Sponsored by The Tire Rack

[Kev]

Originally Posted by M3V8Driver

Ah, sorry... didn't see that. Personally, I don't see what's so off-puting. they're just a simple 10-spoke design. However, the quality of the construction and finish is so damn nice in person, it's hard not to like them. But alas, they are more function over form. They have every conceivable thing one could want in a performance wheel, perhaps Richard will see the light

Yeah, I used to have a set of 19" Advan RS and I loved them. They are great for what they are.

However, the CCW rims hold its own weight in the world of forged rims as well. I would be all over the SP600 in 18" fitment if they could clear the 380mm Brembo and use them for winter so I get a wider choice of tires.

[RedlineMotorworks]

DPE can do an 18x9 and 18x11 setup in their 1-piece forged Monobloc series.

Weights will be around 23 pounds but you really won't notice the difference from 21 to 23 pounds.

They will clear your Brembos as well.

http://www.redline-motorworks.com/category_s/1263.htm

[rzm3]

Short List:

Advan RS ~$2k - limited availability; cast wheels
CCW C10 or C14 ~$3k - not certified; 'entitled' customer service
HRE 18" Monoblock ~$4k - expensive... long lead time
HRE Fall Line 18" ~$4k - expensive...

This is a tough choice

[GewoW]

Originally Posted by rldzhao

Short List:

Advan RS ~$2k
CCW C10 or C14 ~$3k
HRE 18" Monoblock ~$4k
HRE Fall Line 18" ~$4k

This is a tough choice

boo HRE!

Btw C140 is what you want, not C14. C14 accommodates center locking, whereas C140 accommodates a center cap. Otherwise they're the same.

[rzm3]

Originally Posted by GewoW

boo HRE!

Btw C140 is what you want, not C14. C14 accommodates center locking, whereas C140 accommodates a center cap. Otherwise they're the same.

yes i called them too. C140 is a 'prettier' version of C14 with less mass taken out from the center.

[aus]

The RS will fit the Brembo's? I thought one of the venders said they don't fit BBK well???

[bigjae1976]

703 KGs. Here is a thread with the load rating...

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=711903

I remember reading somewhere that the ARC8s have a much higher load rating that the LTW5s. Vorshlag doesn't even strongly advocate to use the LTW5s on the street. Which is why I went with the ARC8s for my E46.

But those CCW wheels are pretty nice. They are really popular among the vette crowd.

[M3V8Driver]

Originally Posted by aus

The RS will fit the Brembo's?

Not sure about the Brembo 380s, but I've been told they will clear the StopTech 380s, which is what the OP wants them to clear.

[rzm3]

Originally Posted by bigjae1976

703 KGs. Here is a thread with the load rating...

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=711903

I remember reading somewhere that the ARC8s have a much higher load rating that the LTW5s. Vorshlag doesn't even strongly advocate to use the LTW5s on the street. Which is why I went with the ARC8s for my E46.

Except I have yet to see any type of certification documents of ARC8... it's been 2 weeks since "paintpro" was going to provide documents.

When a wheel model is genuinely certified by VIA, they can be found here:

[bigjae1976]

Originally Posted by rldzhao

Except I have yet to see any type of certification documents of ARC8... it's been 2 weeks since "paintpro" was going to provide documents.

Pardon my ignorance, but are you competing in some series where the sanctioning body requires certification?

I understand the risk associated with inexpensive, cast, lightweight track wheels since there are some corners that are being cut with strength. Which was my concern. But I would rather use the experience of others than rely on a certificaton which usually tend to be corrupt.

Personally, the cheap SOB in me can't justify $700 ea for rims that will be abused for track use and covered in brake dust which you will never get off.

But my vote from your list goes to CCW

[calintexas]

Originally Posted by rldzhao

Except I have yet to see any type of certification documents of ARC8... it's been 2 weeks since "paintpro" was going to provide documents.

paintpro21 responded to the certification documentation status a couple of days ago (because of a comment by Aus) here: http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...3&postcount=22

[rzm3]

Originally Posted by bigjae1976

Pardon my ignorance, but are you competing in some series where the sanctioning body requires certification?

I understand the risk associated with inexpensive, cast, lightweight track wheels since there are some corners that are being cut with strength. Which was my concern. But I would rather use the experience of others than rely on a certificaton which usually tend to be corrupt.

Personally, the cheap SOB in me can't justify $700 ea for rims that will be abused for track use and covered in brake dust which you will never get off.

But my vote from your list goes to CCW

Some certifications such as JWL/VIA or TUV are very tightly controlled and can only be handed out to products tested at certified test labs and/or certified equipment.

Sure, certification does not mean everything, but it does provide the buyer some level of assurance that the wheel will perform safely on the street/track. This is just like why some of us look for certified pre-owned or at least CarFax when we buy used cars

It takes a lot of human and financial resources for a set of wheels to be tested and certified. Many times design changes are necessary and wheels have to be retested.

I do not have a problem with wheels not having certifications, as they are not required by law to do so in the United States.

What I do strongly despise are vendors who outright lie about their products. (If a vendor can lie about one thing, who knows what else they are hiding from you )

[Dartanium]

well I'll be looking forward to some installed pictures of C140

[Eddy@ApexWheels]

rldzhao,

You made a post in my photo thread two weeks ago requesting that info, and I've been sourcing it ever since. Every single day I spend time on this via email pushing for clarification (huge language barrier, and since emails arrive 3am my time there is only time for one message per day). Most of all, I’m trying to get a phone call with my proper English speaking representative who is out touring clients from factory to factory (poor timing). I’ve had zero response from VIA in two weeks which doesn’t help what so ever. This is not an excuse, just an explanation for why I cannot give an instant response. My lack of a faster response does not make me a liar, it just makes me unprepared for your question.

I don't like posting on important issues such as this until I have a complete answer, and that was exactly my intention by holding off on my reply in the other thread. This response would have been timed much better if I made it in about 3 days once I received more word, but I'll give you a fully updated post here in this thread as found below. I’m not very good at organizing my writing so please excuse my style. I’m just going to put it all done here, as I like to be very thorough in my responses when I can be.


First for clarification the wheels were spec’ed above the JWL requirements because this is just one type of standard, and we can do what ever we want when it comes to exceeding strength requirements, as can other manufacturers if they choose to. To start, the VIA certified self-testing that was done in-house by the factory, using VIA certified equipment/procedures. Those tests were set to 1550lbs (703KGS) instead of 1532lbs (690KGS) which is not much of an increase, but notable since we were measuring things in pounds. I never once worded the wheels as being JWL 703KGS or VIA 703KGS, just that the load rating is 703KGS. Even though the JWL standard is 690KGS, this was still done on part of the engineer’s recommendations as there is nothing wrong with shooting higher then the requirement. In the past few days the answers I could get indirectly through another factory representative is that VIA does not care about load ratings above 690KGS for the 5x120 fitment. JWL is 690KGS, and they have no care or control over how many LBS of load rating a wheel has above that. They make no notation of that rating on any document; they strictly care about meeting the 690KGS number. Which is the same as any JWL “+” or “R” testing which is done in-house by manufacturers as self-reassurance that the standard has been exceeded. So VIA certification will only reflect the 690KGS number.

I wont’ know for certain what is going on until my phone call, but the following is regarding the VIA certification of the ARC-8 wheel:

I long time ago before I knew a lot, I was under the impression that the in-house testing using VIA certified equipment was the certification itself to the self-checked JWL standard. Plus I received all the testing documentation for each test run, including images of damaged wheels before optimization began. But I then learned that this was not the case and pushed for VIA certification through the factory.

After your request for the certificate number I found out that VIA certification defaults to the manufacturer of the wheel and there is two methods for registration. One that is setup with pre-certified manufactures (such as the one that produced the ARC-8 wheel), and another method for random outsiders. Factories with VIA certified equipment are to conduct 2 in-house tests for each wheel (4 wheels total per fitment) and then send off 2 wheels plus tires to VIA for a verification test run. If you are an outsider then you have to send 6 wheels and tires total for each fitment for testing.

From my understanding of the emails the wheels were sent for certification under the factories name. I know they’ve been using their own internal part number and model name for my wheel on all my design work and invoices. If it was done under their name, then I am not on the document at all, nor is the ARC-8 name. For 7+ months VIA has not responded to my on-line user registration attempts, and the same goes for my recent emails, so I’ve been some what out of the loop on this, which is my fault for not going after this information before it was requested of me.

Since your request I’ve been trying to see if I can I change this to my name, or recertify them under the APEX company name, and ARC-8 model without sending off 30 wheels for testing as an outsider. I’ve been holding off on answering your question because I don’t have final word on this possibility and I have zero intention of releasing certificate information with just my manufacture on it if I can help it. From the sound of it, there’s a very good chance that I can have it either changed or recertified under our own name which is 100 times better from a credibility stand point. From a business stand point, I don’t want to reveal any of my product sources, and I will continue to stand by this policy long into the future. I had no idea how long that change would take at the time I learned of this issue. My thoughts were if it were only to take a week to change, it would be a much better business decision on my part to wait before I provided you a certificate number. I still don’t know how long it will take but I should know in the next few days.

The point is that I will provide a VIA certificate for all the wheel fitments as soon as possible with our name on it, even if I have to pay to retest them in my name (that speed will be relative to what the process allows). I am waiting to hear back if this can be done simply or cheaply. If not, I’ll send current inventory over to Standard Testing Labs to be tested at 1550lbs rating with all other variables at the JWL standard. I want APEX to be written on all the documents and I want the public information to be easily accessible under our name and no one else’s. Sadly as a small wheel distributor I have to go this route if I want to develop my own brand name.

So as of my writing today, I do not have certificate information I am willing to publicly produce. I hate having to do it this way, but to answer 2 people’s question today, I will not disclose information that I would be much more comfortable and pleased to provide a few weeks later.

Nobody should buy our wheels at this time if this is a concern to them. I fully understand anyone’s reservations. Our VIA certificate is an important piece of information while making a buying decision, and should be take seriously. My being unprepared for rldzhao’s question is my fault, and sadly the time it takes to communicate with my sources has caused this issue. If I had done things right the first time around, I could have provided them to you immediately, so this is a lesson learned for me. My personal guess is I will have to retest in my name, and hopefully that will only be two wheels per fitment and can be done quickly. I don’t know what I have to do yet, and that’s just the issue. I’m waiting on responses to these very questions.

I am doing everything I can to expedite this process, and I apologize for not being able to respond to you in a more timely manner. In the next 2-3 days I will know what direct things will go to have my name on the documents, and I’m hoping to have an estimate of the time this will take by, the end of the week if it has to go the testing route. If I'm lucky I'll have the actual certificate then if it’s as simple as a name change. I’m not going to make this a discussion about the different standards, and what's involved in testing and so on, this is just a thorough status updated directed at rldzhao’s posts. I’ll post future updates in my commercial thread where you originally requested the information.

Thank you for your understanding

-Eddy P

[rzm3]

^Thanks for the info and let us know when you get them.

On a different note, I think I am ready to pull the trigger on a set of wheels with the following combo. Advice (especially on tire choice)?

Style: you guys will see soon
Front: 18x9.5 ET25
Rear: 18x10 ET22

Tires: Nitto NT05
Front: 265/35/18 (may go 275 in future if there is enough clearance)
Rear: 295/35/18

[GewoW]

1- there is enough clearance with a 275 front (not lowered)
2- I am also thinking of doing 265/295 but am scared that the +30 difference will upset the balance - am I right in thinking this?
3- I think 10" will be too small for 295, but am not sure because I've heard conflicting stories about this.