The updated 2008 535i is much more of a car for the money compared to 2007 530i. Here are few things that I noticed. The total difference in base price for both cars in 6-speed manual trim is only $1900. But when you look at the 6-speed auto versions the difference is even far less and shrinks to $625. The 535i gets the same wheels as the 550i thus an upgrade.
In case of the 2007 525i vs 528i the deal is even sweeter because the price difference is only $800 for the 6-speed manual and when you opt for a 6-speed paddle shifter auto the price difference becomes negative :rockon: -475. Not only that but the sport package comes with standard 18 inch upgraded wheels compared to the 17" wheels on the 2007 version. Also the new 6-speed is said to be more responsive and quicker with its shifts as well as capable of throttle blipping and the I-drive is the updated version found in the new X5. Also the new
For the 550i with sport package you get 19" M sport wheels and bodykit as well as standard power folding mirrors. A more aggressive newly calibrated sports suspenison settings and sportier exhaust with more mean growl.
Overall the 528i and 535i are offering a good deal more as you get more hp and torque in upgraded engines and better calibrated 6-speed automatice and bigger wheel and tire package as well as upgraded and more user friendly I-drive.
I think the best bargain is 528i with 6-speed auto and sports package as it is actually cheaper then the 525i. But if I was buying today I would go with 535i with 300hp/300Ib-ft of torque turbo monster and 6-speed paddle shifter auto and sports package. Only reason I would not go with 6-speed manual is because the wifey doesnot know how to drive a 6-speed manual.
2007 BMW 530i= 255hp, 226 Ib-ft,
2008 BMW 535i= 300hp, 300 Ib-ft, bigger and more aggressive wheels and better calibrated 6-speed auto :thumbsup: :ohyeah:
I don't know if this is a good move. It seems like they're encroaching on the 550i's territory. they need to give it a power boost.
For the longest time I wanted an E39 528i/530i. I don't care much at all for this one.
I'd buy a 528i over a 535i or 550i without a doubt.
Quote from: TBR on April 21, 2007, 02:52:15 PM
I'd buy a 528i over a 535i or 550i without a doubt.
The 525i was a dog, but the with the new engine, it breathes new value into that model. Definitely a good choice.
If you want a BMW, that is.
How does the new 535i compare in price to the M45, GS350, etc?
I agree, it's an insane engine, and I'd take it over the 550i and the 528i every time.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 21, 2007, 07:08:52 PM
How does the new 535i compare in price to the M45, GS350, etc?
No idea, but it'll probably cost nearly as much as an M45. BMW doesn't price based on what the competition chooses to charge, they price based on what they think they can sell their cars for. Market economics.
535i auto will be is starting very near the price of the M45. Which is not alarming as BMW, MB and Lexus cars have greater prestige factor and thus can demand greater prices. But the advantage the BMW 535i will have over the M45 and others in its class is a great 6-speed manual transmission. Which no other car maker offers :rockon:.
One other great advantage it has compared to V8 cars like M45, GS430, E550 or even in house 550i is its 3.0 liter twin turbo beast of an engine. As it will provide V8 like acceleration with V6 like fuel economy. :ohyeah:
Now, all they have to do is deliver the friggin 535xiT to the damn dealer, and I will be happy. Until then, I will be angry at BMW for taking so long.
Quote from: TBR on April 21, 2007, 02:52:15 PM
I'd buy a 528i over a 535i or 550i without a doubt.
Why?
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on April 22, 2007, 09:26:44 PM
Why?
A lot cheaper, and it's not like the thing's anemic. Because anything more (at least to him) in a 5er would be a waste.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on April 22, 2007, 09:26:44 PM
Why?
Better value I guess. Although personally i'd want a lot more power.
I'd go with the 528i too. These big cars just aren't as fun as equally fast smaller cars... IMO there's no point.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 23, 2007, 07:21:03 AM
I'd go with the 528i too. These big cars just aren't as fun as equally fast smaller cars... IMO there's no point.
Because sometimes fun comes in larger packages, especially when discussing luxury cars, where overall space is as much of a consideration. That's why I bought a 7 series instead of a 5 or 3 series. Not every car has to be tiny. And if you're not planning on tracking the car or driving balls out all the time, a larger car can be more enjoyable, as you're looking for a different kind of enjoyment.
I agree with you 100% as a E65 7 series owner. There is nothing like my 1BAD7 :mrcool:............... and the 325hp and 330 Ib-ft of monster torque from 4.4 liter V8 can spin those gumball size 295/25 at will:thumbsup:.
Quote from: ChrisV on April 23, 2007, 01:43:19 PM
Because sometimes fun comes in larger packages, especially when discussing luxury cars, where overall space is as much of a consideration. That's why I bought a 7 series instead of a 5 or 3 series. Not every car has to be tiny. And if you're not planning on tracking the car or driving balls out all the time, a larger car can be more enjoyable, as you're looking for a different kind of enjoyment.
Well today when I went to the dealership to pick my 745i from the service I was going thru the brochure for 2008 BMW 5 series and at the end they had the accelerations numbers written for each model series 5.
So here it goes......according to BMW's conservative numbers the BMW 535i does 0-60mph in 5.6 sec. :praise:
Now that is seriously fast as BMW numbers posted by automotive mags are usually faster by couple of sec. atleast. So I think the new 535i times might actually be arround 5.3 sec. to 5.4 sec range :thumbsup:
The conservative times of 550i were listed at 5.4 sec by BMW but as we know Road and Track back in july of 2006 found a 550i to rip 0-60mph in 5.0 sec. & 0-100mph in 12.1 sec. with quarter mile times in M3 like 13.5 sec. @ 105mph. So I dont think that the 550i is any danger from the 535i as it will still be bit faster in both to 60mph as well as 1/4th mile. Just to compare times with Infiniti M45 sport the same Road and Track clocked M45 sport at 0-60mph in 5.3 sec & 0-100mph in 13.3 sec. with quarter mile times of 13.8 sec. @ 101.4 mph.
This brings us to the lightest weight among this group 528i which rips 0-60mph in very decent 6.5 sec. according to conservative BMW numbers. So when tested it might actually get down to 6.3 sec. Which is very good :ohyeah:
Overall all 3 versions have gotten a lot more quicker with these upgrades :rockon:.
Oh and to distance the V8 version BMW is said to be working on a new V8 biturbo beast making 410 hp and 400 Ib-ft of torque that will be introduced with the all new BMW 7 series and then will migrate down to 5 series. Pretty soon we might be looking at non M V8 5 series breaking into 4 sec. range.? :partyon:
Wow, that is some pretty nutty stuff. Infiniti really needs a 5.0L V8
The 550i is definitely in danger there. Two tenths of a difference to 60? Anyone who reads that is going to think buying the V8 is a waste of money! It's just like the old A6. Why would anyone buy the 4.2 when the 2.7T was faster, even with the automatic. I've heard that the turbo motor is rather smooth thanks to the small turbos, so there won't even be a noticeable difference in smoothness. I wouldn't touch the 550i with the 535i available.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8712.msg428786#msg428786 date=1177509515
The 550i is definitely in danger there.? Two tenths of a difference to 60?? Anyone who reads that is going to think buying the V8 is a waste of money!? It's just like the old A6.? Why would anyone buy the 4.2 when the 2.7T was faster, even with the automatic.? I've heard that the turbo motor is rather smooth thanks to the small turbos, so there won't even be a noticeable difference in smoothness.? I wouldn't touch the 550i with the 535i available.
I'd be willing to bet that as speeds increase the 550i acceleration advantage increases as well.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 25, 2007, 08:18:28 AM
I'd be willing to bet that as speeds increase the 550i acceleration advantage increases as well.
Do you mean the 535i? Because I'd agree with that, since the turbos will be making full boost in 3rd gear, and since it's 2WD, you don't get that power bleed you see with AWD cars (since it seems that most turbocharged cars are AWD). Were it supercharged, I'd say that the 550i would run away with it in higher gears, but I think long range acceleration will even out here, with the 535i closing the gap.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8712.msg428822#msg428822 date=1177511675
Do you mean the 535i?? Because I'd agree with that, since the turbos will be making full boost in 3rd gear, and since it's 2WD, you don't get that power bleed you see with AWD cars (since it seems that most turbocharged cars are AWD).? Were it supercharged, I'd say that the 550i would run away with it in higher gears, but I think long range acceleration will even out here, with the 535i closing the gap.?
No I meant the 550i. As speeds increase weight has less of an effect and outright hp tends to show through.
Example: (I know this is apples to oranges but whatever) 1. A SRT-4 and a 350Z are very close from 0-60 but from 60 on a 350Z will consistantly pull away from the SRT-4. 2. An Elise will smoke alot of cars from 0-60 but it loses its edge at higher speeds.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 24, 2007, 07:57:07 PM
So here it goes......according to BMW's conservative numbers the BMW 535i does 0-60mph in 5.6 sec. :praise:
Now that is seriously fast as BMW numbers posted by automotive mags are usually faster by couple of sec. atleast. So I think the new 535i times might actually be arround 5.3 sec. to 5.4 sec range :thumbsup:
The conservative times of 550i were listed at 5.4 sec by BMW but as we know Road and Track back in july of 2006 found a 550i to rip 0-60mph in 5.0 sec. & 0-100mph in 12.1 sec. with quarter mile times in M3 like 13.5 sec. @ 105mph. So I dont think that the 550i is any danger from the 535i as it will still be bit faster in both to 60mph as well as 1/4th mile. Just to compare times with Infiniti M45 sport the same Road and Track clocked M45 sport at 0-60mph in 5.3 sec & 0-100mph in 13.3 sec. with quarter mile times of 13.8 sec. @ 101.4 mph.
This brings us to the lightest weight among this group 528i which rips 0-60mph in very decent 6.5 sec. according to conservative BMW numbers. So when tested it might actually get down to 6.3 sec. Which is very good :ohyeah:
This was
needed, the 525i was slow, and the 530i was slow for the money.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 25, 2007, 08:38:23 AM
No I meant the 550i. As speeds increase weight has less of an effect and outright hp tends to show through.
Example: (I know this is apples to oranges? but whatever) 1. A SRT-4 and a 350Z are very close from 0-60 but from 60 on a 350Z will consistantly pull away from the SRT-4. 2. An Elise will smoke alot of cars from 0-60 but it loses its edge at higher speeds.
I would think aerodynamics would have more to do with that than torque added from turbocharging.
Quote from: the Teuton on April 25, 2007, 01:53:36 PM
I would think aerodynamics would have more to do with that than torque added from turbocharging.
Aerodynamics does have an effect but it still holds true that weight has less of an effect as speeds climb. ANother example is a 350Z and a S2000. From 0-60 is very close maybe the S2000 has the edge but as speeds climb the 350Z normally pulls away.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 25, 2007, 04:19:00 PM
Aerodynamics does have an effect but it still holds true that weight has less of an effect as speeds climb. ANother example is a 350Z and a S2000. From 0-60 is very close maybe the S2000 has the edge but as speeds climb the 350Z normally pulls away.
The S2000 has 8 horsepower. Of course the Z is going to pull away.
E60 needs new skin worthy of this drivetrain.
there was a 550i with the Msport bodykit at teh New York autoshow... it looked pretty badass and I though at the time I couldn't see a reason to pay the extra 20 or so grand for an M5 (who really needs that extra 100hp?)
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8712.msg429266#msg429266 date=1177541604
The S2000 has 8 horsepower.? Of course the Z is going to pull away.
and weighs 400lbs less.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 24, 2007, 07:22:50 PM
I agree with you 100% as a E65 7 series owner. There is nothing like my 1BAD7 :mrcool:............... and the 325hp and 330 Ib-ft of monster torque from 4.4 liter V8 can spin those gumball size 295/25 at will:thumbsup:.
I dont think the E-65 comes with 295's.
Quote from: Submariner on April 26, 2007, 10:38:26 AM
I dont think the E-65 comes with 295's.
Nor do I think they'd have a 25 height sidewall.
Someone didn't get the memo about sig sizes... :nono:
Quote from: Raza on April 26, 2007, 10:54:02 AM
Nor do I think they'd have a 25 height sidewall.
Someone didn't get the memo about sig sizes... :nono:
Indeed.
And yes, mother, I just noticed the blip. I'll change it, which is a shame, because that XJ Portfolio is really a glorious looking automobile.
Still too high, brother.
Just crop it down.
You are correct it doesnot come in that size from the factory I had recently upgraded my wheels from 19" start spoke that came with 245/45 in front & 275/40 in rear to the 22" wheels wraped in gumball size 265/30 in front and 295/25 in the rear. :ohyeah:
Quote from: Submariner on April 26, 2007, 10:38:26 AM
I dont think the E-65 comes with 295's.
I have upgraded from stock 19" to 22" that is why I have 265/30 and 295/25.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8712.msg430140#msg430140 date=1177606442
Nor do I think they'd have a 25 height sidewall.
I would agree with you. I also think that as speeds rise the 550i will pull away because it is packing 360hp and 365 Ib-ft of torque vs 300hp and 300 Ib-ft of torque. The only advantage the 535i has is that it is lighter then the V8 packing 550i. Which might cause the 535i to stay close enough but overall I think 550i will start to pull away once speeds rise above 90mph.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 25, 2007, 08:18:28 AM
I'd be willing to bet that as speeds increase the 550i acceleration advantage increases as well.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 26, 2007, 10:06:05 PM
I have upgraded from stock 19" to 22" that is why I have 265/30 and 295/25.
The car must ride like shit on rims and rubber like that.
Quote from: Raza on April 26, 2007, 10:52:15 PM
The car must ride like shit on rims and rubber like that.
Thats what I was thinking.
Quote from: Submariner on April 27, 2007, 08:44:05 AM
Thats what I was thinking.
It was no softie on stock rubber (especially if you went with the 19s, it could get rather choppy...the 18s were firm, but fine). Also, I don't know where he lives, but if he lived where I do, he'd be paying more every year to replace shredded tires and bent rims than he would to insure the damn car.
I didn't even know they made 25 series rubber. That must be like a rubberband!
Quote from: Raza on April 27, 2007, 08:52:15 AM
It was no softie on stock rubber (especially if you went with the 19s, it could get rather choppy...the 18s were firm, but fine). Also, I don't know where he lives, but if he lived where I do, he'd be paying more every year to replace shredded tires and bent rims than he would to insure the damn car.
Meh, driving around in my pop's 760 gave one the impression that the car wasn't designed for livery service, yet almost every aspect of the car gave one the impression that it was designed for exactly that.
The new 535i are offering a lot more for the money?
ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US.
So Kayani gives all this talk on how BMW's are so great because of their performance and he slaps heavy 22" wheels on his 7er.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 11:14:29 AM
So Kayani gives all this talk on how BMW's are so great because of their performance and he slaps heavy rediculous looking 22" wheels on his 7er.
:praise:
Extra unsprung weight FTW!
Actually it rides almost as smooth as it does with 19" wheels. I was under the same impression as you before I had researched and talked with other BMW 7 series owners. But most all of them said that the difference was not much. Now since I have them I can tell you first hand that they were 100% correct.
The car feels more planted and grips like its on rails with those gumball size tire prints wraped arround 10 wide wheels in front and 11 inch wide in the back. This tire and wheel combo seems to be able to put the power down to the ground more efficiently in my opinion. Since they are 3 piece forged they are actually lighter then the 19" BMW stock wheels. Not to mention the car looks awesome with those light weight 3 piece custom forged wheels with 4" lip in front and 6" lip in rear. Every where I go I seem to get a lot of? positive attention and thumbs up.? :ohyeah:
Only down side in my opinion is the cost of these wheels/tires as the whole package runs close to $6K and with such expensive wheels you develop extreme pot hole phobia :cry:
Here is a pic that shows the type of wheels I have.
(http://www.allstartire.com/images/wheels/asanti/AF116_b.jpg)
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=8712.msg430845#msg430845 date=1177649535
The car must ride like shit on rims and rubber like that.
Ignorance is a bliss my friend and you are sure enjoying it. :rolleyes: :praise:
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 11:14:29 AM
So Kayani gives all this talk on how BMW's are so great because of their performance and he slaps heavy 22" wheels on his 7er.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 27, 2007, 04:34:26 PM
Ignorance is a bliss my friend and you are sure enjoying it. :rolleyes: :praise:
And don't you be so ignorant as to forget that each of your tires are quite likely a few pounds heavier.
Quote from: NACar on April 27, 2007, 04:41:53 PM
And don't you be so ignorant as to forget that each of your tires are quite likely a few pounds heavier.
and don't forget that although the wheels may be lighter the weight is farther out. To illustrate this take a ruler and hold it in the center. Tape a stack of quarters just outside your hand. Move the ruler around and then do the same thing but tape the stack of quarters at the end of the ruler. It will be more difficult to move and control the quarters. The same thing occurs when you put bigger wheels or brakes on your car.
Actually you are being extra ignorant by calling me ignorant without doing any research. I did plenty of research? before I bought the wheels/tires so before you decided to make a comment without even knowing the full details call yourself ignorant not me.? :confused:
The weight difference of tires is almost negligible because stock 245/45/19 front & 275/40/19 rear in Pirelli P Zero Rosso is 29 Ib for front &? 31 Ib for rear. Where as the new tires 265/30/22 front & 295/25/22 rear in Pirelli P Zero Nero is 30 Ib and 32 Ib. The difference is so small that it is negligible even by itself. However, like I said my new wheels are custom forged 3 piece vs one entire mold of cast alloy type construction for stock Bmw wheels. Without a doubt the custom 3 piece forged are lighter by a significant margin then stock BMW 19" wheels.
When I went for purchase I wanted to keep the weight more or less same as stock 19" BMW wheels/tires. The stock Bmw 19" are single cast alloy type wheels. Thus to reduce the weight of my new 22" wheels I went with custom 3 piece forged wheels. Which are the lightest and best quality wheels in market and cost nearly $6K.
The lighter 3 piece custom forged wheels compared to stock cast alloy single piece 19" BMW wheels are much lighter. For example, take a 19" X 9.5" cast alloy OEM BMW stock wheel which weighs nearly 29 Ibs. While a slightly larger 19" X 10"? 3 piece custom forged wheel weighs only 18 Ibs despite being slightly larger in size. So I hope you are getting the overall picture. My 22" wheels weigh arround 24-25 Ibs which are 4 to 5 Ib lighter per wheel then the 19" stock wheels and the difference between tires is only 1 Ib per tire.?So in reality I have shaved off nearly 3 to 4 Ibs per wheel. Which means that I have overall reduced the unsprung weight by 14 Ibs overall. ;)
So please before calling me ignornat look at your own self as you fit the bill more then I do :evildude:
Quote from: NACar on April 27, 2007, 04:41:53 PM
And don't you be so ignorant as to forget that each of your tires are quite likely a few pounds heavier.
The weight is not further out dude give me a break :rolleyes:
Because if that was the case then your wheels would be rubing against the fender of your car. The wheels are custom made to fit the car and are infact set much deeper by nearly 4" in front and 6" in back then the stock BMW cast alloy wheels. Which means that they carry more of their weight towards the inside not outside of the wheel so your entire example is flawed and makes no sense in this case. :nono: :lol:
Also the 22" custom 3 piece forged wheels are nearly 4-5 Ibs lighter then the smaller stock 19" BMW wheels all the while carrying most of that weight towards the inside of the car rather then hanging towards the outside. ;)
Even Formula One cars or Cart/Indy cars have wheels that are real wide but set real deep with their offset. Most race cars have this type of a setup.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 05:26:37 PM
and don't forget that although the wheels may be lighter the weight is farther out. To illustrate this take a ruler and hold it in the center. Tape a stack of quarters just outside your hand. Move the ruler around and then do the same thing but tape the stack of quarters at the end of the ruler. It will be more difficult to move and control the quarters. The same thing occurs when you put bigger wheels or brakes on your car.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 27, 2007, 05:39:00 PM
The weight is not further out dude give me a break :rolleyes:
Because if that was the case then your wheels would be rubing against the fender of your car. The wheels are custom made to fit the car and are infact set much deeper by nearly 4" in front and 6" in back then the stock BMW cast alloy wheels. Which means that they carry more of their weight towards the inside not outside of the wheel so your entire example is flawed and makes no sense in this case. :nono: :lol:
Also the 22" custom 3 piece forged wheels are nearly 4-5 Ibs lighter then the smaller stock 19" BMW wheels all the while carrying most of that weight towards the inside of the car rather then hanging towards the outside. ;)
Even Formula One cars or Cart/Indy cars have wheels that are real wide but set real deep with their offset. Most race cars have this type of a setup.
I wasn't talking about offsets. Think of it this way, is it harder to get a big wheel or small wheel rolling off the line(assuming they have a similar weight)? The smaller wheel is easy to get rolling. The weight is further away from the hub and it takes more to get the wheel moving even though the larger wheel may weigh less. It will also have an affect on your intial turn-in.
I've seen it happen where someone will buy an aftermarket big brake kit for their car. The aftermarket kit weighs less than the stock brakes but because the rotors are larger the caliper is farther away from the hub. They'll then have a greater drivetrain loss because it takes more effort to rotate the wheels.
Once again the 19" wheels vs 22" wheels and there distance from the hub is equal in this case and thus the example might work for after market brake kits but doesnot work for the wheels as they both are equal distance from the hub and the 22" have greater offset thus more of their mass is toward the inside and center of the car then the 19" which have less of an offset and carry more of their weight towards the outside of the car. :ohyeah:
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 06:07:50 PM
I wasn't talking about offsets. Think of it this way, is it harder to get a big wheel or small wheel rolling off the line(assuming they have a similar weight)? The smaller wheel is easy to get rolling. The weight is further away from the hub and it takes more to get the wheel moving even though the larger wheel may weigh less. It will also have an affect on your intial turn-in.
I've seen it happen where someone will buy an aftermarket big brake kit for their car. The aftermarket kit weighs less than the stock brakes but because the rotors are larger the caliper is farther away from the hub. They'll then have a greater drivetrain loss because it takes more effort to rotate the wheels.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 27, 2007, 06:15:10 PM
Once again the 19" wheels vs 22" wheels and there distance from the hub is equal in this case and thus the example might work for after market brake kits but doesnot work for the wheels as they both are equal distance from the hub and the 22" have greater offset thus more of their mass is toward the inside and center of the car then the 19" which have less of an offset and carry more of their weight towards the outside of the car. :ohyeah:
You're not understanding. Its a bigger wheel its 22" vs. 19" it has to be further from the hub. 1.5" on each side.
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 27, 2007, 05:35:58 PM
Actually you are being extra ignorant by calling me ignorant without doing any research. I did plenty of research before I bought the wheels/tires so before you decided to make a comment without even knowing the full details call yourself ignorant not me. :confused:
The weight difference of tires is almost negligible because stock 245/45/19 front & 275/40/19 rear in Pirelli P Zero Rosso is 29 Ib for front & 31 Ib for rear. Where as the new tires 265/30/22 front & 295/25/22 rear in Pirelli P Zero Nero is 30 Ib and 32 Ib. The difference is so small that it is negligible even by itself. However, like I said my new wheels are custom forged 3 piece vs one entire mold of cast alloy type construction for stock Bmw wheels. Without a doubt the custom 3 piece forged are lighter by a significant margin then stock BMW 19" wheels.
When I went for purchase I wanted to keep the weight more or less same as stock 19" BMW wheels/tires. The stock Bmw 19" are single cast alloy type wheels. Thus to reduce the weight of my new 22" wheels I went with custom 3 piece forged wheels. Which are the lightest and best quality wheels in market and cost nearly $6K.
The lighter 3 piece custom forged wheels compared to stock cast alloy single piece 19" BMW wheels are much lighter. For example, take a 19" X 9.5" cast alloy OEM BMW stock wheel which weighs nearly 29 Ibs. While a slightly larger 19" X 10" 3 piece custom forged wheel weighs only 18 Ibs despite being slightly larger in size. So I hope you are getting the overall picture. My 22" wheels weigh arround 24-25 Ibs which are 4 to 5 Ib lighter per wheel then the 19" stock wheels and the difference between tires is only 1 Ib per tire. So in reality I have shaved off nearly 3 to 4 Ibs per wheel. Which means that I have overall reduced the unsprung weight by 14 Ibs overall. ;)
So please before calling me ignornat look at your own self as you fit the bill more then I do :evildude:
Let's see here....
Is 30lbs > 29lbs? Yes... An extra 2lbs of tire weight in front (the effects of which, since it is further formthe center of rotation, is magnificed even greater than wheel weight)
Is 31lbs > 30lbs? Yes... Another extra 2lbs of tire weight in the rear.
Was I right, or was I right?
Now perhaps the lightness of the wheels negates the increase in tire weight, but don't call me ignorant!
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 06:18:30 PM
You're not understanding. Its a bigger wheel its 22" vs. 19" it has to be further from the hub. 1.5" on each side.
Your point is good, because the concentration of mass is farther from the center of rotation.
Also, his new tires are even a bit taller in overall diameter, spreading the mass even further out, while giving the brakes and drivetrain a tougher workout at the sametime.
Not that I'm trying to pick on you, Kayani, but I'm just making a point here. ;)
Once again you are not understanding the entire plus sizing concept. The overall diameter of wheel and tire stays appx. the same. :banghead: :confused:
As in this case the overall diameter of 19" wheels with 275/40 size rears is appx. 24.5 inches where as the 22" wheels have overall diameter of 25 inches. The difference is nearly negligible. So the overall distance from hub on each side is no where near 1.5" for the entire wheel/tire package.
So overall with greater offset and deeper setting and lighter weight the advantage is still with the newer set of 22" wheels vs the stock 19" wheels.
Quote from: JYODER240 on April 27, 2007, 06:18:30 PM
You're not understanding. Its a bigger wheel its 22" vs. 19" it has to be further from the hub. 1.5" on each side.
With all due respect you are the one who called me ignorant first without knowing the entire details so maybe you should take your own advice.
Oh and 2 Ibs in front and 2 Ibs in rear equal 4 Ibs all together for the bigger tires. Where as the bigger wheels are lighter at each corner by 4 Ibs in front and 5 Ibs in rear which is all together 18 Ibs. I am not trying to pick on you either but maybe your math is weak. ;)
So overall 18-4 = 14 Ibs advantage in favor of 22" setup vs 19" setup and your whole theory of mass being further away from hub makes no sense as the overall diameter is nearly the same as that is the basics of any plus sizing cocept. So please go research on the matter before you accuse me of being ignorant and going with heavier wheels and tires. Oh and it would be nicer if you would bring your own original argument rather then stealing his flawed argument in this specific case. :lol:
Bottom line is the 22" setup is overall lighter period and is set more deeper due to greater offset thus making the mass more centeralized. So your and his overall arguement are flawed and you are just pulling the skin of some hair to save face at this point. :partyon:
Quote from: NACar on April 27, 2007, 06:47:02 PM
Let's see here....
Is 30lbs > 29lbs? Yes...? ?An extra 2lbs of tire weight in front (the effects of which, since it is further formthe center of rotation, is magnificed even greater than wheel weight)
Is 31lbs > 30lbs? Yes... Another extra 2lbs of tire weight in the rear.
Was I right, or was I right?
Now perhaps the lightness of the wheels negates the increase in tire weight, but don't call me ignorant!
What I don't get, is why you feel the need to put 11 inch wide tires on your 325 HP luxury saloon.
With some sedans, I could see this to be a logical choice. For instance, my dad is looking to fit 10.5 inch wheels on his S-600. But that has a torque output of 590 lb-ft, and a BHP rating of 493. That car needs the wide rubber to put down those numbers. Your 7, on the other hand hardly needs wide tires. The stock setup is perfect.
Another reason to fit wide rear (and front) tires, is to improve lateral grip. Thats fine, but then again, if you were concerned about sports car grip, you wouldn't have bought a 4400+ pound executive sedan, nor would you have placed it on 22 inch rims.
Besides, we all know only people who can actually form a logical sentence in their native language should be concerned with something as monumental as "lateral grip" :ohyeah:
And I really hate to say it, but the difference between 18 inch wheels and 19 inch wheels are fairly significant. I have no idea how you can say that there is little difference between 19 inch and 22 inch wheels.
Childish insults will not be tolerated at CarSPIN. Those that insist on insulting other members will be banned temporarily or even permanently.
I agree. That's why I try and keep mine fairly sophisticated. :praise:
Just kidding naturally, but I'll make sure to refrain from any of it.
(http://forum.soldf.com/style_emoticons/default/salute.gif) Yes, sir!
I must learn to restrain myself.
Quote from: NACar on April 27, 2007, 08:58:08 PM
(http://forum.soldf.com/style_emoticons/default/salute.gif) Yes, sir!
I must learn to restrain myself.
Nick, if you don't behave yourself, Greg will 'cuff you at the next GTG..... :lol:
Quote from: dazzleman on April 27, 2007, 09:09:24 PM
Nick, if you don't behave yourself, Greg will 'cuff you at the next GTG..... :lol:
:mask:
Quote from: Kayani_1 on April 27, 2007, 06:59:23 PM
Once again you are not understanding the entire plus sizing concept. The overall diameter of wheel and tire stays appx. the same.? :banghead: :confused:
As in this case the overall diameter of 19" wheels with 275/40 size rears is appx. 24.5 inches where as the 22" wheels have overall diameter of 25 inches. The difference is nearly negligible. So the overall distance from hub on each side is no where near 1.5" for the entire wheel/tire package.
So overall with greater offset and deeper setting and lighter weight the advantage is still with the newer set of 22" wheels vs the stock 19" wheels.
Okay, I'll try again. I'll try to make it really simple this time. Wheels weigh more than tires. Because you're new wheels are 3" bigger that means that the edge of your 22" wheels are 1.5" further away from the hub on each side. Even if your new wheels are lighter than the stock 19's. There is more weight further out from the hub than there was before. It requires more to turn a wheel the further the weight gets away from the hub.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Palanca-ejemplo.jpg)
This should help illustrate what i'm trying to say. On one side there is the 100kg ball which represents your old wheels. On the other side is the 5kg ball which represents your new wheels.
Everyone has just got to be a hater these days :huh:.....
I know from cycling and the weight weenies that are always vocal about keeping their bikes light, that rotational weight is three times greater than static weight. The greatest benefit you'll see on a bicycle related to performance is lightweight wheels. Why would this be different on a car?
I'm going to help out JYO here because you guys are ENTIRELY missing the point.
Quote from: Catman on April 28, 2007, 05:56:42 AM
I know from cycling and the weight weenies that are always vocal about keeping their bikes light, that rotational weight is three times greater than static weight. The greatest benefit you'll see on a bicycle related to performance is lightweight wheels. Why would this be different on a car?
It isn't different. The fact that EVEN THOUGH the rim is lighter, SINCE the weight is FARTHER away from the hub, it takes more rotational force to get it moving and keep it moving (And also to slow down - you're braking distances will increase). If you want to think in bike terms, if you had a SUPER heavy hub, with a SUPER light rim, it would rotate extremely easy. Now if you inversed it and took a SUPER light hub, and a SUPER heavy rim (but the same weight as the other combo!), it would be SIGNIFICANTLY harder to start it in motion - and stop it. Overall weight is important, AS WELL AS location of weight. This is why my co-worker who races his Porsche uses 3-piece 15 or 16" racing wheels, but uses a larger 17" street wheel for non-track. So his racing wheels are much lighter AND the weight is more towards the center.
Because your rims are roughly the same weight, it's why your ride hasn't been affected, but if you watch your acceleration and braking times they will be slower.
Now to add to this, since you are getting wider contact patch (wider tires), you are also losing drivetrain power to that, another negative. Sure the grip is up, lateral grip will be up, but gas mileage and highway power will be down.
In closing, what is being talked about here is DISTANCE of mass from the CENTER of rotation outwards towards the rubber. Not left or right - no offsets or deep dish is even being discussed here.
Distance from the lugnuts, to the ground. Not lugnuts to the outside of the rim.
p.s. you also mentioned Indy cars and the tires they use. Notice they don't use 22" rims with 1" sidewalls (which you are arguing FOR), they use a much smaller rim, with a taller rubber. You are right about the left/right placement of weight within a rim, but no one is even talking about that.
I will say this on the matter. My stock Wheels were about 18lbs, and around 32lbs with rubber. I went With OEM wheels as an Upgrade. The weight jumped up to 26lbs, and around 45-50lbs with tires. Acceleration suffered at around .3 or more. It is a big deal.
Quote from: ArchBishop on May 03, 2007, 07:33:36 PM
I will say this on the matter. My stock Wheels were about 18lbs, and around 32lbs with rubber. I went With OEM wheels as an Upgrade. The weight jumped up to 26lbs, and around 45-50lbs with tires. Acceleration suffered at around .3 or more. It is a big deal.
It wouldn't bother me as long as it looked good. :rockon:
The concept of torque seems to be misunderstood, that is all we're talking about here. Torque=FR (where F is force parallel to the radius r). The weight applies more torque the further away from the wheel it is, so wheels with a larger diameter provide more torque worth of resistence (I am sure that is not the book explanation, but it will do).
Quote from: TBR on May 04, 2007, 08:01:40 PM
The concept of torque seems to be misunderstood, that is all we're talking about here. Torque=FR (where F is force parallel to the radius r). The weight applies more torque the further away from the wheel it is, so wheels with a larger diameter provide more torque worth of resistence (I am sure that is not the book explanation, but it will do).
I think the term you're looking for is 'rotational inertia', which is the rotational equivalent of mass... two wheels can weigh the same, but like you said, the one with more material closer to the edge will take more energy to accelerate.
Kayani's just trying to justify blowing so much money on his rimz, so he's going to disagree with all of you guys disagreeing with him.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on May 04, 2007, 09:20:14 PM
I think the term you're looking for is 'rotational inertia', which is the rotational equivalent of mass... two wheels can weigh the same, but like you said, the one with more material closer to the edge will take more energy to accelerate.
Yes, I suppose I was sort of looking at that backwards. The equation, in case anyone cares, for angular momentium is L=MVR (taking SAT2 Physics test tomorrow, really should be studying).
Let me explain this to you Joyrider at this point you are only hating and nothing more. First you came and made the following Silly childish comment for no apparent reason ?So Kayani gives all this talk on how BMW's are so great because of their performance and he slaps heavy 22" wheels on his 7er.?
The funny thing is you made this ignorant comment without even knowing the full details about my wheels. You did not know what type of wheels I had. So When I disproved your childish comment about ?heavy wheels?. Instead of realizing your mistake and saying ?my bad I did not know that your wheels were overall lighter? then your old ones you in your jealous hate jumped band wagon to static mass which was never even your original argument. Your original childish comment was that my wheels are heavy?. At least before making childish insults learn a bit more about other peoples wheels.
Second thing is even though you refuse to admit that you have been disproved already and jumped bandwagon to different aspect of the argument. Let us take a look at your entire theory that is based on the idea of greater diameter from the hub. Your whole arguement has very little proof and has too many assumptions as I will show you below.
1. Please before talking about wheels & tires go learn few things about plus sizing concept.
2. Because the overall diameter for wheels + tires which you pretend has increase by 1.5? has not increased by that margin. So you are wrong once again. I explained to you that overall diameter of 19? wheels + tires combo = 24.5? vs. 22? wheels + Tire combo = 25?. Which is almost negligble and is no where near your false 1.5" inch. Like I said earlier I don?t think you understand the concept of plus sizing and keep pretending that only wheels matter and not the tires. In plus sizing the overall diameter for the entire package of wheel + tire stay the same from the hub. Thus the difference is no where near you?re over exaggerated and false 1.5? inches from the hub that you keep basing your entire argument over. A car does not ride on wheels alone pal and instead it rides on wheels + tires. So you don?t just calculate the diameter of wheel and call it the entire equation. Once again it proves that your whole theory is flawed as it only accounts for the wheel and doesnot consider the tires. The diameter of the wheel increase but the diameter of the tire decrease to compensate for that difference. It is the basics of plus sizing concept. Which you are bent on ignoring in your false assumptions.
3. Third those pics that you keep posting are based on the fact that the smaller mass is placed a lot further away then larger mass. In the case of 22? lighter wheels vs. heavier 19? wheels you have no clue or solid proof of how the overall weight is distributed on these wheels vs the stock 19? wheels. For all you know the 19? wheels might be carrying more bulk of their weight toward the farthest outside from the hub compared to the 22? wheels. Thus, in all actuality causing the 19? wheels to have greater mass away from the hub. So there you go another big flaw in your weak theory that is based on no proof and bunch of false assumptions. What you fail to realize is that 22? lighter wheel/tire package can potentially have less rotational mass then the heavier 19? wheel/tire package based on there specific weight dist %. As the overall diameter is appx. the same for both 19? wheel + tire combo and 22? wheel + tire combo. Once again all this goes to show that you have an agenda of hating and nothing else.
4. If your theory was so flawless why don?t you make a bet with me and put some heavier but smaller 14 inch rims/tires on your 350z instead of your lighter 17? wheels/tires. Then we will take both cars to the track and prove you wrong for once and for all.? Because man o man you would be truly reducing the rotational mass by a huge margin with your tiny heavy 14 inch wheels vs the lighter but larger 17? wheels. LOL?give me a break man your theory is full of false assumptions in which you are basing things on very little actual proof. By the way if you are so confident in your theory why don?t you replace your 17? inch larger lighter wheels for heavier but smaller 14 inch wheels + tires. LOL?..man now that would be seriously funny.
5. Overall the benefits of this upgrade out weigh the negatives which you don?t want to admit. The general rule of thumb is that for removing every 1 Ib. of unsprung mass from wheel/tire package. It is almost equivalent to removing about 10 Ibs. of mass from the car itself. Thus, figure this that four 22? wheels/tire that saved appx. 14 Ibs of unsprung weight would be equal to removing 140 Ibs pounds from the car itself. So again overall benefit is far greater both in braking, acceleration, and lateral grip.
6. Last but not least the lower profile tires reduce tire wall flex and increase directional stability and steering feel. Also with the wider/bigger/ lighter overall wheels & tires combo the overall lateral acceleration gets enhanced, braking ability increases, acceleration at launch enhances thanks to increased grip and lack of tire spin when DSC is fully disengaged.
7. The point is plain and simple that at this point you have drank plenty of haterade my friend and for no apparent reason are venting your hate. Why don?t you go substitute it for some Gatorade and be a man and admit that you were wrong in making silly comment without any prior knowledge that my wheels are heavy or not. I know that you will come back repeating the same song instead of admitting your error and show your immaturity. But what is new.
That is where you are seriously mistaken I have no need to justify anything to you or anyone else. It is my car and my money. I will spend it as I care. I dont need yours or any one elses approval for that matter. :nono:
I think that was an uncalled for and childish comment by you Raghavan.
I disagree with the opinion of few that believe for some reason that the heavier smaller wheels are still better then larger and lighter wheels :confused:.? Specialy without any proof of how weight dist% of both set of wheels is in comparison to one another.
Oh and I would love to see those guys that truly believe this arguement to go swap their lighter larger 16" or 17" wheels and tires for more heavier yet smaller 14" wheels & tires. After that go to track and see who is right and who is wrong.? :partyon:
I know the benefits and disadvantages of my wheels. While haters will be jealous I know that I not only love the looks of my wheels but I also like how they have enhanced my braking, lateral acceleration and grip as well as my launch characteristics thanks to wider contact patch and greater grip. Also the steering feel is more accurate and sharper and thanks to less tire wall flex of ultra low profile tires the directional stability is enhanced. Last but not least it has allowed me to effectively shave the equal of appx. 140 Ibs off of my cars weight. All that unsprung weight is off and every bit helps.
The negative once again is that they are very expensive and I have developed a great deal of pothole phobia thanks to super low profile of the tires. I also believe that the turning circle is slightly greater and rolling friction is a bit more. The good and bad is that the ride is nearly as smooth as it was with 19" wheels and you can often get carried away and easily start driving more care free in an area that might be full of potholes and end up bending your wheels.
Quote from: Raghavan on May 04, 2007, 09:31:54 PM
Kayani's just trying to justify blowing so much money on his rimz, so he's going to disagree with all of you guys disagreeing with him.
wow
(http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jc/images/95cherokee_spt.jpg)
What I dont get is why you feel the need to tell me that I should not put 11 wide wheels in rear. :huh:
I know your daddy's got a torque monster and you cant stop bragining about it. But that doesnot mean that only he has a right to upgrade his wheels. By the way I think he would benefit more from going with 11 inch wide wheels as 10.5 inch is only half an inch more width vs stock. That is assuming that he had 10" wide rears from the factory on it to begin with.
First 335 Ib-ft of torque and 325hp is nothing to sneez at. It is very healthy and with DSC completely off can easily spin the 19 X 10 rears with 275/40 aspect ratio tires. I could have gone with 10.5 inch wide wheels in rear and even thought about doing it. But the fact of the matter is that the 10.5 inch wheels only came with 5" lip in rear and I wanted 6" wide lip. Which made me go even more with the 11 wide wheels. I love the fact that I did that as they look far more aggressive and sexy. Also the 11 inch width allows me to go with much bigger contact patch. I plan to get the inside of the fender trimmed a bit by a good shop this summer. So that in future when I buy new set of tires I can go with upgrade to 305-315 range tires vs 295.
Also for your comment about 4400 Ib 745i and what is the point of making it corner better makes no sense to me. Why did your dad buy a 400 plus hp S600 with over congested roads of today and 70mph speed limit. Do you really need all that power to just reach 70 mph. Maybe you dont realize that people do things because they want to and because they like it that way. After all you upgrading your 7 er with few mods were not planing on going to break any speed records or were you. But you did it any way because you wanted to and thought you like how it drives now vs how it drove stock. ;)
If I wanted to I could have bought a sports car. But I wanted a fast and capable sporty luxury sedan and not a sports car to start with. As it allows me to have the best of both worlds. It is a very nice luxury sedan and it has great sporty feel. Oh and without a doubt BMW 7 series is the equal of sports car among its class. If you dont believe me go read a few reviews each review will echo the same thoughts that the steering feel, and handling as well as acceleration is excellent for the car of this size. This thing can nearly run the figure 8 track in dead heat with much smaller and lighter BMW 330i. It is no slacker when it comes to handling and sporty feel. Yes it weights 4400 Ib but it does an excellent job of hiding its weight on twisty roads.?
?
I hope that you got the answers to your questions.? ?
Quote from: Submariner on April 27, 2007, 08:14:02 PM
What I don't get, is why you feel the need to put 11 inch wide tires on your 325 HP luxury saloon.
With some sedans, I could see this to be a logical choice.? For instance, my dad is looking to fit 10.5 inch wheels on his S-600.? But that has a torque output of 590 lb-ft, and a BHP rating of 493.? That car needs the wide rubber to put down those numbers.? Your 7, on the other hand hardly needs wide tires.? The stock setup is perfect.
Another reason to fit wide rear (and front) tires, is to improve lateral grip.? Thats fine, but then again, if you were concerned about sports car grip, you wouldn't have bought a 4400+ pound executive sedan, nor would you have placed it on 22 inch rims.
Besides, we all know only people who can actually form a logical sentence in their native language should be concerned with something as monumental as "lateral grip"? :ohyeah:
And I really hate to say it, but the difference between 18 inch wheels and 19 inch wheels are fairly significant.? I have no idea how you can say that there is little difference between 19 inch and 22 inch wheels.
When/why did you change your name...when you don't even have a 7er in your sig?
I was not aware that I had to have a 7er pic in my sig. to change my name. Hmmm.....I must have missed the memo
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 05, 2007, 10:15:04 AM
When/why did you change your name...when you don't even have a 7er in your sig?
First off, this is amazing and I don't even know where to start. Kayani has missed the point so many times it seems almost intentional now. JYO's "wow" summed it up quite nicely, but I am going to beat the dead horse.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 05, 2007, 02:36:29 AM
1. Please before talking about wheels & tires go learn few things about plus sizing concept.
2. Because the overall diameter for wheels + tires which you pretend has increase by 1.5? has not increased by that margin. So you are wrong once again. I explained to you that overall diameter of 19? wheels + tires combo = 24.5? vs. 22? wheels + Tire combo = 25?. Which is almost negligble and is no where near your false 1.5" inch. Like I said earlier I don?t think you understand the concept of plus sizing and keep pretending that only wheels matter and not the tires. In plus sizing the overall diameter for the entire package of wheel + tire stay the same from the hub. Thus the difference is no where near you?re over exaggerated and false 1.5? inches from the hub that you keep basing your entire argument over. A car does not ride on wheels alone pal and instead it rides on wheels + tires. So you don?t just calculate the diameter of wheel and call it the entire equation. Once again it proves that your whole theory is flawed as it only accounts for the wheel and doesnot consider the tires. The diameter of the wheel increase but the diameter of the tire decrease to compensate for that difference. It is the basics of plus sizing concept. Which you are bent on ignoring in your false assumptions.
No one is arguing that you have the incorrect diameter tire. 1.5" comes from taking 22" - 19" = 3", take that and divide it by two for 1.5". He is saying more of the weight of your rim is 1.5" farther away from the center than before. We ALL understand that by getting a smaller sidewall tire it retains the same overall diameter/circumference.
Quote3. Third those pics that you keep posting are based on the fact that the smaller mass is placed a lot further away then larger mass. In the case of 22? lighter wheels vs. heavier 19? wheels you have no clue or solid proof of how the overall weight is distributed on these wheels vs the stock 19? wheels. For all you know the 19? wheels might be carrying more bulk of their weight toward the farthest outside from the hub compared to the 22? wheels. Thus, in all actuality causing the 19? wheels to have greater mass away from the hub. So there you go another big flaw in your weak theory that is based on no proof and bunch of false assumptions. What you fail to realize is that 22? lighter wheel/tire package can potentially have less rotational mass then the heavier 19? wheel/tire package based on there specific weight dist %. As the overall diameter is appx. the same for both 19? wheel + tire combo and 22? wheel + tire combo. Once again all this goes to show that you have an agenda of hating and nothing else.
Here is the situation, you need to realize that MOST of a rims METAL and WEIGHT are near the outer edge of the rim. That is fact, and just because you paid more for them doesn't mean they can change the laws of physics. Just look at a picture of a rim, all the metal is on the outside where the tire gets mounted to.
For comparison, let's take a look at the picture that you posted of your rims:
(http://www.allstartire.com/images/wheels/asanti/AF116_b.jpg)
WHERE DOES IT LOOK LIKE MOST OF THE METAL IS? ROFL how are you even arguing that the weight "could" be near the center of rotation? Amazing.
Quote4. If your theory was so flawless why don?t you make a bet with me and put some heavier but smaller 14 inch rims/tires on your 350z instead of your lighter 17? wheels/tires. Then we will take both cars to the track and prove you wrong for once and for all. Because man o man you would be truly reducing the rotational mass by a huge margin with your tiny heavy 14 inch wheels vs the lighter but larger 17? wheels. LOL?give me a break man your theory is full of false assumptions in which you are basing things on very little actual proof. By the way if you are so confident in your theory why don?t you replace your 17? inch larger lighter wheels for heavier but smaller 14 inch wheels + tires. LOL?..man now that would be seriously funny.
First a few things flawed with this.
A) he couldn't put 14's on because I wager they wouldn't clear his brakes.
B) I
already gave you examples of how indy cars and my coworker (races Porsches') use smaller diameter rims because they have less rotational inertia. I also will tell you my snow tires weigh the same as my summer tires, but are 16" instead of 17" and they accelerate faster on the highway.
But hey, maybe you have a bright future in indy car design because they must not have gotton the memo about using a larger wheel that weighs less. I'm sure they just missed it. They should spend more time on the BMW forums!
Quote5. Overall the benefits of this upgrade out weigh the negatives which you don?t want to admit. The general rule of thumb is that for removing every 1 Ib. of unsprung mass from wheel/tire package. It is almost equivalent to removing about 10 Ibs. of mass from the car itself. Thus, figure this that four 22? wheels/tire that saved appx. 14 Ibs of unsprung weight would be equal to removing 140 Ibs pounds from the car itself. So again overall benefit is far greater both in braking, acceleration, and lateral grip.
6. Last but not least the lower profile tires reduce tire wall flex and increase directional stability and steering feel. Also with the wider/bigger/ lighter overall wheels & tires combo the overall lateral acceleration gets enhanced, braking ability increases, acceleration at launch enhances thanks to increased grip and lack of tire spin when DSC is fully disengaged.
Hey if you are happy with how they are and the price you paid, that's great it's your car and you can do as you see fit. I'm not arguing there.
I just want you to realize you are giving up:
A) gas mileage
B) acceleration that isn't traction dependent (i.e. anything over 30-40, especially highway speeds)
C) braking distance that isn't traction dependent (i.e. stopping at highways speeds, but of course you will gain some traction at lower speeds which will help some, but MAY not improve because of higher rotational inertia wheels)
D) resistance to pot holes
E) ride quality (rims will be the same, but with lower profile sidewalls you will have less bump absorption in the rubber)
F) a LOT of money
You are gaining:
A) traction 0-30
B) a different look
C) a slightly better skidpad #
Thanks, hope you can understand this (this is all based off of physics (simple I might add), and nothing some guy on a BMW forum can change that, despite how much you want to believe him).
*note: Wherever "distance away from center" was used when referring to a rim, it means distance from lug nuts to ground, not lug nuts to the where offset is measured from.
Quote from: Champ on May 05, 2007, 11:17:27 AM
I am not arguing that the wheel diameter has not changed by 1.5 " maybe you just dont want to understand what I am telling you. The wheel diameter by itself means nothing in plus sizing. ROFL....you dont ride on just wheels. Mabybe you do but not the rest of people...LOL. The wheel + tires are together and not separate from one another thus the rotational mass is calculated by keeping the entire Wheel + tire in prospective not just wheel. Which I have explianed to you is only .5 of an inch. Now divide that by 2 and you would get even less. So stop trying to just calculate the overall diameter based on wheel alone. Once again learn the principal of plus sizing. You cant just calculate the rotation mass of the wheel alone and then base your entire claim on that. You have to take overall diameter when calculating the rotational mass. Dont pick and choose what you want buddy to suit your arguement. In which case the overall diameter has not changed by enough margin to have any negative effect. However, the rotational and unpsrung mass has reduced by nearly 14 Ibs overall which is quite significant in terms of wheel + tires.
First off, this is amazing and I don't even know where to start.? Kayani has missed the point so many times it seems almost intentional now.? JYO's "wow" summed it up quite nicely, but I am going to beat the dead horse.
No one is arguing that you have the incorrect diameter tire.? 1.5" comes from taking 22" - 19" = 3", take that and divide it by two for 1.5".? He is saying more of the weight of your rim is 1.5" farther away from the center than before.? We ALL understand that by getting a smaller sidewall tire it retains the same overall diameter/circumference.
Here is the situation, you need to realize that MOST of a rims METAL and WEIGHT are near the outer edge of the rim.? That is fact, and just because you paid more for them doesn't mean they can change the laws of physics.? Just look at a picture of a rim, all the metal is on the outside where the tire gets mounted to.
WHERE DOES IT LOOK LIKE MOST OF THE METAL IS?? ROFL how are you even arguing that the weight "could" be near the center of rotation?? Amazing.
Once again I know where most of the metal is on 22" wheel. But maybe you dont realize that even far more metal that weighs a lot more is sitting on the edge of the 19" wheels vs the 22" wheels. Thus more mass in 19" is sitting towards the outside vs the 22". Just because you cant see that doesnot mean it is not true. The 19" weigh good 4-5 Ib more and carry most of that extra weight towards the outside. So weight dist% for 19" and 22" could be effectively the same as 19" are carrying more mass away from the hub. :rolleyes:
First a few things flawed with this.
Now few flawed things in your assumptions
A) he couldn't put 14's on because I wager they wouldn't clear his brakes.
A) Then maybe we can put 15" inch smaller more heavier one on his and run it against his lighter 17 inch. So we can disprove you and him for once and for all.
Wow no lie...huh. I know that lighter smaller wheels will be better then heavier and larger wheels and that is why indy cars use lightest possible wheels. So you are not telling me something brand new. Your arguement is that a 14 inch heavier yet smaller wheel would be better in overall performance then the 17" lighter yet larger wheel. I would take you up on that challange anyday. As 14-17 = 3 inch overall and so does 19-22 = 3 inch. So bring your buddies porsche and we will slap a heavier set of 14 inch wheels and run it on track and then swap them with 17 inch lighter wheels and see which track times are better. ;)
For your info you keep talking about your 16 inch vs 17 inch wheels. I can bet you that your 16 inch wheels weigh less then your 17 inch wheels or nearly the same and the overall size difference is only 1 inch. Swap that 17 for a more heavier 14 inch and I would see how your performance doesnot get effected. So just cause you believe that people on a BMW forum are ignorant doesnot make them so :rolleyes:?
B) I already gave you examples of how indy cars and my coworker (races Porsches') use smaller diameter rims because they have less rotational inertia.? I also will tell you my snow tires weigh the same as my summer tires, but are 16" instead of 17" and they accelerate faster on the highway.
More so then you as you will be swaping heavier and much smaller wheels destroying the lateral acceleration ability of their cars by a significant margin.
But hey, maybe you have a bright future in indy car design because they must not have gotton the memo about using a larger wheel that weighs less.? I'm sure they just missed it.? They should spend more time on the BMW forums!
Thank you very much as I am.
I also want you to realize I have gained:
1. Greater grip off the launch.
2. Greater lateral acceleration and grip
3. Increased braking
4. Greater directional stability by effectively reducing the side wall size.
5. The shorter side wall also allows for greater steering response and better overall steering feel
6. I have also reduced the unsprung mass by 14 Ibs. Which translates to nearly equal of reducing 140 Ibs effecitively from your car. This lack of mass is nothing to sneez at and helps in increased braking, handling, acceleration.
7. Last but not least the cars looks amazing and I get thumps up all the time.
8. Oh and I have driven back to back with both 22" vs 19" wheels and the gas mileage has not gotten effected by any significant margin and doesnot bother me.
Over all I am gaining far more then what you are pretending. But if it makes you any happy you can keep pretending that is not the case. ;)
Hey if you are happy with how they are and the price you paid, that's great it's your car and you can do as you see fit.? I'm not arguing there.
I just want you to realize you are giving up:
A) gas mileage
B) acceleration that isn't traction dependent (i.e. anything over 30-40, especially highway speeds)
C) braking distance that isn't traction dependent (i.e. stopping at highways speeds, but of course you will gain some traction at lower speeds which will help some, but MAY not improve because of higher rotational inertia wheels)
D) resistance to pot holes
E) ride quality (rims will be the same, but with lower profile sidewalls you will have less bump absorption in the rubber)
F) a LOT of money
You are gaining:
A) traction 0-30
B) a different look
C) a slightly better skidpad #
Thanks, hope you can understand this (this is all based off of physics (simple I might add), and nothing some guy on a BMW forum can change that, despite how much you want to believe him).
*note:? Wherever "distance away from center" was used when referring to a rim, it means distance from lug nuts to ground, not lug nuts to the where offset is measured from.
Most useless thread ever.
Reading comprehension is tough isn't it?
Yoder, don't even bother. He's not worth your time, and he's mentally challenged.
Just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't mean you have to insult them.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on May 05, 2007, 12:16:57 PM
Just because you don't agree with someone, doesn't mean you have to insult them.
Nick, have you even read his posts in this thread? He's just trying to troll BMW without backing up his statements. Hell, even IFFY's let out a few on this guy.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 05, 2007, 12:18:06 PM
Nick, have you even read his posts in this thread? He's just trying to troll BMW without backing up his statements. Hell, even IFFY's let out a few on this guy.
I don't agree with a lot of it, but I don't think calling someone mentally challenged is any better really :lol:. You don't have to open his threads, in fact if you know you're not going to enjoy reading it, might as well save you time right?
Nick while you are at it can you ask him how I am effectively trolling for BMW. When we are not even comparing BMW to any other car brands in nearly last one and a half page. :lol:
All we have been arguing is wheel sizes & weight and rotational inertia/mass and different other aspects of plus sizing concept. Has this guy even been reading any of this stuff or he just love attacking me without even reading the posts :confused: :lol:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 05, 2007, 12:18:06 PM
Nick, have you even read his posts in this thread? He's just trying to troll BMW without backing up his statements. Hell, even IFFY's let out a few on this guy.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on May 05, 2007, 12:24:43 PM
I don't agree with a lot of it, but I don't think calling someone mentally challenged is any better really :lol:. You don't have to open his threads, in fact if you know you're not going to enjoy reading it, might as well save you time right?
I accept the fact that calling him mentally challenged was a tad out of line. My apologies, Kayani.
(http://erroraccessdenied.com/files/images/hatethread.jpg)
My auto teacher uses the lightest, smallest wheels he can find on his race cars, usually about 14". In auto crosses, where acceleration is crucial, small wheels with the weight closest to the hub is the most important.
Quote from: Raghavan on May 05, 2007, 03:06:27 PM
My auto teacher uses the lightest, smallest wheels he can find on his race cars, usually about 14". In auto crosses, where acceleration is crucial, small wheels with the weight closest to the hub is the most important.
For autocrossing, I think my friend runs 14" or 15" as well.
Yes, my Prelude has 15"s for performance reasons only, it has nothing to do with money.
I'm on 18s. My car came with 17s but I put 18"s from either hte Charger or teh Magnum on it.
Quote from: NACar on May 05, 2007, 08:56:27 AM
(http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jc/images/95cherokee_spt.jpg)
Post of the day!
Man I wish I had seen this thread when it started, I would told Jordan and CHAMP that its not worth arguing with Kayani.
Kayani, please please please respond to this post, insult me, and write your reply above the post like Raza used to do at C/D.
I need a good laugh :lol:
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 05, 2007, 10:13:14 AM
What I dont get is why you feel the need to tell me that I should not put 11 wide wheels in rear. :huh:
I know your daddy's got a torque monster and you cant stop bragining about it. But that doesnot mean that only he has a right to upgrade his wheels. By the way I think he would benefit more from going with 11 inch wide wheels as 10.5 inch is only half an inch more width vs stock. That is assuming that he had 10" wide rears from the factory on it to begin with.
First 335 Ib-ft of torque and 325hp is nothing to sneez at. It is very healthy and with DSC completely off can easily spin the 19 X 10 rears with 275/40 aspect ratio tires. I could have gone with 10.5 inch wide wheels in rear and even thought about doing it. But the fact of the matter is that the 10.5 inch wheels only came with 5" lip in rear and I wanted 6" wide lip. Which made me go even more with the 11 wide wheels. I love the fact that I did that as they look far more aggressive and sexy. Also the 11 inch width allows me to go with much bigger contact patch. I plan to get the inside of the fender trimmed a bit by a good shop this summer. So that in future when I buy new set of tires I can go with upgrade to 305-315 range tires vs 295.
Also for your comment about 4400 Ib 745i and what is the point of making it corner better makes no sense to me. Why did your dad buy a 400 plus hp S600 with over congested roads of today and 70mph speed limit. Do you really need all that power to just reach 70 mph. Maybe you dont realize that people do things because they want to and because they like it that way. After all you upgrading your 7 er with few mods were not planing on going to break any speed records or were you. But you did it any way because you wanted to and thought you like how it drives now vs how it drove stock. ;)
If I wanted to I could have bought a sports car. But I wanted a fast and capable sporty luxury sedan and not a sports car to start with. As it allows me to have the best of both worlds. It is a very nice luxury sedan and it has great sporty feel. Oh and without a doubt BMW 7 series is the equal of sports car among its class. If you dont believe me go read a few reviews each review will echo the same thoughts that the steering feel, and handling as well as acceleration is excellent for the car of this size. This thing can nearly run the figure 8 track in dead heat with much smaller and lighter BMW 330i. It is no slacker when it comes to handling and sporty feel. Yes it weights 4400 Ib but it does an excellent job of hiding its weight on twisty roads.
I hope that you got the answers to your questions.
I hardly brag about it. No more than you gawk about your 7.
Ok this is my last shot even though I already gave up.
QuoteOnce again I know where most of the metal is on 22" wheel. But maybe you dont realize that even far more metal that weighs a lot more is sitting on the edge of the 19" wheels vs the 22" wheels. Thus more mass in 19" is sitting towards the outside vs the 22". Just because you cant see that doesnot mean it is not true. The 19" weigh good 4-5 Ib more and carry most of that extra weight towards the outside. So weight dist% for 19" and 22" could be effectively the same as 19" are carrying more mass away from the hub. rolleyes
You forgot to realize the whole physics thing, and now you just ventured into missing "simple math." Based on the picture of the rim you posted, almost the entirety of the metal is on the very outer edge. (Which is GREATER than 19" in the first place!!!!! They already CAN'T have less rotational inertia than the 19's)
Look at my bold part. Read it, think about it, then read it again, then think some more. the 19" CAN'T carry more mass away from the hub because it's only 19"!!! The majority of the mass on your 22" doesn't even start UNTIL 19"!!!!
And really instead of arguing about this, you should just go dyno the two sets of wheels. I suspect you would probably want to do that anyways. I know I would if I spent $6k on a set of tires, I would certainly spend the extra $50-$100 for a dyno session to see what kind of gains/losses were made. (you will have a power loss to the wheels).
Last: Why didn't you just buy a lighter 19" or 20"? Then you would have gotton a way bigger benefit, and most likely cheaper, more rim protection (lord I hope you live south of the snow belt), and better performance.
Don't waste your time Champ, you're making exactly the same argument I did.
Quote from: Submariner on May 06, 2007, 12:00:34 AM
I hardly brag about it. No more than you gawk about your 7.
QFT. :clap:
:wtf: is wrong with Kayani?!
Every time I read this thread's title I feel like going "Are they really?" :lol:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 07, 2007, 03:44:38 PM
QFT. :clap:
:wtf: is wrong with Kayani?!
:praise:
I sincerely get the impression his 4 year old kid sneaks onto his account and posts random gibberish.
Then again...
Quote from: 850CSi on May 07, 2007, 04:38:03 PM
Every time I read this thread's title I feel like going "Are they really?" :lol:
:P
Quote from: Raghavan on May 05, 2007, 03:06:27 PM
My auto teacher uses the lightest, smallest wheels he can find on his race cars, usually about 14". In auto crosses, where acceleration is crucial, small wheels with the weight closest to the hub is the most important.
Actually the accelleration is improved because the small wheels and tires give a shorter overall gear ratio. That's the secret.
And i can't believe you guys are arguing over wheel weights without factoring in the weight of the TIRES. A larger diameter wheel will also have a tire with a shorter sidewall, therefore reducing the weight of the tire. And that weight is normally at the outermost portion, offsetting the added weight of the wheel to some degree, especially when discussing wheels that are say one to three inches different in diameter.
Ever pickup a tall sidewall 15 or 16 inch tire, like a 70-75 series? then pick up a similar width 50-45 series version? With less sidewall, there is less weight. And the tires usually weigh as much as or more than the wheels themselves.
Factor that in before arguing about a fraction of a percent of mass of the rim out away from the hub.
Quote from: ChrisV on May 08, 2007, 07:46:41 AM
Actually the accelleration is improved because the small wheels and tires give a shorter overall gear ratio. That's the secret.
And i can't believe you guys are arguing over wheel weights without factoring in the weight of the TIRES. A larger diameter wheel will also have a tire with a shorter sidewall, therefore reducing the weight of the tire. And that weight is normally at the outermost portion, offsetting the added weight of the wheel to some degree, especially when discussing wheels that are say one to three inches different in diameter.
Ever pickup a tall sidewall 15 or 16 inch tire, like a 70-75 series? then pick up a similar width 50-45 series version? With less sidewall, there is less weight. And the tires usually weigh as much as or more than the wheels themselves.
Factor that in before arguing about a fraction of a percent of mass of the rim out away from the hub.
His new tires weigh more than the ones he had on from the factory.
how much more, and do you have proof that the sidewalls are taller? Or that the width offsets the reduction in sidewall height?
the point is when arguing wheel weights, you HAVE to factor in tires and the fact is, most larger diameter wheels end up with lighter tires when the overall diameter of the tire doesn't change much (like going from a 17 or 18 to a 20 inch wheel). So arguing about the added weight of the rim is moot.
Quote from: ChrisV on May 08, 2007, 07:56:23 AM
how much more, and do you have proof that the sidewalls are taller? Or that the width offsets the reduction in sidewall height?
the point is when arguing wheel weights, you HAVE to factor in tires and the fact is, most larger diameter wheels end up with lighter tires when the overall diameter of the tire doesn't change much (like going from a 17 or 18 to a 20 inch wheel). So arguing about the added weight of the rim is moot.
earlier in this thread he gave the weight differnences of the new tires. They're wider than the stock tires which is most likely where the extra weight comes from.
Everyone knows the smaller and lightest possible wheels will have advantage over the heavier and bigger wheels except in case of lateral acceleration.
But here we are not arguing that fact. We are arguing the fact that smaller but heaveir wheels are better or lighter & larger wheels are better. In which case me and Chris V believe that lighter but larger wheels will be better then heavier yet smaller wheels. ;)
Quote from: Raghavan on May 05, 2007, 03:06:27 PM
My auto teacher uses the lightest, smallest wheels he can find on his race cars, usually about 14". In auto crosses, where acceleration is crucial, small wheels with the weight closest to the hub is the most important.
You hardly brag about it is an under statement. I can clearly tell you are daddy's boy who loves to brag about his daddy. But then again at your age.......
Quote from: Submariner on May 06, 2007, 12:00:34 AM
I hardly brag about it.? No more than you gawk about your 7.
LOL.....I was in a hurry when I wrote the thread title. But as long as you got a good laugh it ok :rockon:
Quote from: 850CSi on May 07, 2007, 04:38:03 PM
Every time I read this thread's title I feel like going "Are they really?"? :lol:
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 08, 2007, 07:26:19 PM
You hardly brag about it is an under statement. I can clearly tell you are daddy's boy who loves to brag about his daddy. But then again at your age.......
1. I does know how speak Inglish. You do?
2. When has Sub bragged about his E38? He hardly even talks about it.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 08, 2007, 07:26:19 PM
You hardly brag about it is an under statement. I can clearly tell you are daddy's boy who loves to brag about his daddy. But then again at your age.......
What the hell is wrong with you? He doesn't even TALK about his car. Secondly, his dad helped him with his car but he has to pay him back. Zach's parents DEFINITELY know how to raise their kid. He gets to live in a nice house but he has to pay beastly amounts of rent. The guy works his ass off to live the life he does. What do you have, a travel company scam?
Quote from: Champ on May 06, 2007, 02:55:57 AM
Ok this is my last shot even though I already gave up.
You forgot to realize the whole physics thing, and now you just ventured into missing "simple math."? Based on the picture of the rim you posted, almost the entirety of the metal is on the very outer edge. (Which is GREATER than 19" in the first place!!!!! They already CAN'T have less rotational inertia than the 19's)
Once again no and no. I clearly understand what you are trying to say but you are not factoring in what I am trying to tell you. The weight of the 22" wheel is appx. 5 Ibs less overall then the heavier 19" wheels. The 19" wheels are carrying most of that extra 5 Ib towards the outside just by looking at the pic in same way you are looking at the pic of the 22". Second the overall diameter thanks to 22" tires has changed by a margin that is insiginficant compared to the 19" wheels/tires. Thus, the overall weight has not increased towards the outside and neither has the rotational mass. So please take your own advice and read and then read again and if you still dont understand go do some reasearch on plus size concepts. Also keep in mind that most plus sizing concepts tell you of benefits of going with larger wheels without even factoring in that they could be lighter then the smaller wheels.
Look at my bold part.? Read it, think about it, then read it again, then think some more.? the 19" CAN'T carry more mass away from the hub because it's only 19"!!!? The majority of the mass on your 22" doesn't even start UNTIL 19"!!!!
Wrong again. The outside loop in all actuality is lighter then the center portion made of spokes and bolts etc.. These spokes end well before they reach 22". As the lip is of fat lip technology that gives the apparance of the lip to be thick yet superlight weight. ;)..........once again I think I am talking over your head or you on purpose are not trying to understand the concept.
And really instead of arguing about this, you should just go dyno the two sets of wheels.? I suspect you would probably want to do that anyways.? I know I would if I spent $6k on a set of tires, I would certainly spend the extra $50-$100 for a dyno session to see what kind of gains/losses were made.? (you will have a power loss to the wheels).
First of I am not the one that is arguing it is you and .JYODER240 and few other sour and childish fellow members. Jyoder240 is the one making ignorant and rude and false claims without knowing anything about my wheels that they are HEAVY ASS Wheels compared to my stock 19" :rolleyes:.?
Seriously my question to you guys is do you have nothing better then to hate on others. Because you all could sure make a profession out of it :confused:.
Last:? Why didn't you just buy a lighter 19" or 20"?? Then you would have gotton a way bigger benefit, and most likely cheaper, more rim protection (lord I hope you live south of the snow belt), and better performance.
Now out of the all the comments so far this is the one that is most valid and I agree.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 08, 2007, 07:39:21 PM
What the hell is wrong with you? He doesn't even TALK about his car. Secondly, his dad helped him with his car but he has to pay him back. Zach's parents DEFINITELY know how to raise their kid. He gets to live in a nice house but he has to pay beastly amounts of rent. The guy works his ass off to live the life he does. What do you have, a travel company scam?
Don't argue with him, the four giagantic gyroscopes he put on his car must be generating some kind of force field that keeps any sort of logic from passing in or out.
:loopy:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 08, 2007, 07:39:21 PM
What the hell is wrong with you? He doesn't even TALK about his car. Secondly, his dad helped him with his car but he has to pay him back. Zach's parents DEFINITELY know how to raise their kid. He gets to live in a nice house but he has to pay beastly amounts of rent. The guy works his ass off to live the life he does. What do you have, a travel company scam?
Rabid Intrepid to the rescue. :rolleyes:
are alot of posts missing from this thread or is it just me
Thanks, Touareg.
And as for Kayani, This will be my last response to this thread (hopefully) unless you make another gross misstatement that just completely fabricates the truth (likely)
He is simply a blithering idiot who is not willing to accept any form of logic, other than his twisted own. He accuses me of bragging about his car, when he fits his car with massive wheels (to showoff, no doubt) then changes his name to "1 BAD 7". It sounds to me like someone has a bit of an ego problem, and needs to advertise their badass car.
Kayani, congratulations on being an idiot. You are representing the growing number of Americans who are stupid as sin, and can afford nice things. You should pat yourself on the back. :ohyeah:
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 08, 2007, 07:44:20 PM
Once again no and no. I clearly understand what you are trying to say but you are not factoring in what I am trying to tell you. The weight of the 22" wheel is appx. 5 Ibs less overall then the heavier 19" wheels. The 19" wheels are carrying most of that extra 5 Ib towards the outside just by looking at the pic in same way you are looking at the pic of the 22". Second the overall diameter thanks to 22" tires has changed by a margin that is insiginficant compared to the 19" wheels/tires. Thus, the overall weight has not increased towards the outside and neither has the rotational mass. So please take your own advice and read and then read again and if you still dont understand go do some reasearch on plus size concepts. Also keep in mind that most plus sizing concepts tell you of benefits of going with larger wheels without even factoring in that they could be lighter then the smaller wheels.
(http://imatt.us/mt/archives/orly.JPG)
(http://www.w3bdevil.com/forums/O_RLY-Ya-Rly.jpg)
--> (insert nonsensical remark about huge wheels being a performance advantage here) <--
Z0MG I FIGURED OUT WHY KAYANI IS RIGHT GUYZ ITS COS TEH UBER TWENTYTOOZ GIVE T3H CAR AN EXTRA 64.2 SO HE CAN GO F4ST3R!!!
(http://files.kavefish.com/pictures/collections/funny_cat_pictures/funny_cat_pictures_014.jpg)
^ :lol:
That last cat looks like an Asian person. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Last:? Why didn't you just buy a lighter 19" or 20"?? Then you would have gotton a way bigger benefit, and most likely cheaper, more rim protection (lord I hope you live south of the snow belt), and better performance.
Last night I was in a hurry so I never got a chance to finish answering the last part of your post.
Now out of the all the comments you made so far this is the one that is most valid and I agree with you. Like I said I agree that 19/20 forged would be the best choice. They would have the greatest benefit. But then again according to your theory the 20" would be carrying more mass to the outside and you already know I disagree with that theory. As it doesnot account for the overall diameter which has not changed enough to make a difference and I have already tried explaining that to you.
As for why I didnot go with the 19" and 20"? Then the answer to that question is because I wanted to go with deep dish wheels and the 19" seriously look like 18" mounted on the car. Out of all the sizes the best that looks is 22" deep dish on the 7 series. That is one of the main reasons I picked the 22" over 20".
Pics of horribly fugly 7?
Pics of that horribly fugly intrepid are already blinding me..... :cry:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 09, 2007, 03:23:44 PM
Pics of horribly fugly 7?
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:26:32 PM
Pics of that horribly fugly intrepid are already blinding me..... :cry:
I meant fugly because of the 22"s. I'm on 18"s and I think they're pretty big already.
Look at what you drive before you run to make fun of others seriously....... :confused:
Quote from: NACar on May 08, 2007, 07:44:45 PM
Don't argue with him, the four giagantic gyroscopes he put on his car must be generating some kind of force field that keeps any sort of logic from passing in or out.
:loopy:
No lie :lol:
Quote from: ArchBishop on May 08, 2007, 07:45:12 PM
Rabid Intrepid to the rescue.? :rolleyes:
Iam not accusing you of braging about my car :lol:
You seriously need help. Oh and while you are at it take some pills for PMS. As you are suffering from some serious PMS over my wheels. :evildude:
Quote from: Submariner on May 08, 2007, 08:21:10 PM
Thanks, Touareg.
And as for Kayani, This will be my last response to this thread (hopefully) unless you make another gross misstatement that just completely fabricates the truth (likely)
He is simply a blithering idiot who is not willing to accept any form of logic, other than his twisted own.? He accuses me of bragging about his car, when he fits his car with massive wheels (to showoff, no doubt) then changes his name to "1 BAD 7".? It sounds to me like someone has a bit of an ego problem, and needs to advertise their badass car.
Kayani, congratulations on being an idiot.? You are representing the growing number of Americans who are stupid as sin, and can afford nice things.? You should pat yourself on the back.? :ohyeah:
Seriously you have 18" on there. You should move to heavier 15" just like your friend jyorider240 suggested. That would make that thing look even more fugly :P
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 09, 2007, 03:27:03 PM
I meant fugly because of the 22"s. I'm on 18"s and I think they're pretty big already.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:35:40 PM
Seriously you have 18" on there. You should move to heavier 15" just like your friend jyorider240 suggested. That would make that thing look even more fugly :P
I'm sorry that as a 18-year old high school student I can't afford a $70k car. I'm sure your almighty self drove a Bugatti Veyron at my age, right?
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:28:47 PM
Look at what you drive before you run to make fun of others seriously....... :confused:
He has priorities too.
:rolleyes:
Seriously; we get the point. You can afford nice cars. What does that really mean though? You're an absolute jerk of a human being. I'd rather be a nice, intelligent person with a decent social circle and ride a bicycle than have a 745i and be like you.
I knew you would never get it. I guess you must be still trying to pass MCAT :lol:
Quote from: Danish on May 08, 2007, 10:48:07 PM
For someone that lives at home and is still in High School you sure have lots of guts to make fun of other people. But god forbid if someone says some thing about you......Mr. high schooler gets his panties all bunched up :huh:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 09, 2007, 03:37:37 PM
I'm sorry that as a 18-year old high school student I can't afford a $70k car. I'm sure your almighty self drove a Bugatti Veyron at my age, right?
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:28:47 PM
Look at what you drive before you run to make fun of others seriously....... :confused:
You know Kayani, in the great pinball game of life, your flippers are a bit further apart than most.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:40:14 PM
For someone that lives at home and is still in High School you sure have lots of guts to make fun of other people. But when god forbid if someone says some thing about you then your panties get all bunched up :huh:
I may be a douche at times, but I consider almost everybody here at CarSPIN my friends. We all take shots at each other, and it's considered a joke. You, however, take things way too far and get personal. Name ONE member that would fight against a ban on you right now?
Quote from: NACar on May 09, 2007, 03:40:37 PM
You know Kayani, in the great pinball game of life, your flippers are a bit further apart than most.
Oh...I would just say he was abused as a child. But your terminology works perfectly too.
First you are not owner of this website as your daddy doesnot own it. So you cant ban me even if you want to that is up to the moderators:ohyeah:
Second you are childish person who should be banned from this web site as you came here for no reason and attacked me unprovoked. Show me where I went in your thread and attacked you over your wheels or car. I only acted towards you the way you acted towards me.
I have better things to do then kiss butt of teenage people like yourself that live at home or drive junk but love to make fun of others. That is also unprovoked. Go do your home work son before you fail your classes. :rolleyes:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 09, 2007, 03:42:16 PM
I may be a douche at times, but I consider almost everybody here at CarSPIN my friends. Name ONE member that would fight against a ban on you right now?
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:46:49 PM
First you are not owner of this website as your daddy doesnot own it. So you cant ban me even if you want to that is up to the moderators:ohyeah:
Second you are childish person who should be banned from this web site as you came here for no reason and attacked me unprovoked. Show me where I went in your thread and attacked you over your wheels or car. I only acted towards you the way you acted towards me.
I have better things to do then kiss butt of teenage people like yourself that live at home or drive junk but love to make fun of others. That is also unprovoked. Go do your home work son before you fail your classes. :rolleyes:
This isn't your thread where your wheels or car should have been discussed. It's about the 535i. I didn't say I'm going to ban you, and even if I did have powers outside of Photography I doubt I would. This is simply due to the fact that every forum needs one tool like you, for humor purposes.
Have fun Kayani. ;)
Wow is that the best you could come up with. Huh.......must have worked the brain over time to come up with that :mask:
Quote from: NACar on May 09, 2007, 03:40:37 PM
You know Kayani, in the great pinball game of life, your flippers are a bit further apart than most.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on May 09, 2007, 03:50:13 PM
Wow is that the best you could come up with. Huh.......must have worked the brain over time to come up with that :mask:
Wow is that the best you could come up with. Huh.......must have worked the brain over time to come up with that :mask:
Only tool I see is you. Yes this was a thread that was created to discuss 535i and you and few other sour losers decided to throw insults unprovoked. But then again I can understand why you have stomach cramps over my wheels. Because you still live at home with daddy and drive a fugly intrepid. :ohyeah:
I am also glad that a rude high school kid like yourself is not a moderator of this website. :praise:
Quote from: TheIntrepid on May 09, 2007, 03:49:11 PM
This isn't your thread where your wheels or car should have been discussed. It's about the 535i. I didn't say I'm going to ban you, and even if I did have powers outside of Photography I doubt I would. This is simply due to the fact that every forum needs one tool like you, for humor purposes.
Have fun Kayani. ;)
Oh finaly came up with some thing original huh.....well done big brains ;)
Quote from: NACar on May 09, 2007, 03:51:50 PM
Wow is that the best you could come up with. Huh.......must have worked the brain over time to come up with that :mask:
Quote from: Danish on May 05, 2007, 11:04:34 PM
Man I wish I had seen this thread when it started, I would told Jordan and CHAMP that its not worth arguing with Kayani.
Kayani, please please please respond to this post, insult me, and write your reply above the post like Raza used to do at C/D.
I need a good laugh :lol:
I did that because that's where the cursor was placed!
At the beginning, anyway. After that, I just did it to annoy the people who complained about it.
For all of you who keep engaging 1 BAD 7 with the same BS and carrying on it's getting old. The guy has already been banned temporarily once, there's no need to kick him while he's down. I'm locking this thread, let's move on. :ohyeah: