Looks great. How is the ride? What size rims aer on both cars. Are mikes 17 and yours 18?
18" wheels (inc tyres) should not 'fill the front fenders up' any more or less than 15"s, 16"s or 17"s etc. If they do then your tyres are incorrect. The overall diameter of any wheels (inc tyres) should remain the same regardless of rim size or they will alter the vehicles gearing and possibly cause other problems such as rubbing. Visually, larger rims may appear to fill out your fenders but in reality only lowering your suspension will do that.Originally Posted by Denasti
![]()
1990 E34 535iA, 215,000kms (130,000 miles).
Dual Climate, Rear Headrests, Rollerblind, M-Tech Wheel,
Memory Seats, EAT Chip, T-Stars.
Looks great. How is the ride? What size rims aer on both cars. Are mikes 17 and yours 18?
Ted K
90 535 5-speed
Actually we both used the same springs and same 4mm pads. I thought mine looked lower too, but it's just because of the color I guess. Measuring the front and rear bumpers both cars are withing 1/8" of each other.Originally Posted by lowell
We did all four on each car. If you look closesly at his before and after you can see the back is down slightly also. As far as I know Vogtland makes two sets of springs for these cars, these and some called "audio" springs. They are supposed to be stiffer for people with lots of audio weight in their trunk.Originally Posted by mattyb
We both like it, but we both come from muscle car background and that's the look we are used to with a little rake.Originally Posted by infinity5
1988 M3 - Track rat
1989 325iC
1995 530iM
2000 323iT - UUC BBK, PSS9 Coilovers
2005 GMC HD Crew
I don't know if he does, I on the other hand am rubbing slightly when I pull in my driveway, other than that no issues.Originally Posted by Denasti
Hey, I live in Texas, I just don't drive on dirt roadsOriginally Posted by Denasti
![]()
1988 M3 - Track rat
1989 325iC
1995 530iM
2000 323iT - UUC BBK, PSS9 Coilovers
2005 GMC HD Crew
Mike's is running 17x8.5" all the way around with 225/45 on the front and 245/45 on the rear.Originally Posted by Ted K
I have 18x8.5" all the way around with 245/40's on all 4 corners.
I got to hit some corners tonight on my way home from hockey. Car is so much more fun to drive now. I hear everyone on here talking about how great these cars handle, but mine always felt big and heavy since I'm used to my e30. Now it feels much nicer around the corners and even running 90-100 down the highway feels smoother.
1988 M3 - Track rat
1989 325iC
1995 530iM
2000 323iT - UUC BBK, PSS9 Coilovers
2005 GMC HD Crew
i read in the instruction manual that these cars have 50/50 weight dist.
![]()
Black/Black '90 535IM..... '65 Cal look vw bug
brodee, do you know how much your wheels/tires weigh? or wheels and tires seperately?...did you notice any negative effects after installing your upgraded rims/tires?
www.KaRealtySF.com
Build Date: 05-1995 /Engine: m50tu /Automatic Transmission /ABS /NO ASC /Open Differential /EAT Chip
No clue, I'll try to weigh one the next time I have them off. I know they are heavy. Didn't really notice much difference in performance or handling, but I don't pus this car that hard either.Originally Posted by liquidtiger720
On my e30 I switched from 16" t-star replicas that were HEAVY to my 15" Kosei K1's for track and can feel a huge difference in acceleration and response, but it is a lighter car and has the m20 in it.
1988 M3 - Track rat
1989 325iC
1995 530iM
2000 323iT - UUC BBK, PSS9 Coilovers
2005 GMC HD Crew
I guess it's time for me to chime in. I had register first.
My car does have a rake to it. I don't mind it though. Gives it that drag look that Thad (Brodee) mentioned. I think that part of the rake is from the staggered tire size (245 rear and 225 front). These tires have different heights and I'm not sure yet how substantial.
As you can see from my before and after pics, the gap in the front was HUGE. The rear was not that bad. When I first put these rims/tires on I could not stand how they looked with the vehicle at stock height.
The tires rubbed on the driver's side front and driver's side rear going over dips in the road and making right hand turns. At first I though that me being about 230lbs was causing this.
However my driver's side front fender has some damage and it puts the lip of it closer to the tire. So I took a rubber mallet and gently massaged it. I also found a rubber clip on the inside of the fender (maybe to hold the inner fender well?) which had tire marks on it. So I removed it and the inner fender is still secure. On the rear I used a vise grip to carefully fold the edges of the fender lip (which look to have been rolled by the factoryin the top center area).
Now it rides and handles great without running. Going over a severe dip in the road at high speeds will cause a slight rub from the rear, but it did that before I put the springs on too. I also don't like the way the car feels going over parking lot speed bumps. This could be from worn out OEM 220K miles shocks.
The standardfactory basketweaves will be lighter than almost any aftermarket wheels unless you're spending big dollars to buy ultra light weight forged rims. So in reality most who fit aftermarket wheels are actually downgrading the performance of their E34's. Apart from the benefit of reduced sidewall roll of lower profile tyres on larger diameter rims, acceleration, braking and handling in general (especially over uneven surfaces) will be worsened by fitting wheels that weight more the the standard wheels. And most do weigh more... in many cases a LOT more!Originally Posted by brodee
So for most of us it's a classic case of fashion over function which I find somewhat ironic as we all marvel at the technical excellence of the E34 and then do our best to stuff it by worsening the original engineering!![]()
1990 E34 535iA, 215,000kms (130,000 miles).
Dual Climate, Rear Headrests, Rollerblind, M-Tech Wheel,
Memory Seats, EAT Chip, T-Stars.