Sponsored by The Tire Rack

[6ixSpd]

You guys are acting like a 5% reduction with a 10mm increased width (with respect to a 265/35) is suddenly going to shatter your wheels.

You do realize that the 275/30/19 has an even greater load rating than the stock fronts, and only 5% less than stock rears?

Lol.

[sterile stork]

Originally Posted by 6ixSpd

You guys are acting like a 5% reduction with a 10mm increased width (with respect to a 265/35) is suddenly going to shatter your wheels.

You do realize that the 275/30/19 has an even greater load rating than the stock fronts, and only 5% less than stock rears?

Lol.

Load rating is not what the previous post was referring to, but rather the concern of damaging the wheels as a result of striking a pothole with a decreased sidewall ratio--a very real possibility, hell last winter I bent two of the 18" (45-series tires) on my E61 and they were factory BMW wheels and that was a huge bummer.

I tried running 265/35/19 on my 9.5"-width BBS E88 wheels up front, they were too balloon-like, and rubbed. I think 275/30/19 really ought to be the go-to for these setups. As previously mentioned by myself I ran that exact thing on a square set of 220M (9.5"-width) for a few years on my past E92--that thing saw 5 different suspension setups and never was a bother. The only downfall is the decreased tire diameter in the rear, however that is <0.5" if I recall correctly.

Go square and enjoy some awesome handling

[6ixSpd]

That's my point, I don't know why there's so much apprehension to 275/30/19 tires. If you hit a pothole that's going to damage your wheel to begin with, that tiny smidge of extra sidewall is not going to be limiting factor in either tire scenario. And the increased load rating will help against bubbling in the event of hitting a pothole.

And to the previous poster, what is the point of spending money on getting a square ZCP setup to begin with if you're going to stagger the tires anyways? Why didn't you just keep the original staggered setup then? It makes no sense.

C'est la vie.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by 6ixSpd

And to the previous poster, what is the point of spending money on getting a square ZCP setup to begin with if you're going to stagger the tires anyways? Why didn't you just keep the original staggered setup then? It makes no sense.

C'est la vie.

Well to be fair it is pretty well known that these cars do not handle very nicely on a square setup at high speeds.

Maybe he just likes the look?

I run staggered tires on my 18x10's.

[GOFAST M3]

Originally Posted by 6ixSpd

That's my point, I don't know why there's so much apprehension to 275/30/19 tires. If you hit a pothole that's going to damage your wheel to begin with, that tiny smidge of extra sidewall is not going to be limiting factor in either tire scenario. And the increased load rating will help against bubbling in the event of hitting a pothole.

And to the previous poster, what is the point of spending money on getting a square ZCP setup to begin with if you're going to stagger the tires anyways? Why didn't you just keep the original staggered setup then? It makes no sense.

C'est la vie.

I have been considering a set of rears up front to avoid having to use a spacer up front to get that aggressive stance.

[dsenechal]

Originally Posted by Gfunk720

I've been running this square setup for about 5 years. Love the look and ability to cycle wheels to all 4 corners. Going to be due for new tires next spring and am torn as to what to do.

Current Setup- 10" ZCP's all around, 265/35/19's, 5MM Front Spacer, 12MM Rear

Debating going to a 275/30/19 or maybe doing something like a 255/35 up front and a 285/30 in the back. Hesitant to go with a lower profile due to the mediocre roads around here...

Is your car lowered? Looks great!

[Gfunk720]

Originally Posted by dsenechal

Is your car lowered? Looks great!

Yep. KW HAS kit.

Thanks!

[EnVe46]

Originally Posted by Gfunk720

Yep. KW HAS kit.

Thanks!

Did you need the spacer on the front to avoid rubbing on kw sleeve?

[biasrutus]

I went with 275/30/19 and love it. It drives so much nicer! Most of the improvement is likely due to getting rid of the spacer in the front. Any hint of steering wheel wobble is completely gone and I am convinced steering is improved.

Thanks for the nudges everyone. I also think it looks great.



Now I have some basically new 275/35/19 and 255/35/19 pilot sport 4s to sell.

[Atomicteal_M3]

Originally Posted by biasrutus

I went with 275/30/19 and love it. It drives so much nicer! Most of the improvement is likely due to getting rid of the spacer in the front. Any hint of steering wheel wobble is completely gone and I am convinced steering is improved.

Thanks for the nudges everyone. I also think it looks great.



Now I have some basically new 275/35/19 and 255/35/19 pilot sport 4s to sell.

Sik!!

[Gfunk720]

Originally Posted by EnVe46

Did you need the spacer on the front to avoid rubbing on kw sleeve?

I honestly couldn't tell you if it is needed, as I had the spacer on even with the stock suspension.

The spacers came with the wheels when I bought them.

[6ixSpd]

Originally Posted by biasrutus

I went with 275/30/19 and love it. It drives so much nicer! Most of the improvement is likely due to getting rid of the spacer in the front. Any hint of steering wheel wobble is completely gone and I am convinced steering is improved.

Thanks for the nudges everyone. I also think it looks great.

Now I have some basically new 275/35/19 and 255/35/19 pilot sport 4s to sell.

Now that is a badass sedan! Congrats on the setup and welcome to the club

[tdott]

Originally Posted by doogee

Well to be fair it is pretty well known that these cars do not handle very nicely on a square setup at high speeds.

I have never heard this. High-speed stability is more a function of alignment than tire width. 0 toe will do that, a little toe in will provide high-speed stability but too much will be at the cost of tire wear. 0 toe does provide better turn in, and less understeer.

What does not handle very nicely mean anyways? Twitchy? Bump steer? Understeer/Oversteer?

A correctly aligned squared setup is the preferred setup for track afaik. Both are great options depending on tire preference and driving style, I have not heard anything negative about ether setups

[doogee]

Originally Posted by tdott

I have never heard this. High-speed stability is more a function of alignment than tire width. 0 Zero will do that, a little toe in will provide high-speed stability but too much will be at the cost of tire wear. 0 toe does provide better turn in, and less understeer.

What does not handle very nicely mean anyways? Twitchy? Bump steer? Understeer/Oversteer?

A correctly aligned squared setup is the preferred setup for track afaik. Both are great options depending on tire preference and driving style, I have not heard anything negative about ether setups

I beg to differ. In my experience at least. Tire width plays a massive part in high speed stability as well as spring rate. But yes of course alignment plays a big part too. I always run with the front end toed out a bit.

I tried a square setup when I first got the car and it did not work for me. I prefer the front end to lose traction before the rear. The oversteer was simply annoying and just slows you down. Didn't inspire much confidence at high speeds.

This chassis does not have the same characteristics as the E36/E46 where a square setup is ideal. Sure you can run a square setup and dial out the oversteer with other modifications but I'm not looking to swap swaybars etc.

You'd be pretty hard pressed to find any "true" racecars running a square setup. Most people choose this route because it saves money with the ability to rotate tires.

But yeah, this chassis is definitely not neutral on a square setup when it is close to stock form.

[tdott]

Originally Posted by doogee

I always run with the front end toed out a bit.

Toe out? I thought only autocrossers do that, specifically because of the slow speeds for the faster/dartier turn in/direction changes.

Originally Posted by doogee

You'd be pretty hard pressed to find any "true" racecars running a square setup. Most people choose this route because it saves money with the ability to rotate tires.

I see several stripped track cars with square setups here: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...0#post21955340
But yes i'm sure full out race cars run a different setup, i'm not convinced it's for the reason of a squared setup being known to 'not handle very nicely'.

Originally Posted by doogee

But yeah, this chassis is definitely not neutral on a square setup when it is close to stock form.

If anything I think it makes it more neutral than a stock setup, stock alignment/wheel/tires will lean on the side of understeer for safety. Adding more tire up front plus some negative camber brings it towards being neutral, but yes, if you go too far with that, then it crosses the neutral line and into the oversteering territory. It's all about striking the right balance for the driver's preference. It's not until you start adding lots of power that I think a rear 285+ tire is needed and that prevents you from running squared tires.

I think saying squared setups 'do not handle very nicely' is not an accurate generalization.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by tdott

Toe out? I thought only autocrossers do that, specifically because of the slow speeds for the faster/dartier turn in/direction changes.

Errr, this is incredibly common and I'd say a must. Try it and you'll never go back. FYI, if you're running 0 toe and are adjusting 1-2 degrees extra camber at the track, you're toeing it out.

Originally Posted by tdott

I see several stripped track cars with square setups here: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...0#post21955340
But yes i'm sure full out race cars run a different setup, i'm not convinced it's for the reason of a squared setup being known to 'not handle very nicely'.

Watch some in-car videos of some of these "track car" guys and you'll notice most of them don't drive to the cars limits. When this is the case, the balance is not very important because they aren't really reaching the point of losing traction to begin with.

I've seen one case of a guy running around the Nordschleife on a 275 square setup and it looked really good and he was definitely pushing the car. But I don't know what else he had done.

Originally Posted by tdott

If anything I think it makes it more neutral than a stock setup, stock alignment/wheel/tires will lean on the side of understeer for safety. Adding more tire up front plus some negative camber brings it towards being neutral, but yes, if you go too far with that, then it crosses the neutral line and into the oversteering territory. It's all about striking the right balance for the driver's preference. It's not until you start adding lots of power that I think a rear 285+ tire is needed and that prevents you from running squared tires.

I think saying squared setups 'do not handle very nicely' is not an accurate generalization.

I explained what I meant by "does not handle very nicely".

I never said to use the stock tires sizes. I run 265/275.

I will say a square setup works well on a small tight track. But at the higher speed tracks it does not. It isn't stable enough to really drive the car at it's limit. Which is where all the fun and smiles are at!

I believe even Leh Keen stressed this specifically on the E9x chassis.

[b4hand]

From what I know, the stock offsets and tire sizes allow for an even track width front and rear, where as with a squared setup, you have more track width on the front relative to the rear. This induces oversteer because the rear has less grip than the front, which is what some guys like.

If you look at the Team Schirmer car that runs on the nordschleife it runs 265f/295r with widths of 9.5f/11r, if my memory servers me right. But the offsets also play into a factor too and I think they run mid to low 30's all around.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by b4hand

If you look at the Team Schirmer car that runs on the nordschleife it runs 265f/295r with widths of 9.5f/11r, if my memory servers me right. But the offsets also play into a factor too and I think they run mid to low 30's all around.

Yep. And that car is very neutral from any in-car I've watched.

[tdott]

Originally Posted by doogee

Errr, this is incredibly common and I'd say a must. Try it and you'll never go back. FYI, if you're running 0 toe and are adjusting 1-2 degrees extra camber at the track, you're toeing it out.

Hmm, agree to disagree, my car was aligned with my track setup, I back off about .5-1 degree for street. I like the way my car lets loose, very predictable for me. Probably won't be switching up my setup anytime soon.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by tdott

Hmm, agree to disagree, my car was aligned with my track setup, I back off about .5-1 degree for street. I like the way my car lets loose, very predictable for me. Probably won't be switching up my setup anytime soon.

Fair enough. Whatever works for you is whats best I suppose.

But you can't really voice such a strong opinion when you haven't even tried the other side of the debate.

[tdott]

Originally Posted by doogee

But you can't really voice such a strong opinion when you haven't even tried the other side of the debate.

I have a stock wheel/tire setup plus my other street wheels are also staggered. While great for the street and more than enough to get you into trouble, it leans too much into understeer at the limit than I would like for the track.

[doogee]

Originally Posted by tdott

I have a stock wheel/tire setup plus my other street wheels are also staggered. While great for the street and more than enough to get you into trouble, it leans too much into understeer at the limit than I would like for the track.

Super weird! Maybe ride height or spring rates are playing a part in that. Depends on the amount of stagger as well.

We may have different driving styles, I tend to counter understeer with more throttle, if the car has the power for it. Wasn't possible in the gutless e36 :P