain speed and launch harder. You'll just spin those stock tires anyways so the weight/acceleration difference is negligible

[totopo]

Originally Posted by Ashikabi

I didn't read the whole thread but I feel better traction is more important than the slight weight increase per wheel. If you can pick a lighter wheel, great but if you are choosing stock tire/light rim or sticky tire/stock rim and looks aren't a factor, then sticky tire wins.

The extra weight is not THAT big of a deal. More traction will let you maintain speed and launch harder. You'll just spin those stock tires anyways so the weight/acceleration difference is negligible

The difference is that it's not just weight, it's unsprung weight, and not only that, it is rotating weight as well. Pound for pound the most effective weight loss.

So the reason unsprung mass is so important is that it is what pushes against the car over bumps. When the tires see a bump, it's the tire and unsprung mass that sees it. less unsprung mass basically follows bumps better, transmits less road bumps to the car, and lets the car push it down better onto the road. All in all, more traction, and more comfort! (as a side benefit, it decreases the spring rate you need by a linear %, ie a 10% reduction in mass means you need 10% less spring, which is a good thing)

Then the rotational mass thing, is it takes energy to spin it up and stop again when you are accelerating and braking, so less rotating mass lets you accelerate faster and saves your brakes.

To the op's question... I have no idea, haha. They kind of gain and lose performance by completely different means.

In any event, if you care about performance, why not both? get light weight 16" and enjoy your performance and you save money in the long run with cheaper tires. The era of needing low profile tires is over. modern tires are good.

[Ashikabi]

Originally Posted by totopo

The difference is that it's not just weight, it's unsprung weight, and not only that, it is rotating weight as well. Pound for pound the most effective weight loss.

So the reason unsprung mass is so important is that it is what pushes against the car over bumps. When the tires see a bump, it's the tire and unsprung mass that sees it. less unsprung mass basically follows bumps better, transmits less road bumps to the car, and lets the car push it down better onto the road. All in all, more traction, and more comfort! (as a side benefit, it decreases the spring rate you need by a linear %, ie a 10% reduction in mass means you need 10% less spring, which is a good thing)

Then the rotational mass thing, is it takes energy to spin it up and stop again when you are accelerating and braking, so less rotating mass lets you accelerate faster and saves your brakes.

To the op's question... I have no idea, haha. They kind of gain and lose performance by completely different means.

In any event, if you care about performance, why not both? get light weight 16" and enjoy your performance and you save money in the long run with cheaper tires. The era of needing low profile tires is over. modern tires are good.

I understand how sprung and unsprung weight works. But unless you're a super serious racer(op mentioned street use I believe), you won't notice it. The extra traction will be far more useful

[Meanderchap]

Originally Posted by totopo

The difference is that it's not just weight, it's unsprung weight, and not only that, it is rotating weight as well. Pound for pound the most effective weight loss.

So the reason unsprung mass is so important is that it is what pushes against the car over bumps. When the tires see a bump, it's the tire and unsprung mass that sees it. less unsprung mass basically follows bumps better, transmits less road bumps to the car, and lets the car push it down better onto the road. All in all, more traction, and more comfort! (as a side benefit, it decreases the spring rate you need by a linear %, ie a 10% reduction in mass means you need 10% less spring, which is a good thing)

Then the rotational mass thing, is it takes energy to spin it up and stop again when you are accelerating and braking, so less rotating mass lets you accelerate faster and saves your brakes.

To the op's question... I have no idea, haha. They kind of gain and lose performance by completely different means.

In any event, if you care about performance, why not both? get light weight 16" and enjoy your performance and you save money in the long run with cheaper tires. The era of needing low profile tires is over. modern tires are good.

I'm not a huge purist when it comes to weight savings and I have no intention of tracking the car, just spirited canyon drives and daily commutes. I mainly care about retaining the handling, throttle response and acceleration of the stock set-up, and if possible, improving upon the handling/grip aspects. Because of this, I'll avoid any wheel over 17/18 lb.

I also care about filling the wheel gap to some extent, and the aesthetics of the wheel. I'm leaning toward a 17 inch wheel for the reasons mentioned in this thread, but I'm not too sold on the appearance of the rpf-1. I wish there were some lighter weight wheel options for less than $1200/set that looked similar to the TE37s or even the XXR 527s.

[86 South Africa]

Personally I am saving for the 17" tws motor sports t66.
IMO they look awesome, so tick the aesthetics box.
They accommodate certain bbk's. Another tick.
They're also quite light. So tick the performance box / light weight box.
17" tyres shouldn't be too expensive either. (Compared to 18/19s anyway!). So tick the 'ongoing costs' box too.

Downside is that they ain't cheap! Hence the need to save!
But the way I see it is that if I am going to spend cash changing the wheels (or anything else) I'd rather wait a little longer and do it properly. It'll obviously cost more, but I'll maximize my satisfaction rather than always wondering if I should've gone 1 better.


Now to tick the bank manager box ;-)
:grin:

[Ashikabi]

Originally Posted by 86 South Africa

Personally I am saving for the 17" tws motor sports t66.
IMO they look awesome, so tick the aesthetics box.
They accommodate certain bbk's. Another tick.
They're also quite light. So tick the performance box / light weight box.
17" tyres shouldn't be too expensive either. (Compared to 18/19s anyway!). So tick the 'ongoing costs' box too.

Downside is that they ain't cheap! Hence the need to save!
But the way I see it is that if I am going to spend cash changing the wheels (or anything else) I'd rather wait a little longer and do it properly. It'll obviously cost more, but I'll maximize my satisfaction rather than always wondering if I should've gone 1 better.


Now to tick the bank manager box ;-)
:grin:

Look at what tires you want ahead of time. A lot of tires don't come in 17s any more or only in limited widths. Usually these tires cost more than the 18s because of the smaller production runs

[86 South Africa]

Originally Posted by Ashikabi

Look at what tires you want ahead of time. A lot of tires don't come in 17s any more or only in limited widths. Usually these tires cost more than the 18s because of the smaller production runs

Thanks for the tip. We seem to be ok with 17s here though I haven't checked in depth. Will do some calling in the new year!

[Cmorris8848]

Originally Posted by Meanderchap

I'm currently driving stock wheels/tires and I keep hearing that upgrading to grippier tires such as Pilot Super Sports will transform the car into a handling dream. I'm about to purchase a set of Miro 398's 18x8.5 (TE37 reps) with 225(or 235)/40/18 PSS tires all around (square).

For street driving will the handling characteristics between the Miros and a wheel such as the RPF1 be very noticeable? I don't want to cancel out the handling advantages by equipping wheels that are too heavy. Also, would you guys recommend 225/40/18 over 235/40/18? Thanks!

Where did you get 23lbs from? I just ordered a set of Miro 398's from NLmotoring, and they have them set at 21.7lbs a wheel

[MightyMeeple]

Originally Posted by Meanderchap

Hm, based off what I'm hearing I'm leaning toward lighter wheels. Any budget friendly suggestions, maybe XXR 527/530? Also, would springs (1 inch drop) instead of coilovers suffice?

IMHO, it's hard to beat the Enkei RPF1's for the weight reduction and cost per wheel. I am running PF01s which aren't quite as light but I preferred the looks.

Some other considerations:

I would recommend staying with a 17 inch wheel going wider than stock. Remember smaller diameter wheel in the same model will save weight as well; additionally the smaller diameter tire will save some weight relatively. If you lower with springs or coilovers, the 17's look great in my opinion.

In my experience, I went to a 7.5 inch width and put 225's on them and am running Super sports. The grip and ride quality were dramatically improved; I also felt the car accelerated and stopped much better than stock as well.

[Talus1]

Originally Posted by Meanderchap

I don't want to cancel out the handling advantages by equipping wheels that are too heavy. Also, would you guys recommend 225/40/18 over 235/40/18? Thanks!

It is all personal preference, but...

Unsprung weight and tire sidewall stiffness have a big effect on ride and traction. Sidewall height and stiffness affect steering feel. If you drive on real roads (i.e. bumpy) and don't track the car then I recommend sticking with a 17" diameter. Reducing sidewall height 1/2" by going to 18" will make the steering feel sharper but will significantly reduce ride quality and traction, in the corners and on the straights. It will also be significantly more expensive to find a light weight 18" rim vs a 17". Going down to 16" is a bit extreme unless your roads are really bumpy. I seriously considered it, but wasn't willing to risk a reduction in steering feel from the increased sidewall height.

There are some decent looking, modestly priced, light weight 17" rims out there. RPF1s are ubiquitous. I also looked at the Kosei K4R, but in the end I chose 17x8+35 720Form GTF1s (15.5 lb) with 225/45R17 Michelin PSS, which is an awesome tire, with a great balance of weight, cost, street performance (dry/wet traction, steering feel) and longevity. That combination ends up ~3 lb per corner less than stock. The Conti ExtremeContact are potentially ~ 1 lb lighter again but are reputed to have a bit less dry and wet traction and less steering feel than the MPSS.

The extra 8mm (~1.4%) diameter of the 225/45 MPSS over stock isn't noticeable to me. The much wider contact patch, stiffer sidewalls, stickier rubber and tread design are vastly better than stock, with better dry and wet traction. They are also much noisier than stock. Steering is heavier but with more feel. The ride is interesting. With stiffer sidewalls but lower unsprung weight, I notice sharp edged bumps a bit more but general rough pavement doesn't feel worse than stock. The MPSS suck in the cold, but in LA that shouldn't be a problem.

Back in the day, I had a base Integra RS that came with 14" steel rims. I got a great deal on a set of 17" rims and 205/40 tires. I wasn't really thinking about unsprung mass at the time but I sure learned. It was a bit of an extreme case, but the ride was terrible and the additional grip disappeared when the road wasn't perfect. I've been a bit circumspect about tire and wheel choices since then.

Good luck with your decision.

[Meanderchap]

Originally Posted by Cmorris8848

Where did you get 23lbs from? I just ordered a set of Miro 398's from NLmotoring, and they have them set at 21.7lbs a wheel

I got 23 lb from calling the Miro customer support line listed on their website. For all I know, the guy I spoke with could've been mistaken.

[Meanderchap]

Originally Posted by Talus1

It is all personal preference, but...

Unsprung weight and tire sidewall stiffness have a big effect on ride and traction. Sidewall height and stiffness affect steering feel. If you drive on real roads (i.e. bumpy) and don't track the car then I recommend sticking with a 17" diameter. Reducing sidewall height 1/2" by going to 18" will make the steering feel sharper but will significantly reduce ride quality and traction, in the corners and on the straights. It will also be significantly more expensive to find a light weight 18" rim vs a 17". Going down to 16" is a bit extreme unless your roads are really bumpy. I seriously considered it, but wasn't willing to risk a reduction in steering feel from the increased sidewall height.

There are some decent looking, modestly priced, light weight 17" rims out there. RPF1s are ubiquitous. I also looked at the Kosei K4R, but in the end I chose 17x8+35 720Form GTF1s (15.5 lb) with 225/45R17 Michelin PSS, which is an awesome tire, with a great balance of weight, cost, street performance (dry/wet traction, steering feel) and longevity. That combination ends up ~3 lb per corner less than stock. The Conti ExtremeContact are potentially ~ 1 lb lighter again but are reputed to have a bit less dry and wet traction and less steering feel than the MPSS.

The extra 8mm (~1.4%) diameter of the 225/45 MPSS over stock isn't noticeable to me. The much wider contact patch, stiffer sidewalls, stickier rubber and tread design are vastly better than stock, with better dry and wet traction. They are also much noisier than stock. Steering is heavier but with more feel. The ride is interesting. With stiffer sidewalls but lower unsprung weight, I notice sharp edged bumps a bit more but general rough pavement doesn't feel worse than stock. The MPSS suck in the cold, but in LA that shouldn't be a problem.

Back in the day, I had a base Integra RS that came with 14" steel rims. I got a great deal on a set of 17" rims and 205/40 tires. I wasn't really thinking about unsprung mass at the time but I sure learned. It was a bit of an extreme case, but the ride was terrible and the additional grip disappeared when the road wasn't perfect. I've been a bit circumspect about tire and wheel choices since then.

Good luck with your decision.

Thanks for the info! I've just about settled on the RPF1s after browsing some member photo galleries. I would get 17x9 (for flatter face) + 35 offset with a 1 inch drop on Eibach proline springs. I also hear I should dial in some negative camber to diminish some of the poke with a +35 offset. For tires I'll get PSS 245/40/17. Does this sound like a good overall set-up?

Also, would I need to get camber bolts to dial in negative camber, and can anybody chime in on some good camber specs for the above set up? Thanks.

[Talus1]

Originally Posted by Meanderchap

Thanks for the info! I've just about settled on the RPF1s after browsing some member photo galleries. I would get 17x9 (for flatter face) + 35 offset with a 1 inch drop on Eibach proline springs. I also hear I should dial in some negative camber to diminish some of the poke with a +35 offset. For tires I'll get PSS 245/40/17. Does this sound like a good overall set-up?

Also, would I need to get camber bolts to dial in negative camber, and can anybody chime in on some good camber specs for the above set up? Thanks.

Sorry, dude. You're getting well outside my experience. There is lots of info on wheel and tire fitment in the forums, so search away. A quick look at the Wheel Fitment thread (http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7535) shows +35 on 9" wide wheels with a 1" drop probably pokes too much, so camber could help prevent rubbing. More positive offset would help that situation - 17x9 RPF1s are available in a +45. That's much closer to the OEM offset, so will have a smaller impact on steering feel. (I would have gotten rims with +45 offset if I could have at the same size, weight, cost, etc).

Like I said before, its all personal preference. You have to ask yourself what you want to get out of the car. For my tastes, 245 wide MPSS would be too much tire on a street driven Twin with stock power.

[Meanderchap]

Originally Posted by Talus1

Sorry, dude. You're getting well outside my experience. There is lots of info on wheel and tire fitment in the forums, so search away. A quick look at the Wheel Fitment thread (http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7535) shows +35 on 9" wide wheels with a 1" drop probably pokes too much, so camber could help prevent rubbing. More positive offset would help that situation - 17x9 RPF1s are available in a +45. That's much closer to the OEM offset, so will have a smaller impact on steering feel. (I would have gotten rims with +45 offset if I could have at the same size, weight, cost, etc).

Like I said before, its all personal preference. You have to ask yourself what you want to get out of the car. For my tastes, 245 wide MPSS would be too much tire on a street driven Twin with stock power.

Thanks! What do you mean by "smaller impact on steering feel?" +45 would retain the lightness of the stock steering feel?