Why not to get 20" Rims!

A

aquazi

Elite
 Derby + N. London
Just seen this gem on eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2003-BMW-Z4-2-5I-BLACK-HEATED-LEATHER-20-ALLOYS-78K-/320655009220?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item4aa88725c4

Totally the wrong profile tyres..... The car actually looks lowered with the increased rolling diameter..... states 0-60 of the stock 2.5 of 6.8s.. with 265/30/20 rears would probably be more like 10sseconds :lol:
 
ha, the tyres are wrong. the front tyre looks non existent, and the rears look too big?
 
And it's a Cat C to boot. I'm all for modded cars but 19s are the limit on a Zed before it starts to look completely disproportionate. :thumbsdown:
 
The way I look at it, when the tire is thinner than the gap between the tire and wheel well, the rims are too big. We have performance cars, the tires should add to the Z4 appearance, not subtracted from it in my opinion.
 
Those rims must be at least 9" to fit a 265 tyre and the front tyres are certainly too small for the rims. 225 tyres should be on 8" rims. IMO that's dangerous and must be an MOT fail.
 
Half Colin said:
Those rims must be at least 9" to fit a 265 tyre and the front tyres are certainly too small for the rims. 225 tyres should be on 8" rims. IMO that's dangerous and must be an MOT fail.
Click to expand...

My rear tyres are 265/30/19 on a 9.5" rim... So that car has the same profile except mine are on a 19" rim :lol:

the car reminds me a one of those dragsters.. with massive fat profiled rear tyres!
 
BlueZ4 said:
The way I look at it, when the tire is thinner than the gap between the tire and wheel well, the rims are too big. We have performance cars, the tires should add to the Z4 appearance, not subtracted from it in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree... if you can see an arch gap then it's usually a mixture of 2 things... you haven't lowered your car enough and your wheels aren't big enough.

For the perfect look, the top edge of your tyre should be roughly the same level as your arch. I'm not into euro style slammed cars where you try to tuck the top of your rim in the arch, but there shouldn't be too much of a gap.

That picture of 20s on a zed is definately a bad pic and totally the wrong angle to be able to appreciate it and I'm sure it looks better in the metal, however it's probably not the nicest drive in the world and as pointed out, the tyre fitment could be better. I've ran 20s with rubber band tyres on a previous car and although it looked the mutz nutz it wasn't the best ride in the world.
 
I think the gap should be equal around the whole arch, I think the stock 18s are perfect. When you see cars on the street lower than BTCC cars, then something can't be right.

I mean - seriously? Why lower a car for street use? You can't take advantage of the benefits because the roads aren't flat and you're foiled at every speed bump. Lower a car enough, and it becomes a death trap on typical roads because you just don't have the travel necessary to avoid being thrown off into the nearest ditch. So much for better handling.
 
Well apart from the fact that you'd never want to drive a car like that on Welsh roads cos you'd probably crack the rim driving over a sheep turd, the actual difference isn't huge....a difference of only 1.2cms in sidewall height front to rear and 1.4cms or 1" in overall rolling diameter. You guys must have laser eyesight LOL :thumbsup:

Personally I think its a bit sad when form takes precedence over function in this way.....be happy with a set of rims and tyres thats comfortable and safe to drive on, not blingy! :roll:

EDIT: forgot to say, for anyone not familiar with such things, this is a useful calculator.
 
I'm surprised the owner of the car hasnt responded to all the replies, "He's a forum member"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom