Show me proof. I want to see actual race teams that would put a measly, dinky 255 on a 10". $5 bucks says you got nothing.

 

Incorrect, that's a rice team, not race. None of the top BMW's are that low and have that insane amount of camber. That car would get it's doors blown off by the top US set up E36's. You think that car could compete with the G/C cars that run 18x10's with 275/285's?

 

That could be a factory team from a while ago, but I doubt it would run an endurance race

 

so that's not a real race car?

 

It is a real race car and it appears to me that because its going through the turn the tires are being tucked under giving it a stetched look. I'm sure you can find real examples in a static mode.

Bob

 

i dunno, last time i checked, according to bmw:
"In 1998, we demonstrated the superiority of our diesel technology on the racetrack by winning the 24-hours of N�rburgring in a race-tuned 320d Sedan. This grueling test of endurance not only proved the 320d’s ability to run longer between fuel stops, but on a larger scale, demonstrated that performance and fuel efficiency are not mutually exclusive."

check you sh*t bro.

 

One example vs thousands of properly setup BMWs does not = the best way to go about things. Trust me, if a BMW setup that's known to be successful was that, I'd know....being in the BMW scene for over 15 years might have something to do with that....I breath those cars, and NOONE runs that low of ride heights, especially up front, that messes with the lower control arm geometry....for the worse. But you knew that already.....

 

Can't really argue a factory team. How can you question BMW's setup for a 24 hour enduro? That said, none of us know what kind of geometry or tires they're running on that car. And that was in 1998 as well; motorsport evolves temendously.

 

but you would know if you have eyes that that car is under a significant amount of g-loading through a turn, thus compressing the suspension.

i dont care if you breathe those cars, i dont care. but you asked for an example, one was provided and you still dont shut up.

 

And you still don't get that's ONE example of a BMW set up that way....so stfu already.

Ever try to compress 1000lb/in springs? Didn't think so...it won't make the front tire tuck that much up in the wheelwell. You think I haven't seen a BMW under cornering loads? Get a fukin life loser....I used to run my M3 at the track all the time.

Oh, and coming from a kid that says.....

 

Congrats. Stop crying already and just chill out. You've been running around talking about how you're an expert at this and a expert at this because you've driven and race all these cars and daddy has this. Whatever. All I ever said was that some racing teams are using a little stretch and it can be done successfully. The majority of racing teams and people in general or not running this on the track. I have 265s on 10.5s and it handles great. But it is for looks as well. A flush, low profile tire is always gonna be better than using a tire that bubbles out from the wheels. Chill out with vulgar language and threatening people.

 

no, i just dont think you have any brains, thats all

wow...real mature. talking about a life, who takes the time to search out my threads to find a picture and then try to make something funny...you fail.


oh and btw, yes i have driven cars with 18kg/mm rates (including a z) and if your feeble mind cant convert that to in lbs. it equals about 1000lb/in.

 

/thread

 

^^^

 

wow this thread got out of hand fast. And it all comes from people who think they know everything, yet have tried absolutely nothing.

What many people dont realize is how much contact patch you have with a narrow whee/wide tire combo. A 275 on a 7" wheel is absolutely HORRIBLE. You'd have more contact patch with a 255 on a 10" wheel, garunteed. And yes, 'stretching' to an extent is excellent for tire feel and feedback as well as sharp turn in. Try it before you hate on it.

 

^^That's what I meant. I was talking about using a little stretch. Not something extreme like the 265 on the 12" wheel. I'm not an expert or professional racer. I was just stating things I've read and have been told by reliable people.

 

That is what I've been agreeing with in any of the recent threads I've posted in. Not that a bit too wide on a given wheel is terrible, just that a proper width to wheel ratio ( i.e. 255/265 to 9") is best for handling. Where I am disagreeing with many is the overly stretched look. Not only is it heinous looking, it's a poorly performing, dangerous in some cases set up. That trend FTL.

 

it is very tight, but the measurements work out. i figured the offset using spacers on my existing wheels, then spacers on the tire and spun it around. again, every tire manufacturer will have a different tread width to section width ratio (outside of your normal aspect ratio) , and the tires i have, have a low section width to tread ratio, again, do not mistake this for your aspect ratio. they are different measurements. you will be about 1/4" off the insides, and need to pull the pass. side fuel filler cover, cut/roll your fenders also. not exactly a "bolt on" but it can fit.
there was a set of 20x12 rears that just sold on ebay with 335's (iirc) that was on a G and sold to a Z owner. if you search the wheels classified, he was selling them here too. he had pics up.

 

bottom line, tire and wheel selection is highly regulated. they may be limited in actual tire size, and not wheel, thus a slight rollover due to using a wheel width they could choose, would help a little. but you will never see a class limited on wheel size run a 255 on a 10" wheel when he could run a 315"!

 

19x12 285mm tire not much clearance on the inside(stock shocks might even rub.