E60, E61 Parts, Accessories and Mods Discussion about both stock and aftermarket parts for the E60. Accessories and modifications too!

Wheel weight effect on acceleration

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-06-2004, 04:56 PM
  #11  
Senior Members
Thread Starter
 
wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hormazd' date='Dec 6 2004, 05:46 PM
Wolverine:

I think your exercise has answered its own questions.? It looks to me like we have two issues here:
1) Wheel and tire weight.
2) Wheel Diameter.

The weight should make a very small difference,? probaly not noticeable at all.? 40lbs is nothing.? Like having a suitcase in the car.

Now the diameter... the extra inch is giving you an extra 3 inches in circumferance. I would think 3 inches on each revolution of the wheel would make a big difference. This would not only get you going faster,? but might also provide inaccurate speedometer readings.? Does this make sense?? I am not the engineer!

Hormazd
[snapback]65723[/snapback]
The diameters of the two setups are virtually identical. The OEM 18 inch is 25.579 in, and the BBS 19 inch is 25.496 inches, a difference of less than .3 percent. I'm using 245/35 19's vs 245/40 18's in front and 275/30 19's vs 275/35 18's in the rear. So gearing is virtually identical.

What I'm finding out is wheel/tire weight has two contributions to acceleration. First, you use HP to accellerate the rotational speed of the wheel. Imagine the car is on a lift, it takes a certain amount of HP to accelerate all four wheels at a given rate even though you're doing nothing to move the car. Then you also have the actual weight of the wheels, that you carry as if they were a suitcase just riding along with the car. The two combined make wheel weight pretty important in acceleration. If you ask the folks on the racing forums, the general consensus is that 1 lb weight saved on the wheels equals 3-5 lbs saved on the car.
Old 12-06-2004, 06:38 PM
  #12  
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Originally Posted by wolverine' date='Dec 6 2004, 08:56 PM
The diameters of the two setups are virtually identical.? The OEM 18 inch is 25.579 in, and the BBS 19 inch is 25.496 inches, a difference of less than .3 percent.? I'm using 245/35 19's vs 245/40 18's in front and 275/30 19's vs 275/35 18's in the rear.? So gearing is virtually identical.
The heavier tires/rims will definitely slow down the car (even if the diameters are virtually identical) due to the greater rotational inertia. Acceleration is the rate of change of momentum (momentum is the product of mass and velocity) and the heavier tires/rims have a greater mass that needs to be rotationally accelerated. The slower acceleration is not caused solely by having a 40lb suitcase in the trunk because the rotational inertia of the extra 40lbs on the wheels/rims must be overcome to accelerate the car forward.

It is pretty simple to understand if you consider that a merry go round accelerates slower if you add extra weight to its outer edge.
Old 12-06-2004, 07:52 PM
  #13  
Contributors
 
sg530's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alabama, USA
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Rotational inertia is the issue where the two wheel/tires in question have different net mass and different weight distribution radially. The wheel/tire with all the mass in the center will accelerate and brake better than the same diameter wheel/tire with the same mass but placed on the outer radius. Now, add the difference in mass and the placement of that mass, the two setups can differ considerably. The change in rotation inertia goes as the 4th power of radius. That is why, in general, larger wheels place more mass to the outer radius and raise inertia considerably even if no overall mass was changed. This applies to brake rotors too. Bigger rotors may stop better but also require more horsepower to get them up to speed.
One can calculate the difference in rotational inertia but requires a map of the wheel/tire cross section to allow an integration of mass with radius. I haven't seen anyone do that except the designers with finite element algorithms.
I wonder who reads these messages to the end?
Old 12-06-2004, 11:35 PM
  #14  
Contributors
 
colejl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by sg530' date='Dec 7 2004, 04:52 AM
I wonder who reads these messages to the end?
I did

Can't wait to get rid of my runflats...
Old 12-07-2004, 07:24 AM
  #15  
Senior Members
Thread Starter
 
wolverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well, I actually did all the calculations, and I won't bore you with them. Of course, I used some simplifying assumptions - wheel weight distributed 2/3 on the rim, constant acceleration over a 1/4 mile, 1/4 mile of 13.8 at 103mph.

I used actual wheel and tire weights for the OEM runflats and my BBS setup. The BBS setup is 54 lbs lighter than the OEM. According to the calculations, this equates to a 140 lb weight reduction, or if you put it another way, about about a 14 horsepower increase. I'm suprised at how much it affects the performance.
Old 12-07-2004, 08:38 PM
  #16  
Contributors
 
sg530's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alabama, USA
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wonderful wolverine! Can you give a little more details on the calculations and assumptions - especially about the wheel structure? I won't be bored... promise!
Old 12-07-2004, 09:49 PM
  #17  
Members
 
wslam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Did you pay attention to gas mileage?
Old 12-08-2004, 09:01 PM
  #18  
Contributors
 
sg530's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alabama, USA
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wheel weight affects acceleration not gas mileage...unless you litteraly always are accelerating and braking and never cruising.
Old 12-08-2004, 09:58 PM
  #19  
Contributors
 
realtyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Central Massachusetts
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My Ride: Now Driving a Freakin' Prius! Was... 2004 545i | SMG | White/Black | Sport | NAV | Logic 7 | PDC | Fold-down Seats | Adaptive Headlights | Cold Weather Pkg | Clear-again Bra | Mud Flaps | Bluetooth | Coat Hangar | Aux Input | All Weather Mats | 18"X8.5" BBS RK w/ Michelin Pilot Alpin's (winter) | New steering rack @ 1.2K & 17K miles| Software V.19.1 | B&B Exhaust (vrrrroooooommm!) <---Click.
Default

Originally Posted by sg530' date='Dec 9 2004, 01:01 AM
Wheel weight affects acceleration not gas mileage...unless you litteraly always are accelerating and braking and never cruising.
[snapback]66868[/snapback]
Do you think wslam really meant how much gas was in the car?
Old 12-10-2004, 08:39 AM
  #20  
Members
 
wslam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

sg350 got me right actually.
here in HK, yes you are constantly stopping and starting. cruising is a luxury i do not take for granted.


Quick Reply: Wheel weight effect on acceleration



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:57 AM.