italian_spak

why is every shop telling me that staggered wheels dont fit on the tl?

JPTL-S

I have seen several members on AZ that have done staggered setups on a 3G TL. The question then becomes: Why would you do a staggered setup on a FWD car?

JPTL-S

^^ Example POLOTL's ride:



Invincible569:

-sNaFu*

Yes, the question on my mind as well.

shayan

iTrader: (1)

I have staggered wheels that I will put on my car, and I think they will look pretty good

whatjones911

one word, UNDERSTEER

italian_spak

what do you mean by understeer? i would have staggered wheels cus i think they look great

mclarenf3387

When the rear wheels are wider than the fronts it causes understeer.

cleantl6289

looks mad cool though! lol

Kennedy

iTrader: (2)

But sacrificing the limited performance of your car to look mad cool isn't mad cool, and can actually be dangerous.

Do what you want, I laugh when I see it. I think of "slammed mini-truck", when I see this... as in impractical modifications to make your car look cool to accomodate the current car fad.

Element2001

stagggered setups are best for RWD cars...

Element2001

stagggered setups are great for RWD cars...

260 HP

iTrader: (3)

A lot of FWD and AWD (that's based on FWD architecture) cars have a great tendency to understeer in stock form. It's mostly due to the engine that sits forward of the front axis. The weight of the motor, because it's so much forward, acts like a pendulum and forces the car to go straight when you want to turn. This creates understeer.

Understeer will lessen if you have greater traction on the front end because the rear will "slide" earlier. To achieve that, stiffer swaybar and springs in the rear will help the rear end slide easier.

Putting wider tires (=more traction) on the back, you're adding traction on the wrong end of the car and will give it more dose of understeer.

Heh, hope it makes sense.

Don't get me wrong, understeer is easier to handle than oversteer. Just lift the gas and the front end will gain traction and the car should correct itself. When the car oversteers and you lift, the car might actually spin.

Too much understeer though will kill the fun in driving the car. When you're on the track, understeer also kills your time because you can't put too much power exiting a turn. You want something that's neutral with a touch towards understeer for safe yet quite fun street driving.

Weekendzs

Whats the set up on that white TL... My God is that a thing of fuken beauty...

FiveLiterCheater

IMO, it only looks good/makes sense on RWD cars

But those two TL's up there are badass so go with what YOU like

DFBRL8R

It's also a pain in the arse when it comes time to rotate the tires. Directional tires have to be dis-mounted from one side then mounted on the other (R to L) when you have off-set wheels. You can't just move the fronts to the rear and vice-versa. If you want to run the risk of having someone at the tire shop F'ing up your wheels every time you need them rotated, more power to ya

ptk681

[IMG][/IMG]



I have staggered offset on mine as well, and have received comments regarding why? I look at them and ask does the body kit really make your car more aerodynamic, or does the wing on the back of your car really help??? Some people like the appearance, I don't plan on taking my car to the track or driving irratically (sp) through Atlanta so, I do what I like, I like a fat wheel in the back so thats what I got.

kel

260 HP

iTrader: (3)

Staggered offset isn't the same as true staggered setup. If you have different offset front and rear with same width, it doesn't affect understeer/oversteer. It only makes a difference if the rear wheels/tires are wider then the fronts.

I agree staggered setup looks great for RWD cars. For FWD, the pain outweighs the gain.

But hey, it's your car and your money. Do what suits you best.

Kennedy

iTrader: (2)

Can't argue with that... interestign analogy, as I poke fun at TL guys for doing this, I'm installing a 240mm (fat) tire on the back of my V-Rod (motorcycle, for the uninformed). Why? cause it's cool lookin.

I won't do it on the the TL though becasue you can't rotate your tires... and that's no good for a daily driver.

italian_spak

thanks yall

bebophfc10

i have staggered 20's 20x8.5 front and 20x10 rear i think it looks real good.

RKA

That's not entirely true. While you're not changing the size of your contact patch, you are affecting the track width on one axle.

Stand with your feet next to one another and have someone give you a shove. Do that again, but this time with your feet shoulder width apart. Same idea.

260 HP

iTrader: (3)

Well, if you push the rear wheels out by that much (shoulder apart), yes, you are correct. But we are talking about 10-20 mm (less than 1") extra track from a car that has 62" track width. By adding 1", you only increase it by 1.6%.

If you stand up with your feet next to one another, the "track" is probably about 5". If your feet are shoulder apart, you just increase the "track" by 20". The difference is staggering, 400%.

If you bring track the car, you may or may not feel a difference with 1.6% difference in track width. On the street, you definitely won't feel it.

OTOH, if you increase a car's track by 400%, yeah, you'll feel (and see) huge difference.

BTW, if you stand up with your feet about 0.04" apart from each other and someone shoves you, you'll topple just as easily.

True, same idea, but not quite.

RKA

Your original post (to which I responded) explained the issue as if it's black and white. Now we're at a point where we both agree that it does have an impact, the question is how much. I'm reasonably confident a 1.6% difference in track width has a larger impact on the overall balance of the car...more than the number "1.6" might imply. How much, and how you would quantify it is beyond my understanding.

Take a car with 55/45% weight distribution and a car with 50/50% weight distr. I'll give blood money for that 5% shift in weight distribution.

avs007

They can be great for FWD cars too... You just have to do it properly. Look at the Pontiac Grand Prix GXP for example. It's FWD, and it has a 303hp V8. It also has a staggered setup. However, the front wheels are wider than the backs.

The fronts are 18x8, the backs are 18x7. The fronts are 255s, that backs are 225s. Most tests showed the car was actually balanced fairly well with this setup, as the wider fronts provided better traction, and lessened the tendency of the car to understeer.

I have zero idea why you'd want to put bigger backs than fronts on a front heavy FWD car tho... That's like putting 13" 6 piston brembos on the back brakes and leaving the front brakes as the stock non-brembos.

Pure Adrenaline

iTrader: (2)

Yep, I was also going to cite the GP GXP as an example. Front-biased staggered setup has been used in racing applications for a long time now, and it has been making its way into street cars lately, as well.


Body kit and spoiler do not directly affect the safety of the vehicle. However, everything in the car including the lives of you and the occupants are riding on those 4 little contact patches. If you don't understand driving dynamics, then it's best to leave it alone the way it is.

On any drivetrain layout, the front wheels provide steering and the rear wheels provide stability, regardless of which wheels are powering the vehicle forward. On a nose-heavy FWD car like the TL, where 2/3 of the weight of the vehicle is in the front, it is retarded to put wider tires in the rear. In dry traction, this will provide too much stability, meaning in emergency situations where you swerve to dodge an obstacle, you could very well just keep going forward. In wet/slippery traction, wider wheels are more prone to hydroplaning, ESPECIALLY if there's not much weight on it. 1/3 of the weight + wider tires = all of a sudden, not enough stability in relation to the front.

Body kits and spoilers are 90% of the time for aesthetic purposes. Millions of dollars of suspension R&D and tuning ultimately come down to those 4 little contact patches. Wheels and tires are 90% safety and driving dynamics and 10% looks.

To sum it up, rear-biased staggered setup on a TL will cause understeer in good traction and suddenly cause overtsteer in bad traction. It just doesn't make sense to sacrifice the safety of the car and the lives of the occupants just to look cool. Hell, going with 20" spinners is one thing, but when you start messing with front-to-rear balance, it's a whole another ball game. And if you don't know what you're doing, then you best leave it alone.

Now on a RWD, it makes sense, because that's where the power goes to. You can control the rear end with throttle input, so it gives you more control.

A good analogy would be demanding a dragster with skinnies up front to carve corners, or putting narrower tires in the rear on a 383 stroker LS1. It just makes no sense.

Slammed_JDM

i am currently on a staggerd set up 20 x 10 rear and 20 x 8.5 front and i wouldnt change thsi setup for nothing in the world. just lookin gat the car from the back and seeing those wide ass tires gets me off.

italian_spak

can the tire size be the same even if your rim is 1inch wider in the back than the front rim, or does it have to be bigger absolutely?

thx

avs007

Bigger, as in rolling size, or bigger as in width?

They can be the same width, but then it would look wierd. For example, a 225 tire on an 8" rim looks "stretched", but a 225 tire on a 7" rim looks normal.

If you are talking rolling size, then yes they can be the same, despite different widths. For example, 245/45-18 would be the same rolling size as a 275/40-18. This is the setup I have on my other car, except the fronts were 245/40-18 to maintain the original stagger on the car.

ALPHSTER

AXIS makes a staggered rim set up where the rim has the same size width on both the front and the rear. It looks like they offset the center somehow.

The wheels are designed for front wheel drive cars. Am i reading that wrong?


And does this still cause the same issues on a front wheel drive cars?



axis