18" why you all hate them?

[GTR240]

personally i love 18" deep dish.  i think on S14's deep dish and 18" is the best looking rim.  on S13's 17" with a dish.  but anyways i think 18's are better for handling stand point.  putting more rubber on the ground.  that is why cars like in the LeMans seris have 18" and even 19" rims on the cars.  drag racing is different due to rotational mass and all that stuff.  so 16" or smaller are better.  but 17-18 i think are the best for all around use.  just depending on what you are going for.  anyways 18's rock...17's are cool...have 16's that i think are nice...but that is about it.

[ca18guy]

blah blah blah, i want 18's cause they look nice to me. If they hinder performance i can make up for it in other areas but rims are the biggest asthetic improvement you can make on a car I believe, so personally I'm not gonna cheap out in that area.

[Yoshi]

well on a GT car that's pushing 400whp minimum, a heavy ass 18 or even 19" wheel isn't that big of a deal... they're also running on nice smooth (mostly) roads.

In the real world there are several factors why people don't go for the bigger rims:
- first and foremost, they're EXPENSIVE.
- 2nd, the "bling-bling" factor.  Most larger rims are crap for strength and performance value... look at any Neeper wheel, bling y0.
- tires... tires are expensive enough... now getting a new set of Z rated 19" wheels every year is going to cost a lot
- ride - personally, after having ridden in an xterra with bling bling 19's and barely thicker than rubber band tires was NOT comfortable by any stretch of the word... and that was a nice cushy SUV... imagine trying that with stiff coilovers and a re-enforced frame. STIFF RIDE.  Hope you don't have any potholes deeper than 1/4" or say goodbye to your kidneys.
-for our cars, most of us have tween 140 and 180hp (@ the fly), this is no where close to the power a GT car puts out, don't try to compare the two... GT minded cars are bigger all around and more suited, it's basic proportions.
- total weight - our cars do so well due to their balance and tossability (light), by adding giant rims, you add a larger contact patch, but you also add lots of weight... don't be thinking you get better traction from that slightly larger contact patch alone... think wieght and a lot higher rotating mass having just as much, if not more to do with the newfound tire hookup.

I personally have fairly light 17"s (enkei RS-E's) and I definitely wouldn't want anything bigger/heavier. &nbsp;...but I just noticed you said for "look", so I guess if that's the point, any performance value or ride comfort is taking a back seat to bling-bling value anyhow &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/dozingoff.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':zzz:'>

[uuninja]

Fack the 18's you need some 22's y0! <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/thumbs-up.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':thumbsup:'>

Weight, less unsprung weight is better for handling. Smaller rim = less weight.

Cost, Have you priced any max performance tires for 18's lately?

Not to mention light weight forged wheels are serious $$$

More rubber to the ground? Best as I know the main reason would to fit large enough brakes under them. Sure the bigger the circumference of the tire the more rubber that touches. Don't have a protractor with me, so I won't try and mental gymnastics.

But hey if you have money to burn, they are bling-tastic &nbsp;<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/music.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':music:'>

[ruf]

18" wheels do not put more rubber on the road. A 15x7 and a 19x7 will have very similar contact patches. Wide wheels don't even do it. They just change the SHAPE of the contact patch, and in doing so affect the traction characteristics. You have to adjust tire volume/pressure (or sidewall stiffness, or chassis weight) to actually change the SIZE of the contact patch. A larger wheel will require a lower sidewall which can improve steering response at the expense of wheel protection and ride comfort. Larger wheels are primarily used on racecars to clear big brakes. Unless you've got 300+mm brakes, then 18" are nothing but heavy and easily damaged wheels that make your silly little brakes look out of place. <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/hehe.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':hehe:'>

[ruf]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (uuninja @ Oct. 30 2002,5:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">More rubber to the ground? Sure the bigger the circumference of the tire the more rubber that touches.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
But you should be reducing the sidewall (aspect ratio) of the tire to account for the increase in wheel diameter so that the tire diameter (and circumference) stay the same. If ANYTHING, a 18x8 will have a SMALLER contact patch than a 15X8 due to the 18" tire having less sidewall/carcass flex.

[bc240sx]

i agree with " RUF" since i bought my S14 in 95 i have own about 6 diff set of rim i have try 17" and 18" of coures 18" will look tight on ur ride.. but look 18" will make ur car &nbsp;stop slower and make the car slower as well, but if u &nbsp;have some mean ass brake system &nbsp;and highly tune SR.. i don't think 18" is a big issue.. &nbsp; <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/crazy.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':crazy:'> &nbsp; <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/crazy.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':crazy:'>

[95twoforty]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (uuninja @ Oct. 30 2002,5:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Cost, Have you priced any max performance tires for 18's lately?</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
totally agree. i sold my 18s because the cheapest tires were still like 130 bucks a piece.

[DuffMan]

The main reason to have big wheels is to clear big brakes. They will slow you down though, because there is more weight, it is farther from the axis of rotation, and it is unsprung which can negatively affect handling.

Also, like ruf said, the less sidewall you have, the narrower the tires will be in relation to the wheel width. I can fit 225's on my 15x7 easily, but putting 225's on a 17x7 and keeping stock circumference would be not very good.

[AKADriver]

Dang, everyone pretty much summed it up for me <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>

We have a pretty performance-minded crowd here, even those that don't take their cars to the track/autocross. &nbsp;You just won't see much support for a pure-looks mod.

The 18" wheels on my roommate's GTI 337 actually ride pretty smoothly, BTW. &nbsp;The MkIV GTIs use the same tire sizes as our cars. &nbsp;That car's suspension is designed around the big heavy wheels though.

[LanceS13]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ruf @ Oct. 30 2002,5:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If ANYTHING, a 18x8 will have a SMALLER contact patch than a 15X8 due to the 18" tire having less sidewall/carcass flex.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
That's not really true. &nbsp;Smaller sidewalls allow for wider contact patches. &nbsp;My 225/45/16's on my car have about the same width (if not wider) contact patch as the 265/75/16's on my Dad's Z71. &nbsp;Some specs from tirerack.com for the Kuhmo 712's show that 225/45/16's have an 8.2" tread width while the 225/50/16's only have an 8" tread width.

[240racer]

lance you are really close to what ruf is saying, just complete the thought. &nbsp;The tread width does change with aspect ratio, ever so slightly. &nbsp;That itself is an interesting concept. &nbsp;The first number in the size (width) is actually section or carcus width, which you said. &nbsp;However, as we both know the tread width is smaller then that, and on higher aspect tires, it's a lot smaller. &nbsp;However, the contact patch has to be regulated by air pressure and load on the tire. Unless the sidewalls are super stiff, in that case, the contact patch will be smaller then if they were soft, because they are taking some of the load and not making a larger contact patch in doing so. &nbsp;The tread width part of the contact patch is only one dimension, the other is the length, forward to back, of the patch. &nbsp;That changes with air pressure and load more then the width of the patch due to the shape of a tire. &nbsp;Whereas on a soccer ball the patch changes in all directions since it remains a circle. &nbsp;for any given load and pressure, a wide tire will have a wide, thin contact patch, looking from the front and the narrow tire will have a narrow, long patch. &nbsp;The area will be similar, especially if the sidewalls have similar stiffness. &nbsp;
hope this helps

[dave240sx]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The main reason to have big wheels is to clear big brakes. They will slow you down though, because there is more weight, it is farther from the axis of rotation, and it is unsprung which can negatively affect handling.

Also, like ruf said, the less sidewall you have, the narrower the tires will be in relation to the wheel width. I can fit 225's on my 15x7 easily, but putting 225's on a 17x7 and keeping stock circumference would be not very good.

</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Will more than one size tire fit on the stock 91 SE rims? &nbsp;I've always figured that they could only have one size. &nbsp;

If so what is the best size to improve handling? &nbsp;I've got 205's on my car right now. &nbsp;What is the difference between 225's and 205's? &nbsp;

sorry so many questions, I've always wondered this and never asked.

-Dave-

[LanceS13]

aahhhhh...I see. &nbsp;Makes sense. &nbsp;I was only thinking in one dimension.

[misnomer]

From what I've read into, you don't want to go much larger than a 205/60 (205/55 was stock on the sport package). Base s13s had 195 width tires.

[ruf]

**Edit: Oops. Got disconnected and this reply is about a million years behind.**

Wait your comparing TRUCK tires to performance (I'm assuming) car tires?

Anyways, all specs that I've seen from manufacturer's sites list lower aspect ratio tires as slightly narrower than those with taller sidewalls and the same width.

Nitto 555R (http://www.nittotire.com/tire_nt555r_sizes.asp)

[240racer]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anyways, all specs that I've seen from manufacturer's sites list lower aspect ratio tires as slightly narrower than those with taller sidewalls and the same width.
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

there was hardly any sizes to compare there, try somthing with more sizes, so we can get only one variable to change &nbsp;it also helps to try a tire with a larger range of aspect ratios, I chose the re950, it is a nice tire, with a lot of sizes available
look at the 205/40-16 and the 205/55-16 as well as the 225/50-16 and the 225/60-16. &nbsp;this is the pattern I see most often. &nbsp;Let me know what you think

RE950 (http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.jsp?make=Bridgestone&model=Potenza+RE950)

[ruf]

Nitto 555R:

205/55R14 8.39
205/45R15 8.19

245/50R16 9.80
245/45R17 9.69

All the Bridgestone specs are pretty generic. Very little change...

[240racer]

I saw those tires, but I didn't like the fact that they were on the different diameter rims. &nbsp;I will give you those though, i don't understand why the tread would get narrower with a larger rim. &nbsp;that's a very interesting dilema

[ruf]

That's the point I'm making. You're trying to maintain the same tire diameter overall while reducing the sidewall height. The only way you can do that is by increasing wheel diameter. That's all thinking backwards though.

The point is that by going to a larger wheel while maintaing tire diameter, you decrease the sidewall height which will effectively make it stiffer. Because it doesn't flex as much, the tire won't collapse as much, thus a smaller treadwidth. The reason I'm using 555R in my comparison is it has flexier sidewalls being that it's a drag radial so the effect will be greater.

This is theoretically the wrong way to plus size though. You are supposed to maintain tire volume, so when you go bigger diameter wheel, you also go wider so that the volume of air in the tire is the same as before. That way the size of the contact patch doesn't change, though it's shape does. That's what is "officially" recommended. Changing the size of the contact patch drastically changes the way a car handles. What I've been playing with is running staggered width and diameter wheels and maintaining a balanced tire volume. The tire combo for my project car is going to be 245/45R16 and 275/40R17 initially. Should give better forward grip while remaining relatively neutral mid-corner.

[AKADriver]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (misnomer @ Oct. 30 2002,9:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From what I've read into, you don't want to go much larger than a 205/60 (205/55 was stock on the sport package). Base s13s had 195 width tires.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Actually, 205/60-15 was stock on the sport package.

That's what I run on my base '90, it works well.

[uuninja]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ruf @ Oct. 30 2002,12:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That's the point I'm making. You're trying to maintain the same tire diameter overall while reducing the sidewall height. The only way you can do that is by increasing wheel diameter. That's all thinking backwards though.

The point is that by going to a larger wheel while maintaing tire diameter, you decrease the sidewall height which will effectively make it stiffer. Because it doesn't flex as much, the tire won't collapse as much, thus a smaller treadwidth. The reason I'm using 555R in my comparison is it has flexier sidewalls being that it's a drag radial so the effect will be greater.

This is theoretically the wrong way to plus size though. You are supposed to maintain tire volume, so when you go bigger diameter wheel, you also go wider so that the volume of air in the tire is the same as before. That way the size of the contact patch doesn't change, though it's shape does. That's what is "officially" recommended. Changing the size of the contact patch drastically changes the way a car handles. What I've been playing with is running staggered width and diameter wheels and maintaining a balanced tire volume. The tire combo for my project car is going to be 245/45R16 and 275/40R17 initially. Should give better forward grip while remaining relatively neutral mid-corner.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
We are talking apples and oranges. When I say larger circumfrance = larger contact patch I am not assuming that you have to worry about clearing the spring pearch on oem suspention. IE in a GT, LeMans or Formula car. In those classes side wall depth, size, circumfrance, width ect.... are chosen to perform at optimal levels, clear ideal breaks. You won't see those guys running 45 side walls. I was really speaking to the first guy's point siting F1 and gt cars as a reason for 18's.

[ruf]

F1 uses 13" wheels.

Changing contact patch by increasing tire diameter affects your speedometer reading, gearing, ride height, roll center, bearing loads, etc...

[HippoSleek]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (uuninja @ Oct. 31 2002,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">GT, LeMans or Formula car. In those classes side wall depth, size, circumfrance, width ect.... are chosen to perform at optimal levels, clear ideal breaks. You won't see those guys running 45 side walls. I was really speaking to the first guy's point siting F1 and gt cars as a reason for 18's.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Actually, race cars have no business in this debate UNLESS they run street tires (i.s., Speed World Challenge, SSB). &nbsp;The sidewall of an R-compound tire is so rigid (see, F1 tires) that the height of the sidewall really doesn't matter. &nbsp;On a street tire, this matters - moreso w/ lower performance tires.

Big wheels are for big brakes on cars that: a) can afford to run $$$$$$$ super light mag-forged wheels (both cost and fragility); b) can balance out the extra rotational mass; c) have properly prepared suspensions and chassis to handle the larger set up; d) don't have to worry about ride comfort when hitting potholes; and e) have multiple gearboxes to take care of any gearing issues they may have.

Bottom line - if you like 'em, good for you.

[uuninja]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HippoSleek @ Oct. 30 2002,12:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (uuninja @ Oct. 31 2002,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">GT, LeMans or Formula car. In those classes side wall depth, size, circumfrance, width ect.... are chosen to perform at optimal levels, clear ideal breaks. You won't see those guys running 45 side walls. I was really speaking to the first guy's point siting F1 and gt cars as a reason for 18's.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
Actually, race cars have no business in this debate UNLESS they run street tires (i.s., Speed World Challenge, SSB). The sidewall of an R-compound tire is so rigid (see, F1 tires) that the height of the sidewall really doesn't matter. On a street tire, this matters - moreso w/ lower performance tires.

Big wheels are for big brakes on cars that: a) can afford to run $$$$$$$ super light mag-forged wheels (both cost and fragility); b) can balance out the extra rotational mass; c) have properly prepared suspensions and chassis to handle the larger set up; d) don't have to worry about ride comfort when hitting potholes; and e) have multiple gearboxes to take care of any gearing issues they may have.

Bottom line - if you like 'em, good for you.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
My point exactly.

[ruf]

Speaking of sidewall stiffness, here's a cool shot of the FW23. As the name of the pic implies, there is less than 10mm between the endplate of the rear wing and the inner sidewall of the rear tire. Even at the tremendous loads that the car and tires undergo, they can run them that close without fear of contact under deflection.

http://www.biznetworking.com/ruf/images/williams/10mmwingclearance.jpg

[ruf]

Here's another shot that kinda shows how close they are.

http://www.biznetworking.com/ruf/images/williams/diffuser0.jpg

[GreekRPS13]

18" wheels do not put more rubber on the road. A 15x7 and a 19x7 will have very similar contact patches. Wide wheels don't even do it. They just change the SHAPE of the contact patch, and in doing so affect the traction characteristics. You have to adjust tire volume/pressure (or sidewall stiffness, or chassis weight) to actually change the SIZE of the contact patch. A larger wheel will require a lower sidewall which can improve steering response at the expense of wheel protection and ride comfort. Larger wheels are primarily used on racecars to clear big brakes. Unless you've got 300+mm brakes, then 18" are nothing but heavy and easily damaged wheels that make your silly little brakes look out of place. *<img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/hehe.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':hehe:'>

noicley put.........

[ILoveJDM]

noicley put.........


did you seriously revive a 5 year old thread???

[revat619]

way to bump a FIVE YEAR OLD thread...:rolleyes: