When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
As you might have seen in our recent survey thread, APEX is working with the Porsche community in an effort to produce track wheels that offer unprecedented value. We have received 800+ survey responses from fellow community members offering feedback and fitment requests. The 996 chassis represented approximately 23% of the surveys submitted, so we’d love to hear more from this community. If you haven’t chimed in yet, you can still provide valuable feedback by taking our Porsche wheel survey here.
Before we can move forward, we need to fine tune certain fitment specifications for the 996 chassis. So, we’re seeking your expertise and need detailed feedback on the specs we believe should be produced.
Below is a list of all widths and offsets we’re looking to create for a variety of Porsche chassis in the first round of production. Fitments specific to the 996 chassis can be seen listed below. In accordance with the survey results, these will be produced in 18” sizes first and 19” thereafter. Survey data and community feedback will directly determine what will be produced, and when. Please note that both the SM-10 and EC-7 designs are being reviewed for feasibility. In your comment, please include tire sizes, tire model, and alignment settings if you have a change request so we can track developing trends.
Fronts:
F: 18x8.5” ET50 with 225/40-18, 235/40-18, or 245/40-18
F: 18x8.5” ET42 with 225/40-18, 235/40-18, or 245/40-18
F: 18x9” ET48 with 235/40-18, 245/40-18, 255/35-18
F: 18x9.5” ET42 with 245/40-18, 255/35-18, 265/35-18
Narrow body rear:
R: 18x11” ET62 with 285/35-18 or 295/30-18
R: 18x11.5” ET63 with 295/30-18, 305/30-18, 315/30-18
R: 18x12” ET65 with 305/30-18 or 315/30-18
Wide body rear:
R: 18x11” ET38 with 295/30-18, 305/30-18 or 315/30-18
R: 11.5” ET42 with 295/30-18, 305/30-18, 315/30-18
R: 18x12” ET45 with 305/30-18 or 315/30-18
R: 18x12.5” ET46 with 315/30-18 or 335/30-18
On-Car Image Gallery
I’d like to invite you to view new on-car imagery which help depict concavity profiles, finishes, and designs. The first round of images shown are the SM-10 design, however, the EC-7 design will follow.
If you would like to view all of our high-res versions, please click our Flickr album.
I dig the 9.5 / 11.5 availability for those who want to get aggressive with narrow body fitment. Will absolutely be on my radar when I need yet another set of wheels.
I dig the 9.5 / 11.5 availability for those who want to get aggressive with narrow body fitment. Will absolutely be on my radar when I need yet another set of wheels.
Appreciate the input. Does the narrow-body 11.5" offset look correct to accommodate appropriately sized R-comps? We're having an internal conversation to nix the 11.5" option and only offer the 11" and 12" for the narrow-body 996. However, if there's enough communal support for that specific width, it can and absolutely will be produced. Please let me know your thoughts!
Appreciate the input. Does the narrow-body 11.5" offset look correct to accommodate appropriately sized R-comps? We're having an internal conversation to nix the 11.5" option and only offer the 11" and 12" for the narrow-body 996. However, if there's enough communal support for that specific width, it can and absolutely will be produced. Please let me know your thoughts!
Rear offsets all look pretty close...I'd actually stick closer to 63 on the 12"...FWIW CCW generally uses 9" backspacking (63.5) for their 12's. You'll want to watch clearance on that diagonal thrust arm in the rear.
I get the logic...you're not going to sell many sets in the 11.5 and 12 as they require careful alignments and possibly fender massaging to get them to fit...only the most aggressive people are going to run them so simplifying to 1 size might be the best.
Rear offsets all look pretty close...I'd actually stick closer to 63 on the 12"...FWIW CCW generally uses 9" backspacking (63.5) for their 12's. You'll want to watch clearance on that diagonal thrust arm in the rear.
I get the logic...you're not going to sell many sets in the 11.5 and 12 as they require careful alignments and possibly fender massaging to get them to fit...only the most aggressive people are going to run them so simplifying to 1 size might be the best.
Thank you for sharing your expertise - it's very helpful and appreciated!
Similarly to what we do with certain aggressive BMW fitments, we will still produce the ultra-aggressive Porsche fitments even if it only caters to a smaller crowd - just in a lower quantity and potentially during a future production run. Ideally we'll offer every width between 11-12" for the narrow-body 996 applications, it's just a matter of gaining community-wide support for each specific size. Producing and offering all three of those 18" rear widths from the get-go is feasible, we just need to know their demand.
A small portion of our success can be attributed to designing and engineering these typically built-to-order aggressive fitments and stocking them on-the-shelf to be shipped in less than a day's notice. Since this is a very communal project, the wheel specifications that are proposed and/or collectively agreed upon by enthusiasts have a heightened chance of being produced.
That said, if anyone has a specific fitment that they'd like to be produced, see any tweaks to be made to the fitment list(s) above, please make it known! We'd love to hear your thoughts.
Here we have a rendering showing the 18" SM-10 in our three finishes against a Racing Yellow Cayman GTS. The front wheels are profile 1 concavity - the least amount of concave. The rear wheels are profile 2 concavity - medium amount of concave.
I hope 2018 brings you health, happiness, prosperity... and APEX wheels this spring!
Here we have a beautiful basalt black 996 GT3 on 18" SM-10 in our three finishes. Similarly to the rest, these front wheels are concavity profile 1 (least concave). The rear wheels are concavity profile 2 (medium concave).
To answer the numerous people asking for concavity profile clarification, here’s a general overview of how they’re presented and produced for each specific application.
We offer our Porsche-specific APEX SM-10 and EC-7 in two or three different concavity profiles. Pending design and final engineering/strength optimization, the wheels will vary in concavity depth from profile one to three; one being the least concave, three being the most concave. Typically, the level of concavity is dependent on the width and offset of the wheel. The wider the wheel and lower the offset, the more concave. Whereas the skinnier the wheel and higher the offset, the less concave. While the amount of concavity may differ, some wide(r) and low(er) offset wheel specifications have a deeper “pocket” or center pad where the studs/lug nuts attach to the hub.
The varying concavity profiles in the SM-10 and EC-7 ensure that spoke curvature and brake clearance is never compromised due to width or offset changes in the wheel. The SM-10 and EC-7 are of the few 18" VIA/JWL certified wheels on the market that can clear both an aftermarket and OEM 380mm rotor 6-piston brake kit.
We are now making final tweaks in the engineering phase, prior to launching our initial pre-order/group buy next month. We’ll continue to update the community through the different phases of production, and will continue to release on-car photography to give enthusiasts a better idea of how some of these proposed wheel designs visually appear on specific chassis. Stay tuned for updates and solidified ETAs!
Please let me know if you have any further comments, questions, or fitment change requests.
Thanks to the community, we’ve nearly finalized our proposed 18” wheel specifications. As you may very well know, seemingly minute millimeter differences in wheel offset can result in large differences in overall wheel fitment. It directly determines how the wheel fits, performs, and is often times the deciding factor between it working, working well, or ultimately not working. With this said, we need your assistance in deciding between a handful of offsets for our 9” front option.
18x9” ET48: least inner (suspension) clearance, more outer (fender) clearance
18x9” ET47: 1mm more inner clearance, 1mm more aggressive towards the fender
18x9” ET46: 2mm more inner clearance, 2mm more aggressive towards the fender
18x9" ET45 or below -
For example, the +48 offset has approximately ~2mm of inner clearance (wheel to bottom spring perch) with linear spring equipped Ohlins coilovers. We’re unsure if this is the case across the board with all linear spring coilovers as it’s dependent on the use of a helper spring, spring length, inner diameter, etc, etc, so we’d like to hear your thoughts. Since it will not require a change in negative camber settings from the original +48, our suspicion is that the +46 is the best option to compensate for any tire deflection under severe load while on track. We typically like to see ~3mm of clearance to ensure ample clearance under any load, condition, or to account for tire deflection.
While a 997 GT3 equipped with cup flares can accommodate our profile 2 concavity wheel specifications in the front, we opted to show what front (profile 1) & rear (profile 3) wheels would typically be seen. Here is some on-car imagery of 18" APEX SM-10 on our longtime friend & partner, BRRacing's, 997.2 GT3.
12-06-2017, 09:31 PM
APEX | Porsche Track Wheel Development
