BIG CAR, BIG MOTOR, LITTLE WHEELS!

[blackonblacksls]

Well, after not being able to get my 16in CCW set mounted up, I decided to try something else.. I pulled these off a 4th gen body I have here at the shop and what do you know, They fit over the v6 brakes and clear all the BMR suspension components just fine... They are a 17x11 inch torque thrust II.

[The_Blur]

They look too small for the car, although I can see how having a smaller rotating mass can be good for performance. Did you calibrate the speedo to compensate for the new diameter?

[midnighter]

Needs fatter tires now.

[blackonblacksls]

These would be for racing only... SO, not too concerned with looks.. Just something I haven't seen yet.. Everyone that runs 17s is either the welds or the ccw.. Just showing that you could do something like this and spend 600 bucks for 2 rear wheels that are 11inch wide, instead of spending 1200 bucks for 2 10inch wide wheels.

[Mud]

The rims look good, but as someone suggested, just need to get those fat wide tires and it would look great.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by blackonblacksls

These would be for racing only... SO, not too concerned with looks.. Just something I haven't seen yet.. Everyone that runs 17s is either the welds or the ccw.. Just showing that you could do something like this and spend 600 bucks for 2 rear wheels that are 11inch wide, instead of spending 1200 bucks for 2 10inch wide wheels.

That's what I was hoping you'd say. I look forward to seeing some track vids.

[Nessal]

That's freaking awesome

[2010SLVRBULIT]

looks like a donut spare.

[2010 SSRS]

Wow, that 17x11 looks so small

[camarograna2]

Originally Posted by 2010SLVRBULIT

looks like a donut spare.

[Pentatonic]

I know you're not concerned with looks, but that looks pretty goofy.

[blackonblacksls]

Fast isn't always pretty.

[The 2010 Sin]

If fast wasn't making me money.. i'd stick with pretty.

[blackonblacksls]

I don't drive the car around like this. This is just doing some testing see what kind of wheel combo I could make work.

[blackonblacksls]

And you guys not understanding things like this. Is why most 5th gen camaros are ballsac slow. Lol

[camarograna2]

[SUX2BU]

What offset is that? If I remember correctly the 4th gen TT2s were 44mm but those look like they stick out more than that. More like a 25mm or something. Them sticking out will probably help you not have to clearance your LCA on lowered cars like the Welds.

Originally Posted by blackonblacksls

These would be for racing only... SO, not too concerned with looks.. Just something I haven't seen yet.. Everyone that runs 17s is either the welds or the ccw.. Just showing that you could do something like this and spend 600 bucks for 2 rear wheels that are 11inch wide, instead of spending 1200 bucks for 2 10inch wide wheels.

What happened with the CCW 16s?
Yeah, you can fit a ton of wheels with the V6 brakes. You can get a pair of 17x10 Welds for under a grand shipped and keep your Brembos. Also those TT2s are very heavy even for 17x11 wheels. They are 27 lbs compared to the 17x10 Welds that are 19 lbs, hell even my 18x11 F14s are 21.5 lbs. But that's cool that you tried them on.

Originally Posted by blackonblacksls

Fast isn't always pretty.

At least not for the guy in the other lane!

Originally Posted by blackonblacksls

And you guys not understanding things like this. Is why most 5th gen camaros are ballsac slow. Lol

[AutoAgenda]

1 pound rotating mass is roughly equal to 4 pounds stationary mass. If you manage to take off 5-10 lbs off your wheels that the same as 20-40 stationary lbs.

Great bit of info from here: http://forums.5series.net/topic/7163...v-hp-increase/

Conventional wisdom says that conservatively, 1lb worth of rotating mass lost is roughly equivalent to a 4lb sprung mass lost. This being said, I don't think there's any way to get an exact measurement. Even where the rotating mass is lost will make a difference. 1lb lost at the tire tread will make a bigger difference than 1 lb lost near wheel bolts.

In terms of converting that to horsepower, it depends on the power to weight ratio before the weight loss.

For instance, let's just assume we agree with the 4/1 ratio for rotating vs spring.

Let's further assume we're talking about a 4000lb vehicle with 500hp (ie. much like an E60 M5). We're starting off with a 8 lbs per hp ratio.

Let's take 50 lbs off of the rotating mass. Given our 4/1 assumption above, that is equivalent to losing 200 lbs. We're now at 3800lbs and 500hp, giving us 7.6 lbs per hp.

If we wanted to do this by increasing horsepower instead of losing weight:

4000 / 7.6 = 526hp

In other words, we could gain 26hp and we'd be at the "same place."

How much weight would we need to lose to be equal to a 100hp gain in this example?

4000 / 600 = 6.67 lbs per hp

6.67 * 500 = 3333.3 lbs

4000 - 3333.3 = 666.67 lbs sprung weight lost

666.67 / 4 = 166.67 lbs rotating weight lost

166.67 lbs is a LOT of rotating weight to lose.

[The 2010 Sin]

^ :-)

[hightower]

Looks so weird!!!!!! hahaha

[camarograna2]

Awesome info

Originally Posted by AutoAgenda

1 pound rotating mass is roughly equal to 4 pounds stationary mass. If you manage to take off 5-10 lbs off your wheels that the same as 20-40 stationary lbs.

Great bit of info from here: http://forums.5series.net/topic/7163...v-hp-increase/

Conventional wisdom says that conservatively, 1lb worth of rotating mass lost is roughly equivalent to a 4lb sprung mass lost. This being said, I don't think there's any way to get an exact measurement. Even where the rotating mass is lost will make a difference. 1lb lost at the tire tread will make a bigger difference than 1 lb lost near wheel bolts.

In terms of converting that to horsepower, it depends on the power to weight ratio before the weight loss.

For instance, let's just assume we agree with the 4/1 ratio for rotating vs spring.

Let's further assume we're talking about a 4000lb vehicle with 500hp (ie. much like an E60 M5). We're starting off with a 8 lbs per hp ratio.

Let's take 50 lbs off of the rotating mass. Given our 4/1 assumption above, that is equivalent to losing 200 lbs. We're now at 3800lbs and 500hp, giving us 7.6 lbs per hp.

If we wanted to do this by increasing horsepower instead of losing weight:

4000 / 7.6 = 526hp

In other words, we could gain 26hp and we'd be at the "same place."

How much weight would we need to lose to be equal to a 100hp gain in this example?

4000 / 600 = 6.67 lbs per hp

6.67 * 500 = 3333.3 lbs

4000 - 3333.3 = 666.67 lbs sprung weight lost

666.67 / 4 = 166.67 lbs rotating weight lost

166.67 lbs is a LOT of rotating weight to lose.

[motorhead]

Goes to show you just how big the 5th gen really is.

[blackonblacksls]

The ccw I had bought used an we're built for a fbody. They didn't clear my brakes. Even the v6 ones.

These wheels still have over 7invhes of backspacing. So similar to the welds if I'm not mistaken.

And yeah not the lightest. But still give you some more tire options. An are half the price of the welds. Just showing another option.

But if I had know the ccw were not going to fit. I would have spent the money and bought welds and like you said, keep my Brembo.

Originally Posted by SUX2BU

What offset is that? If I remember correctly the 4th gen TT2s were 44mm but those look like they stick out more than that. More like a 25mm or something. Them sticking out will probably help you not have to clearance your LCA on lowered cars like the Welds.



What happened with the CCW 16s?
Yeah, you can fit a ton of wheels with the V6 brakes. You can get a pair of 17x10 Welds for under a grand shipped and keep your Brembos. Also those TT2s are very heavy even for 17x11 wheels. They are 27 lbs compared to the 17x10 Welds that are 19 lbs, hell even my 18x11 F14s are 21.5 lbs. But that's cool that you tried them on.


At least not for the guy in the other lane!

[gm_joe]

OK, but now you have an effective gear ratio of 7.5:1. Zero to 60 in no time and a top speed of 65MPH.

[SUX2BU]

Originally Posted by gm_joe

OK, but now you have an effective gear ratio of 7.5:1. Zero to 60 in no time and a top speed of 65MPH.

Actually, if he kept that tire (which he wouldn't, he just wanted to see if they fit), he would have an effective gear ratio of 3.85 and have a top speed of about 138-155 in 4th gear (depending on his rev limiter).