|
|
SUPPORT ZPOST BY DOING YOUR TIRERACK SHOPPING FROM THIS BANNER, THANKS! |
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
08-11-2009, 09:29 AM | #1 |
Second Lieutenant
7
Rep 222
Posts |
Non-staggered track setup?
greetings!
i am looking to get into a z4 m coupe in the next couple of months. i plan on getting a set of track rims pretty much right away. i am an intermediate track driver-- i do run r comps and race brake pads. does anyone have any experience or suggestions concerning a non-staggered setup for the z4m? obviously such a setup can help reduce understeer in most cars, but in the z4m, understeer seems pretty easy to dial out just with alignment/suspension setup. to me, a non-staggered setup reduces track day costs, since being able to rotate the tires evens out the wear a lot. thanks for anyone's input! |
08-11-2009, 09:05 PM | #2 |
Private First Class
3
Rep 164
Posts |
Depends on your suspension, wheel width, offset, race or street tires.
Problem is that with stock wheels and suspension you can't really fit anything much bigger than a 245 on the front and 245 is too small for the rear. If you get aftermarket wheels you may be able to fit 255 on the front with a lot of work. But 255 is still on the small side for the rear. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-12-2009, 05:03 PM | #3 | |
Second Lieutenant
7
Rep 222
Posts |
Quote:
from tirerack fitments available, it looks like 17x8.5's with 245's on might do pretty well. to be sure, quite narrower in back, but it doesn't seem like too little tire for a car of this size and weight. anyone ever tried such a thing at the track? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 04:37 AM | #4 |
New Member
1
Rep 12
Posts |
Hi guys!
I'm going to buy a set of non-staggered 18x8.5's with 235/40 for my '06 Z4 Coupe 3.0si (using 50% at the track and 50% at the city). What do you think of this size? Sorry for my bad english |
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 11:34 AM | #5 |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
I'll likely be going with a set of 18x9's and running 255 all around. If I can fit it, I'll go with 265 all around. The offset will almost certainly be in the high 30's or low 40's all around and then I'll use a 15mm or so spacer in the rear.
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 11:36 AM | #6 |
First Lieutenant
15
Rep 385
Posts |
I think 245s are going to be too small for the rear, you're going to be oversteering all over the place. 235s, of course, are going to be even worse.
255s would be the smallest I'd go for a non staggered setup, but even then performance will likely suffer.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 12:13 PM | #7 |
Midlife Crises Racing Silent but Deadly Class
1827
Rep 5,337
Posts
Drives: 2006 MZ4C, 2021 Tesla Model 3
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Welcome to Jamaica have a nice day
|
In my NOT SO HUMBLE opinion, the MZ4 Coupe does not like a non-staggered setup. Unless you can shove 265s or wider up front (you can't without some significant modification) going non-staggered has more drawbacks than rewards.
And while going non-staggered appear to save you a few bucks on tire cost, all it's doing is shifting the cost of replacing 2 tires sooner to replacing 4 tires later...I'm sure if I'm some sort of math wiz, or if I'm REALLY asian, I'd be able to explain to you that over the long haul, your cost is the same between being able to rotate the wheels/tires and replacing them 2 at a time instead of 4 at a time. The REAL cost saving comes from having the right alignment so your tires wears evenly inside AND out, not front and back. Again, in my NOT SO HUMBLE opinion. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 12:56 PM | #8 |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
I'm reasonably confident that you can fit a 255 tire up front so long as you have a high 30's or low 40's offset and at least a mild amount of negative camber. With even more negative camber, the kind you'd get from camber plates or knocking out the alignment pin, you could definitely get 265s up front. But I'd seriously recommend getting a high offset up front because it'll allow you to tinker with the fitment by simply adding spacers. My ideal set up would be 265's up front and 285's out back. But that's pushing it in the rear.
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 05:49 PM | #10 |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
I think you'd start getting close to the shocks/springs in the rear with a wider tire. Definitely do-able and probably wouldn't require much modification but you'd be toeing a fine line...
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 11:47 PM | #11 | ||
Second Lieutenant
7
Rep 222
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
i do hear you about correct camber and alignment. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
08-13-2009, 11:50 PM | #12 |
Second Lieutenant
7
Rep 222
Posts |
cool-- i'd love to hear how this works out for you.
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-14-2009, 11:47 AM | #13 | |
Midlife Crises Racing Silent but Deadly Class
1827
Rep 5,337
Posts
Drives: 2006 MZ4C, 2021 Tesla Model 3
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Welcome to Jamaica have a nice day
|
Quote:
1. MZ4 C is significantly shorter than the E46 M3. 98.3" vs 107.3". 9 inches may not seem like a lot, but it is nearly 10% shorter. Meaning the polar moment of inertia is much easier to overcome in the MZ4 C. 2. MZ4 C is significantly LIGHTER than the E46 M3. 3,250 lbs vs. 3,425 lbs. Almost 200 lbs lighter with the same power and torque means the polar moment of inertia is much easier to overcome in the MZ4 C. 3. MZ4 C suspension is not the same as the E46 M3. The front struts are designs carried over from the E36 M3, which results in slightly less front wheel/tire clearance compared to the E46 M3 (stock for stock). 4. MZ4 C rear ///M variable Limited Slip Differential is "tuned" to send more power to the outside wheel quicker than the ones on the E46 M3, making the MZ4 C's tendency to rotate much quicker. All factors conspire against non-staggered set-up for the MZ4 C in my opinion. And even with just a 10mm less stagger than stock, my MZ4 C tend to have a little too much squirming in the rear (stock suspension still) in really tight corners. Going squared would mean I would have to be very judicious with my throttle application AND be up on my car control skills much more than I'd like to be. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-14-2009, 12:19 PM | #14 | |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
Quote:
I may just have to go with a 265F and 285R set up. What are your thoughts on that? Other than the fact that on the street tram-lining will make me want to take a bus...
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-14-2009, 01:32 PM | #16 |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
I plan to but it's always best to learn your car in stock form before springing for a suspension setup. I had a TCK kit on my 330Ci and it was phenomenal. It handed wonderfully and I have no doubt the Z4M would too. But if you're really in to tracking a car, and you get a new one, best advise is to learn to drive it fast stock and then add modifications one at a time. (Suspension is first on my list... after wheels/tires and pads)
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-14-2009, 04:22 PM | #17 | |
Midlife Crises Racing Silent but Deadly Class
1827
Rep 5,337
Posts
Drives: 2006 MZ4C, 2021 Tesla Model 3
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Welcome to Jamaica have a nice day
|
Quote:
The main benefit to wider tires in performance applications, is that there's a bigger surface area to cool-off and therefore the tendency for them to over-heat decreases. There's a couple of argument here, that if you're not on the edge of overheating your tires, you're not driving fast enough. I'm again of the school of thought that if you're overheating your tires, you're not driving SMOOTH enough and therefore you're not driving fast enough. The other draw-back, is that wider tires are heavier. So if your driving style and your car's weight isn't enough for you to constantly be fighting the tires from overheating, going wider isn't going to help much. On a car like say, the E92 M3, you can put 275+ all around and I will probably still overheat the tires due to the weight and available power. But on a car like, say, a Lotus Exige S, putting anything larger than 255mm would probably mean you're unnecessarily degrading the performance of the car. But that's just my opinion, of course. I don't have actual scientific data to back that up. However, if you subscribe to "Grassroot Motorsport" magazine, I believe 2 months ago they did an article comparing different width tires on an autocross course on a Mazda Miata, and found that wider tires, up to a certain point, start to degrade their lap time. And about 4 months ago they did an article trying to get a Subaru WRX Wagon to handle 1G or higher with street tires, and when they put on new, wider tires their lateral load readings actually went DOWN. I can only speak to my personal driving style and experience, and I find that 245F/265R seems to give me more than enough heat dissipation to stave off overwhelming my Toyo R1-Rs, but 225F/255R couldn't save the OEM Contis from nearly melting (when I pulled into the pit, I can put a finger on the tire and it would leave an indentation and the rubber was so malleable that you can almost see my palm print on it). Then again my 245F/265R combo wasn't enough tires to allow me to keep up with my instructor friend at the California Speedway event. He was driving an E46 M3 shod with 275s all around an otherwise stock car. But that doesn't mean squat since he does have 10+ more years at this than I do. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-14-2009, 10:46 PM | #19 | |
Second Lieutenant
7
Rep 222
Posts |
Quote:
of course, all of these points (except for the tighter space in the front) are great reasons to have the mcoupe over the m3. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-15-2009, 10:54 PM | #20 | |
Private First Class
3
Rep 164
Posts |
Quote:
265/285 won't fit with stock suspension. I doubt they will even fit with aftermarket wheels. On the rear a 275 barely fits. Anything larger will rub the chassis on the inside. They will burn thru the fender liners on the inside and after that start eating the chassis. This is with moderate camber and some toe IN. If you move the tires out with a lower offset it will rub the fender. The only way is to raise the car to ugly high SUV height so it doesn't rub. A 245 is about the largest you can go before it starts to rub the stock spring perch on the front. A wider tires is not only wider its' also taller. With aftermarket coilovers that have narrower springs you make be able to squeeze 255s. I agree with Hack. Don't put wider tires on the car unless you have maximized the grip of a smaller size and you still need a wider size. Alignment, proper tire pressure, and sticky compound will give you a better handling car than putting oversized tires on the car that wont' fit right and make you run suboptimal alignment. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-16-2009, 12:56 AM | #21 |
Track Head
24
Rep 503
Posts |
Great read thanks to the Hack.
I'm up in the air on wheels for the track for my Z4M. I've tracked my modified E46 quite a bit with 245/275 on it and modified suspension. My Z4M has full TCK setup with camber maxed out on 235/265 on the street, it definitely feels a bit more skirmish than E46. I'd prefer a bit more grip but don' want to go overboard, right now I'm thinking 245/40/18 and 275/35/18 NT01s might be the ticket. Thoughts or experiance with this size / setup? I've found quality 18" wheels even more challenging to find as well, most used E46 setups are square or the wrong offset, the TR Motorsports MT1s from Tirerack are a great option but the 10" rears are constantly on back order. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-16-2009, 11:14 AM | #22 |
Captain
32
Rep 606
Posts |
Great info on all fronts. Thanks.
__________________
|www.onehotlap.com|Real People|Real Cars|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|