Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

Track Wheels: 16s vs 18s

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-14-2014, 04:54 PM
  #1  
Mach 5
Racer
Thread Starter
 
Mach 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Track Wheels: 16s vs 18s

I'm looking for some inexpensive track wheels for a '86 951. They will be used for both Autocross and DE. My ideal would be a set of four 16 x 8 early offset Phone Dials which I could run 245/45s on. In my quest to find these, I have come across two interesting alternatives. Both are late offset and would require spacers/adapters, but I'm fine with that (I have run them on a '72 911 DE car for 14 years).

Option 1 - Late offset 951 Phone Dials, 7s and 8s. I'd have to run 225/50s on front.
Pros: light wheels, cheaper tires. Cons: smaller front tires.

Option 2 - 18 x 8 Cayenne wheels. I'd run 245/35s all around.
Pros: 245 "square" tire set up. Cons: Heavier wheel (+10 lbs, I think), more expensive tires.

I can get the Phone Dials for $100 and the Cayenne wheels for $150. So the real question comes down to which one will perform better. Smaller and lighter, or bigger and heavier? Better response versus better grip?

Thoughts anyone?

Thanks.
Roger
Old 11-14-2014, 05:39 PM
  #2  
jmj951
Pro
 
jmj951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This changes a lot.
Posts: 726
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

I would vote for the smaller/lighter wheels.

At basically the exact same tire size, I noticed a difference between a set of 18" BBS OEM wheels (for 996) that I was originally using versus a set of 18" Forgeline wheels I used for my last two events.
Old 11-14-2014, 05:50 PM
  #3  
Mach 5
Racer
Thread Starter
 
Mach 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

jmj951,

When you say you noticed a difference, I'm assuming you are referring to the 18" Forgelines being lighter and therefore better? What was the difference like?

Thanks.
Roger
Old 11-14-2014, 07:42 PM
  #4  
Cyril
Rennlist Member
 
Cyril's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jmj951
I would vote for the smaller/lighter wheels.
+1
Old 11-14-2014, 07:52 PM
  #5  
User 41221
Banned
 
User 41221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,017
Received 173 Likes on 108 Posts
Default

Go for the lightest wheels you can find, and hold out for early offset if you can. You will feel the extra weight of the spacers, in my opinion.

Also, if you are auto crossing, you might really appreciate getting as small a diameter tire as you can find. Math wise, it has some nice advantages out of the hole.
Old 11-14-2014, 08:16 PM
  #6  
rlm328
Rennlist Member
 
rlm328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 6,305
Received 309 Likes on 206 Posts
Default

There are numerous discussions on advantages and dis-advantages of wheel and tire size. The major advantage of the 18-in wheel vs 16-in wheels is around slip angle. The 18-in tires have a shorter wall which corresponds to a smaller slip angle which has an effect on handling. 17-in and 18-in wheels behave about the best for this car.

Note that jmj was comparing wheels of equal diameter. You will need to be able to make some adjustments to your suspension if you go with a square set up, if not you will have some interesting over steer.
Old 11-14-2014, 09:34 PM
  #7  
Mach 5
Racer
Thread Starter
 
Mach 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I appreciate the feedback. I'm leaning towards the 16s. I'm gonna take a look at them in the AM. If they're nice I'll get'em. For $100, how do you go wrong? (assuming they are straight and un-cracked, as promised).

We have Mille Miglia 17" Cup 1s on the car now. They look great, but I'm just a bit uncomfortable using these as track wheels with stickies. Autocross is one thing, but Road America is altogether different! They might be fine, but I guess I'd just feel a bit better with OE wheels of some sort.

Roger
Old 11-15-2014, 07:20 AM
  #8  
jmj951
Pro
 
jmj951's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: This changes a lot.
Posts: 726
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Mach 5
jmj951,

When you say you noticed a difference, I'm assuming you are referring to the 18" Forgelines being lighter and therefore better? What was the difference like?

Thanks.
Roger
Yes, the forgelines are much lighter, and better on the track. I noticed it most during braking. I still have stock brakes (using Pagid Orange on the track) and had an easier time slowing down for the hairpin and the corkscrew.
Old 11-15-2014, 09:37 AM
  #9  
Van
Rennlist Member
 
Van's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 12,008
Received 92 Likes on 62 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rlm328
There are numerous discussions on advantages and dis-advantages of wheel and tire size. The major advantage of the 18-in wheel vs 16-in wheels is around slip angle. The 18-in tires have a shorter wall which corresponds to a smaller slip angle which has an effect on handling. 17-in and 18-in wheels behave about the best for this car.
Bob, I'm pretty sure sidewall height has nothing to do with slip angle - sidewall flex has other implications regarding bounciness, grip and contact patch. But when it comes to slip angle, that is primarily dictated by rubber compound.

Remember that the spring value of the tires works in conjunction with the spring value of the suspension - and lots of people that put on 17" or 18" wheels without addressing springs/shocks/sway bars actually reduce their handling capability.

As a purist, I'm going to vote for the lightest wheel/tire combination you can put on there.
Old 11-15-2014, 10:03 AM
  #10  
Mach 5
Racer
Thread Starter
 
Mach 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Van

Remember that the spring value of the tires works in conjunction with the spring value of the suspension - and lots of people that put on 17" or 18" wheels without addressing springs/shocks/sway bars actually reduce their handling capability.
Good point. Right now it is basically stock suspension (horribly soft!). The plan is to modify the car in stages with my son, kind of an "automotive lab" project. I thought I'd start with a wheel choice, then move on to suspension, then possibly brakes.

Roger
Old 11-15-2014, 10:10 AM
  #11  
rlm328
Rennlist Member
 
rlm328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 6,305
Received 309 Likes on 206 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Van
Bob, I'm pretty sure sidewall height has nothing to do with slip angle - sidewall flex has other implications regarding bounciness, grip and contact patch. But when it comes to slip angle, that is primarily dictated by rubber compound.

Remember that the spring value of the tires works in conjunction with the spring value of the suspension - and lots of people that put on 17" or 18" wheels without addressing springs/shocks/sway bars actually reduce their handling capability.

As a purist, I'm going to vote for the lightest wheel/tire combination you can put on there.


You are correct Van. But I was assuming tires from the same family which would similar tire wall variables, ie NT-01s. Most of the tracked 944's that I am familiar with have gone to the 17-in or 18-in wheels for a number of reasons, but handling is one of the primary ones, being able to cram in bigger brakes is why most opt for the 18-in over the 17-in, as tires are a little more expensive for the 18's.

As far as the 18-in wheels are concerned I will not disagree on a normally staggered set up, but he was talking a square set up. The square set up will shift the grip bias forward compared to the staggered set up.

From earlier this year:

https://rennlist.com/forums/944-turb...51-wheels.html

Search is your friend. Most anything you can think about to ask has been thought of and asked before. Like most forums it has a dynamic membership and these cars are old. People have been experimenting on them for thirty years so your questions are probably not unique, and may have the best answer buried from a true guru who is no longer participating in this forum years ago.
Old 11-15-2014, 03:11 PM
  #12  
philstireservice
Former Vendor
 
philstireservice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Van
Bob, I'm pretty sure sidewall height has nothing to do with slip angle - sidewall flex has other implications regarding bounciness, grip and contact patch. But when it comes to slip angle, that is primarily dictated by rubber compound.

Remember that the spring value of the tires works in conjunction with the spring value of the suspension - and lots of people that put on 17" or 18" wheels without addressing springs/shocks/sway bars actually reduce their handling capability.

As a purist, I'm going to vote for the lightest wheel/tire combination you can put on there.
Aspect ratio in conjunction with compound does effect slip angle. A smaller aspect ratio will react faster to steering input as a tire with a stickier compound would. Compound trumps aspect ratio in most cases but the optimal combination makes for a smaller slip angle.
Old 11-15-2014, 07:47 PM
  #13  
333pg333
Rennlist Member
 
333pg333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,919
Received 97 Likes on 80 Posts
Default

You haven't mentioned if your car is stock or modified and if modified, how? I'm assuming it's pretty stock so I'd go with the PhoneDials being the lighter of your options. If the car is quite modified and has a lot more power than stock then I'd consider the 18"s and put on larger rubber.
Old 11-15-2014, 10:32 PM
  #14  
Cloud9...68
Burning Brakes
 
Cloud9...68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

It's very true that probably anything that can be said about wheel/tire choices has already been said, but I'll throw in my experience anyway. I have a mostly-track 968, with mild enhancements to the engine (so maybe 250 hp), and a full-race suspension (it has basically every component Racers Edge sells). I initially went with a staggered 18" set-up (8.5" wide fronts, 10" rears), but didn't like the fact that I can't rotate the (expensive 18") tires, so I picked up a set of 17 a 9" twists for $125 apiece, and mounted 245/40-17 BFG G-Force Rivals. I've only done one session on them so far, but I'm very happy with the result. It hasn't turned into a tail-happy handful as I had feared, and feels more lively thanks to the lower overall tire diameter in the back (I made the mistake of initially putting 285/35-18's back there, which are nearly 26" in diameter, vs. 24.7" for my new tires), and the significantly lighter wheel/tire combination in the back. And if anything, the car feels like it has more overall grip, not less.

I'm saying all this because you didn't mention 17" as an option. Unless you're running a ton of power, I don't think these cars need huge diameter wheels and wide tires, and I think 17" hits the sweet spot. My 2 cents, anyway. If only there were really lightweight 17" wheels available in our bolt pattern and offsets...
Old 11-15-2014, 11:18 PM
  #15  
Van
Rennlist Member
 
Van's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Hyde Park, NY
Posts: 12,008
Received 92 Likes on 62 Posts
Default

Look at any "tried and true" track wheel for light 17"s : Fikse, CCW, Kinesis, Braid, Jongbloed, etc.


Quick Reply: Track Wheels: 16s vs 18s



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 04:34 PM.