Close

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 36 of 36
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    What people dont understand is that its not the weight of the rim, but the weight of the tire and ITS DIAMETER. A large tire with a lot of circumferential mass will take a lot more torque to rotate than an identical rim with a lighter tire.
    Isn't a combination of factors? Where the weight is, weight of the rim, tire, width, diameter, everything, it all plays in.

    Changing the diameter is like changing the final drive, we get it Click here to enlarge

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,608
    Rep Points
    3,236.6
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    33


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Isn't a combination of factors? Where the weight is, weight of the rim, tire, width, diameter, everything, it all plays in.

    Changing the diameter is like changing the final drive, we get it Click here to enlarge

    Tire width, diameter, everything, yes etc... Is all summed up into one thing, moment of inertia. At the end of the day, that is what will dictate the power rob caused by the wheels as a rotational mass.

    Weight distribution from center to extremity is what determines moment of inertia, so all those factors are summed up into one number which is proportional to the square of the distance the weight is from the center of rotation.
    Last edited by DBFIU; 12-24-2010 at 02:48 PM.
    Some people live long, meaningful lives.

    Other people eat shit and die.

    I'm not racist, I hate everybody equally; especially fat people.


    Click here to enlarge

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Va Beach, VA. USA
    Posts
    26
    Rep Points
    48.0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    As a general rule of thumb, for every pound of unsprung weight you lose, it equates roughly to 10lbs of total weight.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    2,266
    Rep Points
    936.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    pretty interesting vid
    Click here to enlarge

  5. #30
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,716
    Rep Points
    826.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Pretty big... tirerack lists tire weights which is cool.
    good to know
    JB4LIFE

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UC - San Diego
    Posts
    128
    Rep Points
    108.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    since torque (rotational force) is proportional to radius from center and inertia, not just the overall weight but the distribution of the weight from the center of the wheels will make a difference in wtq reading. the more mass towards the center of the wheel the less torque that will be robbed by the rotating assembly (wheel)

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UC - San Diego
    Posts
    128
    Rep Points
    108.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    The power increase has nothing to do with the tire diameter alone.

    When you change rear gear ratios on a car, does it make more power? No, it doesn't, the power output of the engine doesnt change nor does the power to the ground change, only the slope the power curve. Changing tire diameters is like changing rear gear ratio, assuming you neglect weight etc...

    The weight alone; also, does not attribute to the power loss. Physically, what is happening is the bigger wheel has more mass at the extremities of the rim. Meaning, the rim is heavier as you move from the center of the rim to the outside. This is called the moment of inertia.

    You can have two rims that weigh EXACTLY the same on a STATIC scale. And guess what, if one rim is a properly designed rim, it will be as light as possible towards the outside. If the poorly designed rim is heavy near the rim lip (or if you use a heavier tire), it will show you the exact same results as seen in this video because it has a greater moment of inertia despite the rims weighing the same.

    What people dont understand is that its not the weight of the rim, but the weight of the tire and ITS DIAMETER; the COMBINATION of weight distribution from center of rim to radius. A large heavy tire with a lot of circumferential mass will take a lot more torque to rotate than an identical relatively 'heavier' rim with a lighter tire.

    Weight alone is not the answer, diameter AND weight contribute to this phenomena.

    This is how rotating objects work, when something needs to be rotated it requires torque. Just like you can accelerate in a straight line, you can also accelerate in rotation, this is called angular acceleration.

    To get angular acceleration you need torque. The relationship between angular acceleration and torque is

    Angular acceleration = Torque / moment of inertia

    Doesnt that look familiar?

    Sort of like linear acceleration = Force / Mass

    Except for a rotating object we dont consider static mass, but moment of inertia, because static mass only doesnt tell you enough about how much rotational inertia an object has.

    I just needed to clarify some misinformation.
    oops beat me to it. high school physics for the motha frickin win Click here to enlarge

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    HG Motorsports
    Posts
    385
    Rep Points
    512.7
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I don't see where you guys are getting confused...

    The Z4M gained 20mm in rear tire size, so the weight was by far the bigger issue. In HPF's case, they added 90mm (they're 255 stock, right?) which also increased the height of the tire a lot more (in HPF's words 3/4" to 1") so in their case both weight and overall diameter were significantly changed.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,681
    Rep Points
    31,507.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Remonster Click here to enlarge
    I don't see where you guys are getting confused...

    The Z4M gained 20mm in rear tire size, so the weight was by far the bigger issue. In HPF's case, they added 90mm (they're 255 stock, right?) which also increased the height of the tire a lot more (in HPF's words 3/4" to 1") so in their case both weight and overall diameter were significantly changed.
    That's right, I do not think anyone is getting confused necessarily but just expounded on the various factors that contribute.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    22
    Rep Points
    26.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Nice! My 18" Advan wheels weigh about 18-19 lbs and my 265/35 rear tires weigh 25lbs according to tirerack. That's 43-44 lbs compared to stock wheels that weight 29 lbs and run flats that weigh like 30 lbs.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    PEI, Canada
    Posts
    1,123
    Rep Points
    1,665.0
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    17


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    The power increase has nothing to do with the tire diameter alone.

    When you change rear gear ratios on a car, does it make more power? No, it doesn't, the power output of the engine doesnt change nor does the power to the ground change, only the slope the power curve. Changing tire diameters is like changing rear gear ratio, assuming you neglect weight etc...

    The weight alone; also, does not attribute to the power loss. Physically, what is happening is the bigger wheel has more mass at the extremities of the rim. Meaning, the rim is heavier as you move from the center of the rim to the outside. This is called the moment of inertia.

    You can have two rims that weigh EXACTLY the same on a STATIC scale. And guess what, if one rim is a properly designed rim, it will be as light as possible towards the outside. If the poorly designed rim is heavy near the rim lip (or if you use a heavier tire), it will show you the exact same results as seen in this video because it has a greater moment of inertia despite the rims weighing the same.

    What people dont understand is that its not the weight of the rim, but the weight of the tire and ITS DIAMETER; the COMBINATION of weight distribution from center of rim to radius. A large heavy tire with a lot of circumferential mass will take a lot more torque to rotate than an identical relatively 'heavier' rim with a lighter tire.

    Weight alone is not the answer, diameter AND weight contribute to this phenomena.

    This is how rotating objects work, when something needs to be rotated it requires torque. Just like you can accelerate in a straight line, you can also accelerate in rotation, this is called angular acceleration.

    To get angular acceleration you need torque. The relationship between angular acceleration and torque is

    Angular acceleration = Torque / moment of inertia

    Doesnt that look familiar?

    Sort of like linear acceleration = Force / Mass

    Except for a rotating object we dont consider static mass, but moment of inertia, because static mass only doesnt tell you enough about how much rotational inertia an object has.

    I just needed to clarify some misinformation.
    Great post...I was just about to post something along those lines.

    The dyno doesn't care how tall a tire is......you could run a 26" tall tire, and a 33" tall tire, and as long as the rotational inertia was the same, the dyno would read the same....or almost. (Frictional losses from greater dyno roller speed with taller tires affects things a little bit too)

    One final factor is that taller tires mean less RPM of the rim, meaning less inertia to overcome to a certain road speed. (This is not RPM dependent, it is road speed dependent.)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •