[Em135eye]

And finally, it's nice to find mark, HPete and ALF all enthusing about the advantages of 17s. I'm usually a lone voice on this one.

It's all about looks to many.

Ride quality better with 19s?

Errmm no.

Better turn in? You just made that up.

Laughing at SEs on 17s - that just about sums it up.

Good to see a few fellow 6 pot SEers who bought their cars to enjoy "quietly", not to make a statement about how "sporty" and "masculine" they are with add on Tonka wheels and a bodykit.

///ajd, I find the "proper" fully hydraulic steering, the better brakes and the extra turbo and higher rev limit (not to mention 40+ bhp and many more lbs-ft) of the 335d over the 330d go a lot further in making a "sportier" car than any oversized, super fragile wheels on comedy rubber would ever do ;-)

You knows you loves it.

[F31-340i]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

And finally, it's nice to find mark, HPete and ALF all enthusing about the advantages of 17s. I'm usually a lone voice on this one.

It's all about looks to many.

Ride quality better with 19s?

Errmm no.

Better turn in? You just made that up.

Laughing at SEs on 17s - that just about sums it up.

Good to see a few fellow 6 pot SEers who bought their cars to enjoy "quietly", not to make a statement about how "sporty" and "masculine" they are with add on Tonka wheels and a bodykit.

///ajd, I find the "proper" fully hydraulic steering, the better brakes and the extra turbo and higher rev limit (not to mention 40+ bhp and many more lbs-ft) of the 335d over the 330d go a lot further in making a "sportier" car than any oversized, super fragile wheels on comedy rubber would ever do ;-)

You knows you loves it.

Ride is worse but handling / turn in is better on 19"s.

Factoid!

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by ///ajd

Ride is worse but handling / turn in is better on 19"s.

Factoid!

Opinions do not maketh a fact.

Handling "better?" Define "better" then equate this to a fact. Then do the same with turn in.

Come on, I'm waiting...


















I'm still waiting...


Actually, it's bed time - night!

[Bungle009]

Bigger wheels are not always better. The large majority of people accept that an e46 m3 was a better drivers car on standard 18" wheels than it was when spec'd with the optional 19's. 90% of people ticked the box, payed a grand, and had a worse car with 19" wheels. Aesthetically it looked nicer on 19's but it compromised the car.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Bungle009

Bigger wheels are not always better. The large majority of people accept that an e46 m3 was a better drivers car on standard 18" wheels than it was when spec'd with the optional 19's. 90% of people ticked the box, payed a grand, and had a worse car with 19" wheels. Aesthetically it looked nicer on 19's but it compromised the car.

Exactly, and that has been repeated over and over with the M3, even lap times on the track can be slower on the bigger wheel set.

I noticed in a BMW document that even they admit wheel sizes can basically compromise the setup. I'll have to see if I can find it.

I think what a lot of users mean when the fit bigger wheels, the handling is 'different'. But different doesn't always mean better.

The sort of comments we read are like a guy buys an X5 (E53) sport setup on 19" staggered wheel set. How can I make it more comfortable? It is a bit harsh and I'm wondering if there somthing wrong with the suspension?

I tried an E53 X5 sport model on 18" wheels and that was pretty harsh, not surprised the 19" feels as is there is something wrong with the suspension.

Fine if we don't care about ride quality, but there is a balance of handling and comfort, it doesn't typically come with big rims and ultra low profiles.

HighlandPete

[Em135eye]

And if we look at the "all time greats" in terms of handling (most are ageing now) and look at wheel sizes and tyre profiles, many have relatively "sensible" rubber.

Of course most supercars have large staggered wheels/tyres but we (3 series owners) aren't driving supercars, we are driving nippy saloons/coupes/estates.

It's 99% fashion and about 1% function with huge wheels.

I suspect we may reach a point where small hatchbacks come with 20s as standard - when will it stop?

Ask Gordon Murray what he thinks of massive wheels and ultra low profile tyres...

Right, time to leave this alone before I get told off again...

[willhollin]

I have the best of both worlds with 18" alloys.

[Em135eye]

Yes you do Will.

Progress straight to "go" and collect £200.

[dxb335d]

Your right to an extent Matt, Murray slated the Veyron to high heaven
when it came out, untill he drove it. That's on 20 and 21s

[kaishang]

I tried 18 inches recently and my bottom is still sore. Lose 1 inch, it may not sound like much but your bottom will thank you.

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Your right to an extent Matt, Murray slated the Veyron to high heaven
when it came out, untill he drove it. That's on 20 and 21s

A Veyron has much more than twice the power of any 3 series and weighs more than the sun. It's "allowed" to have big wheels.

He still sticks by his "small and light is beautiful" principle rigidly though.

[willhollin]

He knows a lot about mints.

[Em135eye]

And gin?

[m@rk]

Originally Posted by kaishang

I tried 18 inches recently and my bottom is still sore. Lose 1 inch, it may not sound like much but your bottom will thank you.

[m@rk]

I would like to think that BMW would fit the optimal wheel onto the car as standard.

So a 335D SE would have 17" wheels because is has the softer ride and the 335D M has 18" because of the slightly sportier aspirations of the car.

But if that argument were true then where would run flats fit in?

I'll get my coat

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by m@rk

I would like to think that BMW would fit the optimal wheel onto the car as standard.

So a 335D SE would have 17" wheels because is has the softer ride and the 335D M has 18" because of the slightly sportier aspirations of the car.

But if that argument were true then where would run flats fit in?

I'll get my coat

BMW do claim that "standard tyres on a car must offer the best compromise of all relevant criteria". But also state when discussing up sizing. "Clearly roll comfort, noise and aquaplaning are not givern ther same significance in this case".

The wider compromises begin....

As to RFTs, the real 'bashing' started when the motoring hacks found that the cars didn't work at all well on the standard tyre offerings. Even more of a slating when deviation from standard sizes made it all worse, by a big margin. 'Banana skins' come to mind for BMW's hype, that there was complete development, like any other tyre.

I personally think BMW thought they'd get away with it, because many BMW drivers were willing to compromise their cars anyway, with big wheel setups. Comfort wasn't a key priority to many drivers. Were buying into sporty means 'hard and severe' driving dynamics. I'd love to be proved wrong, but I don't think the evidence will stack up.

HighlandPete

[seanblee]

Many assume sporty => poor (crashy/skippy) ride quality. I'm sure my car would be faster with softer springs and better dampers, as it would keep the tyres in contact with the ground more of the time; after all, a wheel in the air can't brake, steer or accelerate the car.

[kaishang]

Formula 1 tyres look quite big, high profile and balloon like to me.

[Em135eye]

Pete - agreed.

The E46 M3 CSL was universally criticised for it's rock hard ride and crashiness when it was released. Now journos (and owners) seem to have "forgotten" this and cannot praise the CSL enough. Almost like those ride qualities are now acceptable.

I think rock hard rides and wheels that self destruct have become almost the norm on performance saloons/coupes and although there have been many good innovations, I just don't think huge wheels are tyres are one of them.

Sweetest handling cars I've driven have all had fairly "normal" tyres and have been utterly brilliant to drive:

Ford Puma
mk3 Toyota MR2
Mitsi Evo 9 FQ360
Original Lotus Elan
Ford Focus ST170
mk2 Golf GTi
A few Type R Hondas
A couple of Porsches

etc, etc, blah blah blah.

And I also cannot see how on EARTH RFTs were allowed on a marque like BMW. The simple physics of them is ludicrous. Rock hard sidewalls, heavy tyres - how is that going to lead to a high performing but comfortable car?!

As an extreme example, I had an absolute ball driving the Landy hard (on roads) in the pelting rain last night. Massively tall tyres (but wideish), tiny wheels but lots of predictability, fairly low limits and a big grin rinsing every single horsepower (there aren't many!) out of it on twisty little roads.

[HighlandPete]

Talking of cars that could entertain with a comfortable chassis...

I know many will laugh, and probably choke on their supper, but cars like the Peugeot 405 although not a sporty car, had some very good driving dynamics. A very secure, well planted but compliant drive. A brilliant chassis and a lot can be learned from a totally different approach to road car dynamics. Could be driven very fast and totally at one with the road.

History shows it is not all stiff chassis and big wheels.


HighlandPete

[Em135eye]

Pete - Always been a fan of the "unknown" good handling car.

My Saxo VTR (I bought one before they became chaviots) was extremely sweet handling. Not very quick but a true go kart.

A major surprise was a current shape Micra - about as exciting as a brown suit but they actually have a really good chassis and can be rinsed to death on a back road.

Ford have a few blinders - the last two and current Fiestas, most Mondeos, all Focuses. Even with a little engine, they are fun to drive.

Everyone needs to try a mk3 MR2 as well. The MX5 gets all the praise but honestly the MR2 (IMO) beats it. Razor sharp steering, tonnes of grip on fairly small tyres (and wheels), excellent brakes and that feeling of "rightness" that means it's ready for every bend and every imperfection and gives you 100% confidence. If only they'd stuck the Celica's 190bhp unit in it, it would have been an Elise beater that never breaks down. Many happy miles on Dartmoor in an MR2 (and a hairdressing kit).

[F31-340i]

Opinions do not maketh a fact.

I'm not sure why you seem sure my opinion is somehow in error - why would I make it up?

Its not really important of course whether you believe me or not, but I think my experience on these is potentially useful to others. I went the non-RFT route mainly due to cost (i.e. I'd do it anyway), but I also got the impression from some "non-RFT users" that there were no handling downsides to going non-RFT. I personally don't think this is true. The same applies, IMO, when going from larger to smaller wheels.

I've tried the same E91 with 17" nonRFTs, 19" non-RFTs, 18" RFTs and 19" RFTs.

The ride gets harder in that order*

The handling & turn in get sharper in that order*

Handling was definately sharpest on 19" RFTs - they would be what I would choose to fit BUT:
a) they are very expensive
b) in 19" sizes the TPMS doesn't really work, hence its too easy to run them at too low pressure, which is when all the fun starts with inner tyre edge wear and cracked rims (IMO).

Agree about the 405 handling - the 1.9 205 was very nice too.

* as I didn't test them back to back, its hard to be precise about the difference between the 18" RFTs and 19" non-RFTs - from memory I'd say on balance they were very similar in ride & handling, with the 18" RFTs just having the edge on turn in.