|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 626
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 626 |
definitely go with the ones you had on your SHO. in silver.
and if you don't.. tell me what they are so i can get them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
Originally posted by SVTfrog:
The wheels on the SHO look like cheapos.
ya ADR freakin cheap let me tell you 
I said they LOOK like cheapos, and it's just my opinion. Though ADR aren't exactly some real expensive wheels.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281
Captain Impound Boy
|
|
OP
Captain Impound Boy
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281 |
Originally posted by SVTfrog:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
Originally posted by SVTfrog:
The wheels on the SHO look like cheapos.
ya ADR freakin cheap let me tell you
I said they LOOK like cheapos, and it's just my opinion. Though ADR aren't exactly some real expensive wheels.
You look like a Cheapo Get it!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,270
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,270 |
i got some lightweight 18's, for sale. 
~Alex
Ex- SVT Driver627
MUST SELL!!!LOCAL:
Pre-98 MOLDED trunk
Polk db speakers
Corolla parts
LED Underbody Kit
PM
2000 Green CSVT gone on 2/17/06
2001 Toyota Corolla (SHE RUNS!!!)
1989 Mustang LX 5.0
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281
Captain Impound Boy
|
|
OP
Captain Impound Boy
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281 |
supers might be the ugliest wheel ever! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
ya 15 pound wheels def preformace robbing!
They are actually and you just don't know it. 
Stock E1 = 19.5lbs
225/50 Falkien = 22lbs
Total = 41.5lbs
Your 18" rims = 15lbs
235/35/18 XXX = 25lbs
Total = 40lbs
However the bulk of the weight is where? Exactly, it is at the furthest point out radially from the center. This increases it's moment of inertia exponentially.
The E1 Falkien combo requires 14.48 lb/ft of torque (per tire) to rotate and stop rotating.
The 18" combo requires 16.41 lb/ft of torque (per tire) to rotate and stop rotating.
That is a 13.3% increase in torque required even though the "combo" weighs 1.5lbs less. That will be directly tied to the car's acceleration and braking ability.
How does this apply to acceleration and braking? The car's ability to accelerate & brake (rate of speed change) is a factor in how much difference the change in torque required makes.
For instance using 0-60mph times (in seconds) and comparing it to changes in the total chassis weight.
7 sec = 70lb heavier chassis
6 sec = 80lb heavier chassis
5 sec = 100lb heavier chassis
Now for braking times 60-0.
Stock 132 feet (3 sec) = 165lbs heavier
124 feet (2.8 sec) = 180lbs heavier
116 feet (2.6 sec) = 200lbs heavier
So if I were to run those same "light weight" 18's my car would perform "roughly" as if it were 100lbs heavier when accelerating and 200lbs heavier when it was braking.
So just being lighter means next to nothing at all unless you do the math behind your changes. I stand by my first statement.
This is also the main reason I never went to 17" rims. In order for a 17" rim combo to not hurt my performance the combo would have to weigh about 35lbs.
I used 3150lbs as the vehicle weight (with driver) for all my calculations. A heavier car would slightly raise those results and a lighter one would slightly lower them.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 503
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 503 |
95 LX-with a mind of its own
24v DOHC
SVT exhaust and K&N=all thats worth modding
Go Fighting Sioux!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,616
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,616 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
ya 15 pound wheels def preformace robbing!
They are actually and you just don't know it.
Stock E1 = 19.5lbs
225/50 Falkien = 22lbs
Total = 41.5lbs
Your 18" rims = 15lbs
235/35/18 XXX = 25lbs
Total = 40lbs
However the bulk of the weight is where? Exactly, it is at the furthest point out radially from the center. This increases it's moment of inertia exponentially.
The E1 Falkien combo requires 14.48 lb/ft of torque (per tire) to rotate and stop rotating.
The 18" combo requires 16.41 lb/ft of torque (per tire) to rotate and stop rotating.
That is a 13.3% increase in torque required even though the "combo" weighs 1.5lbs less. That will be directly tied to the car's acceleration and braking ability.
How does this apply to acceleration and braking? The car's ability to accelerate & brake (rate of speed change) is a factor in how much difference the change in torque required makes.
For instance using 0-60mph times (in seconds) and comparing it to changes in the total chassis weight.
7 sec = 70lb heavier chassis
6 sec = 80lb heavier chassis
5 sec = 100lb heavier chassis
Now for braking times 60-0.
Stock 132 feet (3 sec) = 165lbs heavier
124 feet (2.8 sec) = 180lbs heavier
116 feet (2.6 sec) = 200lbs heavier
So if I were to run those same "light weight" 18's my car would perform "roughly" as if it were 100lbs heavier when accelerating and 200lbs heavier when it was braking.
So just being lighter means next to nothing at all unless you do the math behind your changes. I stand by my first statement.
This is also the main reason I never went to 17" rims. In order for a 17" rim combo to not hurt my performance the combo would have to weigh about 35lbs.
I used 3150lbs as the vehicle weight (with driver) for all my calculations. A heavier car would slightly raise those results and a lighter one would slightly lower them.
Not in anyway disregarding what was written, but in all probability he's gonna run 225/40/18s on them.
Falken 512's in that size weigh 21.6lbs.
So now the combined weight is 36.6lbs.
Much closer to your "stock" comparison.
The 235/35/18/tire needs a recommended min width of 8" rims, which we've all pretty much decided will rub.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281
Captain Impound Boy
|
|
OP
Captain Impound Boy
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281 |
Good write up demon but what tire brand is Falkien 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Originally posted by Mod-Deth:
The 235/35/18/tire needs a recommended min width of 8" rims, which we've all pretty much decided will rub.
Needs and recommended aren't the same thing.
I'd have no problem fitting 235s to a 7" wheel. I'd prefer 7.5" or 8" but it's plenty doable on 7". And an 8" wheel won't necessarily rub. Offset is important, as are some other things. And you can always trim parts/roll the fenders for whatever rubbing occurs.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
