Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I agree with my decision. After my header, downpipe and cams come in, I'll have put about $1500-2000 into making my car faster and handle better, so why would I spend $500-800 to make it slower and less responsive?

 

How about handling and aesthetics..........

 

I can outrun people all day long on 15" wheels with low profile tires just as well as my 17"ers...

Well the baby spares are about 15lbs a piece less than the stockers....any guesses on how this will effect my times??

 

I run 17x7.5, and 17x8.5 on the rears in my MR2 Turbo. Could you outrun me?

Certainly with the same exact HP you will out accelerate in a straight line someone with 16's or 17's. Again exact same hp...

 

HP doesn't mean ANYTHING....it has more to do with weight, gearing, power transfer to the ground and grip....HP is one of the least important things when racing is concerned.....

Ask the the pair of RSX Type S's with Hondata ecu's that I outran in my P5. Those are 230hp cars to my 130hp car....yet I pulled em by an easy .2s

 

Aesthetics, maybe, although most of the REALLY good looking rims aren't in the $500-800 range with tires added on.

Handling...well... as I said before, while a larger wheel might provide better grip, if that wheel is too heavy it's going to impact your suspensions ability to react to changes in the road surface. The reason Lambos and Ferrraris and the like use super high end alloys and stuff in their suspension isn't to justify their price, its to keep the weight down and allow the suspension to work quickly. The wheel's weight is as key to the suspension as it can get, because the suspension has to control that wheel's up and down movement.
I could go on about this forever, its simple physics, but I'm not looking for an argument or anything like that. I tend to get carried away, none of my friend's are really into cars, so this is the only place I get to vent my knowledge to. Oh well, that's these forums are for.

 

Matty, don't forget, running those in the rear will help a little in the 1/4 mile by reducing your rolling resistance, but not nearly as much as if you could stick a set of 15x8's in the front with a 245/50-15 that weighed in at a total of 21 lbs! Geez, that rim would probably have to have a negative weight, cuz I think that tire actually weighs like 23 or 24 lbs.! Remember, the extra weight only matters to the wheels that the motor must turn. (at least in the 1/4 mile)

 

Well, I figured dropping 30lbs of wheel weight (even the rears) would help out. I used to FIGHT for 30lbs when I was trying to lighten up my Taurus....

My mustang buddy Chris (dougs friend) said you could add skinnys to the front of a mustang and drop .1-.2s every time....no questions asked....I figured I'd give it a shot see how it worked out.

 

I weighed a stock wheel/tire of my 2000ES. 37 pounds. It will be interesing to see what the 16's weigh. I have got to believe 37 is heavy don't you think???

As far as "good looking" wheels in the 500-800 range its all according to taste. My racing hart M5's on my MR2 were in the range of 500 a piece but I bet you are talking total cost?

 

Yeah, I'm talking $500-800 total, not each. For $500 each, you better believe you can have some badass wheels and tires!

Also, 37 lbs. isn't too bad, although it seems as if the 15's are actually a little heavier than the factory 16's. If your new 16's are 20 lbs each, then with a tire I'm guessing you'll weigh in at about 40-44 lbs, depending on the size of the tire.

Matty, I'm sure you'll gain some from the swap, and .1-.2 sec sounds about right. The consensus is that 100 lbs. of weight lost will gain .1 in the 1/4, but I bet your 30 lbs of weight, plus the lost rolling resistance will help about the same. I was just saying that a 21 lb wheel and tire combo in the front with a WIDE tire would be incredible!

 

yeah, I'm hoping the addition of my MS LSD, Stage 2 cams, and respectfull 50hp shot ZEX should be very nice....I think it'll surprise a lot of people...wait until you see how/where I mount the nitrous!

 

All in all, larger wheels don't automatically mean "better cornering." Tread compound and pattern are ultimately more important than sheer size/aspect ratio. A long time ago (but in this galaxy...sorry) Car & Driver answered this by taking a GM sedan (a Celebrity I think, and yes, a dreadful car) and trying 3 different size/aspect ratio tire wheel combinations, all with the same make/model tire (probably Goodyears?). The stock 14" 70 series tires (remember those days?) were tested first on the skidpad and through a slalom, next were 60 series tires on 15" wheels, and finally 16"ers with monster 50 series meats. God, I'm really dating myself now. The first upgrade, to the 15"ers yeilded about a 5% improvement in both tests. The 16" package however gained nearly nothing over the 15's. Their conclusion was that there is a point of diminishing return out there in low-profile land. While cars are certainly better these days than an old FWD GM heap of that era, the same conclusions probably hold up. But don't 16's, or even 17's look sweet? You betcha!

 

You are correct, sir. Tread compound and pattern are very important as well. Did C & D mention any change in weight? That could have affected the slalom considerably, but probably not the skidpad. When I was talking about "larger" rims, I was mainly assuming that if stepped up in diameter, a slight increase in width would also be added. With our 16's being only 6" wide, there's a lot of potential to put more tire to the ground by going to a 7 or 7.5" wheel with a 215/40-17.