noob question: squared setup

[Eccentric]

thinking about running a squared setup for daily use. Any cons?

probably an obvious question, but i still dont know the answer. TIA!

[Z4-VILLA]

wtf is a squared setup?

[tekmoe]

I'm actually considering a squared setup myself. I don't see any issues with it.

[bhoch]

Originally Posted by Z4-Villalona

wtf is a squared setup?

I believe that is same size Wheels front/rear....

[Z4Murder]

I've looked into it, but i want a 265 rubber in the back, and i couldnt make that work in the front without making modifications to the car that i do not wish to make. also, i've read that since our car was engineered for the staggered set-up, switching to a squared setup without making changes to support that setup isn't favorable for handling? wish i could remember where i read that. just some food for thought.

[a_riddler]

Only downside that I know is you will need to use spacers and negative camber (shims, pull alignment pins or camber plates depending on tire size). Spacers for clearance in front or to flush the rears.

Going 18x9.5, 265/35's myself.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Z4-Villalona

wtf is a squared setup?

Haha effin Villalona! I was waiting for your comment, but it was surprisingly not what i was expecting

Yeah like someone else said, tires the same on all four corners

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Z4Murder

I've looked into it, but i want a 265 rubber in the back, and i couldnt make that work in the front without making modifications to the car that i do not wish to make. also, i've read that since our car was engineered for the staggered set-up, switching to a squared setup without making changes to support that setup isn't favorable for handling? wish i could remember where i read that. just some food for thought.

exactly the reason i was wondering. I heard it was not so much the compromised handling, but rather a sacrifice in turn-in feel

[Z4Murder]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

exactly the reason i was wondering. I heard it was not so much the compromised handling, but rather a sacrifice in turn-in feel

yea, i wasn't exactly sure, as i can't quite remember where or when i read that. but i figured i would chime in and maybe someone else had better information on that subject.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Z4Murder

yea, i wasn't exactly sure, as i can't quite remember where or when i read that. but i figured i would chime in and maybe someone else had better information on that subject.

yeah thats what i try to do as well, but the wheel/tire area of Zpost is rather void of traffic

[SCHMOUPE]

what are the pros of going square? I cant think of any

[Finnegan]

Two potential advantages to going square:

Reduced understeer
Ability to rotate tires (even tire wear)

Issues usually revolve around having enough room to run this type of setup. The Z4M has the E36 front-end, so IIRC other threads on this you can't get anything like a 265 width to fit-255 probably does with some tire/wheel combos, but ability to set camber is somewhat limited then due to space IIRC.

If tire wear is an issue, then I think agree with The Hack (other thread) where he states that you don't really save as net wear is pretty much the same--the difference is you replace 4 tires less often rather than replacing 2 more often.

Understeer can pretty much be managed with camber settings, and I'd rather go that route personally as it facilitates more even tire wear (assuming you track or auto-x a bit, or like to canyon carve).

I seem to recall some folks saying the car did not handle well square and it really wasn't designed to run in that config.

Eccentric--what requirements are you trying to fulfill with a square set-up?

[cmark8]

I'm currently running a squared setup for track days and I can say that it reduces understeer significantly. I'm running volk te-37 18x9 et40 with toyo r1r 255/35. But for DD'ing, I'm not sure if it makes any difference. Also, I prefer a staggered combo for street, since it looks way nicer.

[3002 tii]

i run square, only because i'm too cheap to have 2 different sets for street/track. great for auto-x. i don't even bother to rotate considering how the back right will always pick up the nicks/rash and last thing i want is to spread the damage to 2 wheels lol. i dont drive anywhere near the limit on the road so it's not noticeable. but to cmark8's point, i do run spacers on the rear for aesthetics when it's not tracking.

[Eccentric]

Thanks for the input guys

Originally Posted by Finnegan

Two potential advantages to going square:

Reduced understeer
Ability to rotate tires (even tire wear)

Issues usually revolve around having enough room to run this type of setup. The Z4M has the E36 front-end, so IIRC other threads on this you can't get anything like a 265 width to fit-255 probably does with some tire/wheel combos, but ability to set camber is somewhat limited then due to space IIRC.

If tire wear is an issue, then I think agree with The Hack (other thread) where he states that you don't really save as net wear is pretty much the same--the difference is you replace 4 tires less often rather than replacing 2 more often.

Understeer can pretty much be managed with camber settings, and I'd rather go that route personally as it facilitates more even tire wear (assuming you track or auto-x a bit, or like to canyon carve).

I seem to recall some folks saying the car did not handle well square and it really wasn't designed to run in that config.

Eccentric--what requirements are you trying to fulfill with a square set-up?

Great response, thanks

I wanted a setup^2 for 3 reasons: I think it has great aesthetic appeal; I originally thought it would be nice to be able to rotate the tires; I wanted to reduce understeer.

But it seems, as you mentioned, that all of my reasons, other than the aesthetic ones, could be satisfied in other (cheaper) ways.

[3002 tii]

re: the car not handling as well as it was not designed to run in that config, the counter argument to that would be the e36 m3 which originally did come square until people started complaining about the back end coming out so bmw changed to staggered.

[IRunOnE]

if you're going to change the suspension then you're pretty much reegineering the set up. squared will make the car more tail happy but there are ways to remedy that. try to balance it out with other mods.

[Finnegan]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Thanks for the input guys



Great response, thanks

I wanted a setup^2 for 3 reasons: I think it has great aesthetic appeal; I originally thought it would be nice to be able to rotate the tires; I wanted to reduce understeer.

But it seems, as you mentioned, that all of my reasons, other than the aesthetic ones, could be satisfied in other (cheaper) ways.

I highly recommend the Turner Camber Bolt "solution" if reduction in understeer is what what you're after. Super cheap, and you can get anywhere from -1.0 to about -2.4 in the front w/o plates. Cost is about 30 bucks for the bolts + 130 for alignment which is way cheaper than either a square set-up or camber plates. (It's nice to be able to adjust camber this way w/o the expense of plates.) Personally, I think we need the 265s at the rear given the car's power....but these are very subjective areas of course.

The car is a totally different beast with with the front camber at -1.5 and 1/16 toe-in (vs. the max stock -.9 we could get--lots of push with that). No rollover at the track last weekend--and I think as we improve our driving skills we'll take things up to -2.+ front (not good enough IMO for those settings yet). -1.5 front is pretty good for and aggressive street set-up. Even as a DD we get pretty even wear up front (toe is key there) since the car sees some back-road use.

The Hack gives a great suggestion here on how to use these as "adjustible plates" for Auto-X or Track. Certainly worth a try IMO given the minimal expense (but it doesn't provide the cosmetic appeal of course).

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by Finnegan

I highly recommend the Turner Camber Bolt "solution" if reduction in understeer is what what you're after. Super cheap, and you can get anywhere from -1.0 to about -2.4 in the front w/o plates. Cost is about 30 bucks for the bolts + 130 for alignment which is way cheaper than either a square set-up or camber plates. (It's nice to be able to adjust camber this way w/o the expense of plates.) Personally, I think we need the 265s at the rear given the car's power....but these are very subjective areas of course.

The car is a totally different beast with with the front camber at -1.5 and 1/16 toe-in (vs. the max stock -.9 we could get--lots of push with that). No rollover at the track last weekend--and I think as we improve our driving skills we'll take things up to -2.+ front (not good enough IMO for those settings yet). -1.5 front is pretty good for and aggressive street set-up. Even as a DD we get pretty even wear up front (toe is key there) since the car sees some back-road use.

The Hack gives a great suggestion here on how to use these as "adjustible plates" for Auto-X or Track. Certainly worth a try IMO given the minimal expense (but it doesn't provide the cosmetic appeal of course).

Great info! I'm definitely going to look into that. Thanks, buddy

Is it a DIY project?

[dekaliber]

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Great info! I'm definitely going to look into that. Thanks, buddy

Is it a DIY project?

Absolutely. Takes like half an hour to do. You'll want to schedule an alignment pretty soon after since you end up with pretty significant toe out once the camber changes.

[Eccentric]

Originally Posted by dekaliber

Absolutely. Takes like half an hour to do. You'll want to schedule an alignment pretty soon after since you end up with pretty significant toe out once the camber changes.

word, thanks for the heads up

[steveff4]

Originally Posted by cmark8

I'm currently running a squared setup for track days and I can say that it reduces understeer significantly. I'm running volk te-37 18x9 et40 with toyo r1r 255/35.

I'm interested in a squared setup for track days. Is your suspension modified in any way? I'm curious about any problems running the 255/35s in the front, so your setup intrigues me.

I'm also interested in the square setup to allow for tire rotation because I'm trying to be cheap.