dedonderosa

17'S IMHO

bungholio

I've done 17's and 18's. Staggered and non staggered. I prefer 17's, Staggered vs Non is personal preference.

S~Factor

Too much rotational inertia with 18s, need torque to make those move fast, and need weight to match when slowing down, turning.
Light car + No torque = 16/17s
[/quote]

That makes sense but not always true though. I guess it all depends on the wheels you get. My Explorer went from 17's to 20's (same wheel - Mustang Cobras) and the 20's set up were lighter. I'm thinking the added weight on the 20's were offset by the less sidewall weight of the tires? Weird.

steguis

Interestingly enough, there is a case where 18s can actually perform better with a trade off. They do weigh more than 17s of course but there are cases where you might choose an 18" wheel to get a better sized tire. For instance, I know a very good (fast) autoxer that ran lightweight 18s on this CR when he still had it because the 18" star specs have a considerably stiffer sidewall than the 17s which offered much greater steering response. The big tradeoff being added weight and of course added harshness to the ride due to the sidewall stiffness and of course more money per tire. That being said, 17s are the best choice for our car 95% of the time unless you're going for a specific look or have a particular tire requirement.

bungholio

Totally agreed.

I think Arvou had their test car run both 17's and 18's on a specific tire, and the car ran faster lap times on 18's - which was what you stated about different side wall hardness.

ipopvtec

Too much rotational inertia with 18s, need torque to make those move fast, and need weight to match when slowing down, turning.
Light car + No torque = 16/17s
[/quote]

That makes sense but not always true though. I guess it all depends on the wheels you get. My Explorer went from 17's to 20's (same wheel - Mustang Cobras) and the 20's set up were lighter. I'm thinking the added weight on the 20's were offset by the less sidewall weight of the tires? Weird.
[/quote]

True, but weight farther out on a longer radius will weigh exponentially more than one on a smaller one while moving. In car terms, it will feel more stable, at the cost of nimbleness. So, 17 is ok, because the tire will generally be smaller so the radius will stay the same, 18 is just way to big, for the simple fact s2k wasnt designed with 18s in mind.

Also sometimes with lightweight wheels, the tire will weigh more than the wheel itself, especially track tires that are run flat to be able to run strong even at low psi. So its not about weight, just mostly about where the weight is relative to the hub.

ipopvtec

Also, Bridgestone potenza SO-2s were designed for s2ks, so s2ks, technically should all have 16s, 16s are better in every way for performance, but unfortunately so-2 is the only tire s2k specific. The way its designed its a 225, that has the contact patch of a 245. Keeping in mind in most enthusiast cases the tire is heavier than the wheel, 16s are ultimate- for a light car. 17s are popular though, because they are just as good, and the only downside is cost.

Heavier/Bigger/More powerful cars will benefit from bigger wheels to keep them planted. But there is a reason an ariel atom has 16"s

iLuveketchup

^

m R g S r

sure....
















i dont have it anymore thou

m R g S r

dude what are you even talking about? lol