Aftermarket wheels | Page 10 | BMW i4 Forum
BMW i4 Forum banner
181 - 200 of 723 Posts
I did but I went with the similar but more "held together"-spoked GMP Italia Swan wheels. They are available in different appearances. You can check out how they look on the car earlier in this thread as I posted a picture of my car.
hmnn those are sweet. But their max weight is only 750kg? Then i’d rather go with the rials which have 810kg, just to be sure.
 
If I may ask, does anyone know the load rating (per wheel?) of the 18-inch wheels? I'm seeing 810kg listed for 19-inch and 20-inch seems to have a different figure. I'm looking at 18's and so wonder if anything changes, or should I just seek out 810kg load wheels? And I'm assuming the load relates to weight of the car as it bears upon the max torque strain placed on a single hub... where FWIW, I'm driving an eDrive 40 with standard brakes. (So many doggone things to configure a basic tire I kind of wish BMW just offered more and better choices!!!). Thanks for the help btw.
 
Love these wheels. They look fabulous! As a nube, I'm sure others know them exactly. I don't. Please share the ID, specs, etc. I think we all gain in knowing the options. Thanks!
 
FWIW, did a little research on the 225 vs 245 wheels in the same size. Again, as a nube I was just trying to figure why the EU version of the e40 comes with 18's in the 245 size (and better looking wheels IMHO) vs. the US version that runs 225's. Tirereview posts that 225's will be quieter, but 245's will have better traction all-the-time, but especially in wet or other conditions. I guess that says something about BMW corporate's view of the 2 different markets.
 
The 225/50 tire size was chosen for the US market to get the EPA range over 300.

When it comes to wheels+tires, rotational mass has the greatest effect on efficiency, so the US spec'd 18s have a much smaller tire.

After that it's friction, aka rolling resistance. So less grip due to smaller contact patch = greater range.
 
Hmmmm... I thought contact patch was the primary and rotational mass was secondary... but I know there was a thread on this with a lot of math I didn't take the time to understand... So perhaps I have it backwards!
 
@ssh I suppose anything is possible if you can clean page the design because there are a lot of moving parts to this stuff (pun obviously intended :p) but keeping with the comparison between 225/50/18 and 245/45/18 discussed above, and the constants of oem wheels and ed40 i.e. weight, the lighter tire will win.

Going on tire rack and choosing something that's oem and available in both sizes I see the Michelin PS 4S.
225/50 = 23 lbs and 26.9" diameter
245/45 = 25 lbs and 26.7"

Pretending the tires have the same distribution of mass, (obviously they don't, but it's not published) my calculator says the 225/50 has a rotational inertia of 1.218 kg⋅m^2 and the 245/45 has 1.304 That's not a huge difference, but it is more energy expended to rotate the wheels up to speed. Some people reading this will say "but spinning wheels store energy", and they're right, but recuperation is never 100%

As for friction/RR, I'm cheating a bit by using the same tire in that example, so I'll concede that it's possible some special sauce might negate that, but remain skeptical because counter-intuitively, the contact patch doesn’t change area with different tire sizes (due to the weight of the car remaining constant). The 225 has a narrower footprint, but it's longer than the 245.

Add to that, the (extremely simplified) formula for RR is the coefficient times vehicle weight, and [edit, fingers faster than brain] the difference between coefficients for various road tires have a zero after the decimal.

All that said, I had a few beers with friends after work, so maybe this analysis won't stand up to the cold light of tomorrow morning :coffee:
 
Nicely done, but I’m so ignorant on this I don’t know the answer! Thanks for outlining it so well!
 
Love these wheels. They look fabulous! As a nube, I'm sure others know them exactly. I don't. Please share the ID, specs, etc. I think we all gain in knowing the options. Thanks!
Is this the full staggered 826M setup or did you square it with 19x9.5?
They are 826M style replica. the OEM 826M mostly likely will not fill our cars based on my calculation. Too much offset and the width is 10'
since they are replica, there are various set size for the 826M style. I have the staggered setup at 20x 8.5 front and 20x9.5 rear and I got them from ebay.
 
someone might have already posted this option in this thread already as I didn't scan to see if they did or not in the previous 10 pages... but another 'look' you can have is for anyone who ordered the 19" aero wheels can 'simply' remove the triangular aero caps and reveal a very nice looking dark grey/black '5' star wheel... I ordered my e35 with these wheels and told my dealer to remove the aero caps before I pick up my car in about 1 month... I'll post photos for everyone if anyone is interested/curious... I also ordered wheel spacers so will install them as well to flush the wheels with the arches
 
The caps are screwed on the wheel. You have to remove the wheel to remove or install the aero caps and when they're removed, you see the holes from the screws.

There are already pictures in this forum somewhere.
Yep... but only a small hole close to the centre cap so doesn't look too bad IMO...
Image
 

Attachments

  • Helpful
Reactions: generic.user
FINALLY got my wheels mounted! ANOTHER huge thanks for the help to @Technic and @Techwhiz1 for helping me figure out the perfect fitment for these (20 x 9.0 et30 with 255/35/20 tires)! These are VFC Performance custom forged wheels that are very similar to HRE FF10s, but I tweaked them to make them better! 😁
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
 
Looks really good! what rims are those?
Oops! I guess I should've mentioned that! 😅They're VFC Performance custom forged wheels that are very similar to HRE FF10s, but I tweaked them to make them better! 😁
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdu
181 - 200 of 723 Posts