Wheel sizes getting silly?

[Vladimir]

This is a little annoyance I find wit modern cars - the ever increasing size of alloys along with vast tyres on rubber band profiles. German metal is the most "guilty" and this months Evo has a great little rant from Harry Metcalfe about how BMW engineers are slaves to the designers - weight, comfort, etc just does not seem to matter.

So anyone with me on this one?

I have a 335d - perfectly decent, nippy estate car. But I spent ages looking for one on 17s (the smallest you can have to fit the brakes) because 18s and even more so 19s just kill the ride, weigh a massive amount more (my 17s on non RFT tyres aren't that lightweight yet weigh nearly 10kgs per wheel/tyre LESS than average 19s on RFTs!!), are much more fragile, the tyres are comedy money and limited in choice, etc, etc.

The current F10 5 series has arches so vast that even 19s look fairly dinky. Audis are the same. Merc seem to resist them more for some reason.

A few hot hatches are being made with 19s as standard too!

Will this trend ever stop and where did it come from?!

It's certainly not motor racing - look at rally wheels, F1, Lemans, etc. It doesn't seem to make any sense apart from simply being fashionable.

Answers on a postcard.

Edited by Vladimir on Tuesday 26th April 15:40

[Vladimir]

Shaw Tarse said:

This has been discussed before, a modern car would look crap on12" wheels

Yes and the brakes of most wouldn't fit either - but within sensible limits, why the ever increasing sizes?

20" is getting quite normal on many cars - that's bonkers.

[Vladimir]

LeoSayer said:

10kg per wheel!?!?

Are the 19" wheels made out of lead?

Nope -I compared my 160 styles with 225/45 17" non RFT CSC3s to a 19" M Sport (225M) alloys with Bridgestone RFT tyres. I forget the exact breakdown and it took ages to find the weights (wheels - easy, tyres - had to use a US website - VERY hard to find tyre weights) but mine come in (wheel and tyre) at a whisker under 20kg (approx 12kg wheel, 8ish for the tyre), a rear 19" on 255/35(I think) RFTs came in at 29ish kg per corner. A HUGE amount of extra unsprung weight.

Edited by Vladimir on Tuesday 26th April 17:12

[Vladimir]

davidspooner said:

Do you have a picture of the 335 on 17"s?

[Vladimir]

Fox- said:

19 inch wheels were never offered as an option on your pre LCI 335d E91?

They were offered from the start of 335d production. I didn't want them and never will.

Perfectly happy with my light, nice riding, strong wheels on decent rubber - Go 19" and the choice of tyres is tiny too. Stay 17" and you can have what you want.

19s (especially M Sports) have had massive issues with cracking yet people still insist on them because they want to be in with the kids. If you want your nippy BM to go as well as it can, stick 17s with non RFTs on it.

Audi are probably worse - I see countless 2.0TDIs sporting a road ripping 140bhp on spindly 19s with 911 turbo style tyres- no no and no.

I had a 318d M Sport loaner once - 18" with 255/35 profile rears on a 145bhp car - I felt an absolute tool driving it and hid behind a hat and sunglasses.

Just amazed and slightly disappointed at even "purist" marques jumping on the bandwagon too.

If the trend is from BTCC - look at a BTCC race track - many potholes on them? Many speed bumps? No.

Edited by Vladimir on Tuesday 26th April 19:58

[Vladimir]

Oops!

[Vladimir]

Big wheel fans will try and claim "better turn in" and some other waffle.

[Vladimir]

Blakewater said:

You don't get less than 18s on the Sport model or less than 17s on the SE on the 325 and above. Car manufacturers are led by the aftermarket tuning scene. They send people to the shows and look at what's fashionable and go by that. I like the look of a nice set of alloys and I do think the bigger ones look better, at least on some cars, even if they do spoil the ride.

You can get M Sports on 17s - many have them - but you might be right about 18s or bigger being standard on six pot E9*s.

[Vladimir]

jsg612 said:

I think in all fairness to modern day expectations of cars, the majority have got it right. In most cases I think it's around...

15"-16" Small city car
17"-18" Medium sized family hatch/coupe
19"-20" Large saloon/estate

It's when you come to spec an Audi A1 with 18" wheels or a Rangie with 22" wheels that annoys me. Then you have the mere Transit Van, still on it's original tiny 15" castors.

Too big. And they haven't got it right - loads of people are breaking wheels, shaking their teeth out and shelling out a fortune on tyres for a modest saloon.

My cousin has an A6 2.7TDI S-Line - what should be a good mile cruncher is actually completely ruined by the hideous crashy ride on it's comedy 19s (about two feet wide) and he's knackered two of the rims already. It's a FWD, mildly nippy luxobarge not a track car.

[Vladimir]

Obviously brakes dictate wheel size a little - my 348ish mm front disks are very tight inside my 17" rims so I clearly couldn't go any smaller!

Notice that proper "racing" Caterhams all use 13" rims? None go for the bigger options.

[Vladimir]

MC Bodge said:

Caterhams are light enough not to need massive brake discs.

Slightly mixed messages here - just backing my point by saying track cars benefit from smaller wheels. The Caterham has the luxury of featherweight tendencies so does indeed get away with little disks.

Fox - what are you getting?

[Vladimir]

So I'd say most agree with me (rather a unique experience!) and I'd also say there is a good cross section of motoring enthusiasts on here.

So who are these oversized wheels aimed at?!

It reminds me ever so slightly of chavvy mods that haven't been done properly - cars "slammed" so the tyres scrape the arches, massive exhausts hanging on by string (almost), sun visor strips that actually block your view of the road, lights half hidden with tape to look aggressive, etc, etc - just for looks, not for making the car drive better.

I remember when the M3 CSL came out - it was widely criticised for it's bone cracking ride. Now it seems normal and is widely revered. And on the same note - without exception every review of the E46 M3 said is was better on 18s - how many do you see on them? Hardly any. Almost all had the inferior riding 19s and dealers claim shifting one on 18s is very tricky.

I think priorities have changed with a lot of marques - it seems essential to fill them with tech that doesn't enhance driving at all, stick stupid wheels on to try and make them look good, go to massive lengths to make a family saloon look like a full on BTCC, car, etc, etc. Weight doesn't seem to matter - it's all gizmos and aggressiveness. Audi, BMW, Lexus, to some extent Jaguar, Vauxhall and many others are at it. How about trying to shed a couple of hundred kgs instead of loading every car with Shatnav, i-drive-worse-because-I'm-not-concentrating-properly, auto everything, etc. No wonder the bhp of your average performance car is probably double what it used to be - it is needed to shift all these daft wheels and NASA space computers around!

Pointless rant over.