Style 68 wheels

[agent75 37]

I would like to get some style 68 wheels for my E46 . I think they're a good looking wheel. I was just wondering what the whole big deal is with stagger. What are the benefits. Do cars come with this as standard? Do the m sport ones not have stagger? Confused of Christchurch

[agent75 37]

I have a couple of sets I'm looking at and one has a small m badge set in to them near the centre. I can't see a stagger on either set. How common is this stagger? Is it fairly easy to see without measuring?

[qube 3568]

http://www.bmwstylewheels.com/bmw/68

the wheels are 7.5" front and 8.5" rear.

They are supposed to be staggered and you should run it this way.

The reason you see non staggered sets is usually because people buy two sets and steal the two pairs of 8.5's and on-sell the 7.5 fronts.

All of them have the little m sticker below the centre cap. the size difference is fairly easy to spot if you put them side by side there is a clear difference. Most noticeable give-away is different tyre sizes but dont trust this because you could technically put the same size tyre on a staggered set which might *hide* the obvious stagger.

normal tyre size for these wheels are: 225 45 17 front and 255 40 17 rear

also beware of fake wheels but I havent seen any fake style 68s yet..

[Olaf 3235]

8 hours ago, qube said:

http://www.bmwstylewheels.com/bmw/68

the wheels are 7.5" front and 8.5" rear.

normal tyre size for these wheels are: 225 45 17 front and 255 40 17 rear

also beware of fake wheels but I havent seen any fake style 68s yet..

Hang on Kyu, you kindly set me straight a while back; the rear size on e46 is 245/40R17.  255/40R17 is the e90 spec. 

Shane, if you use the search bicycle there's an excellent post from William @3pedals that covers "why staggered".   

A great alternative to Style 68 on an e46 is Style 194 from the e90, gives you 8 inches on the front, a little more offset at the rear profiding slightly wider track with the same tyre sizes, looks awesome and they're plentiful and inexpensive.  That's what I run, no issues with rubbing/fouling etc.

Hope that helps.

 

[qube 3568]

woops you are right. was a typo.

 

[BM WORLD 1258]

have a couple options , for those some with no tyres or worn tyres and a mint near new set with RE003 tyres

[zero 1160]

2 hours ago, BM WORLD said:

have a couple options , for those some with no tyres or worn tyres and a mint near new set with RE003 tyres

What size re003's, what tread left, and how much?

[BM WORLD 1258]

225/45 and 245/40  , just put them on the wifes wagon just before it got written off

cost me around $1000 for the tyres

[agent75 37]

Thank you for the great replies. Much appreciated. I will read that article. Im guessing to neutralise oversteer? There's a guy selling 2 sets here in chch $100 a wheel which seemed reasonable but one set turned out to be all 7.5" and the others were staggered but a little too ropey. I do like those 194s too! I think freight may kill it from Auckland but how much for ones with new tyres bm world?

[agent75 37]

22 hours ago, Olaf said:

Hang on Kyu, you kindly set me straight a while back; the rear size on e46 is 245/40R17.  255/40R17 is the e90 spec. 

Shane, if you use the search bicycle there's an excellent post from William @3pedals that covers "why staggered".   

A great alternative to Style 68 on an e46 is Style 194 from the e90, gives you 8 inches on the front, a little more offset at the rear profiding slightly wider track with the same tyre sizes, looks awesome and they're plentiful and inexpensive.  That's what I run, no issues with rubbing/fouling etc.

Hope that helps.

 

Thanks for the reply.

I've never heard of a search bicycle.. Is that what the forum search function is called?

I feel a bit daft but i can't find 3pedals post. What is the title of the topic? A bit of searching makes me think that if you have a car that came without staggered from factory (mine didn't) then sway bars and setup of car will be different. 

[Olaf 3235]

2 hours ago, agent75 said:

Thanks for the reply.

I've never heard of a search bicycle.. Is that what the forum search function is called?

well, "search engine"... often more of a search bicycle really 

I'll see what I can rustle up.

[Olaf 3235]

here's one I found earlier (the thread is worth a read)

specifically: 

On 7/15/2015 at 2:11 PM, 3pedals said:

The old square vs Staggered debate again.

It all depends on where you start from so lets start with what BMW designed.

The E36 (topic of discussion) as it rolls off the production line with a square set up over steers - the primary influence is the relationship between the front and rear roll centres ---- the rear is higher.

There are two common methods of modifying the over steering characteristic:

1 - Lower the REAR roll centre to reduce the rear axle oversteer - you can go all the way to understeer if you wish.

2 - Fit wider rear wheels to the rear axle.

Lowering roll centre reduces feel but generally increases lateral grip

Going to a staggered set up without lowering roll centres introduces understeer without reducing the feel at both ends.

If you want to go hard out around corners you can lower both the front and rear roll centres and fit staggered wheels and you will get more lateral grip and retain some chassis feel.

If you drive on the brakes more than the gas then a wide square set up with lower rear roll centre will be better for you.

If you drive on the gas and have a 'fluid' style then a staggered set up with optimised roll centres will suit you better.

I have run both square and staggered set ups on my E36 328 and my X5 , plus staggered on my E39, All three are lowered and raked chassis set ups I tend to drive on the gas so I have the opposite experience to Dave.

The square set up is more nervous, less predictable and the drive out of corners is inferior - The staggered set up allows me to get on the gas earlier and hard and carry MUCH MORE corner speed.

Tested on the above 3 vehicles , same roads, same tyre types over a total of some 400,000 km using a race calibrated bum-ometer and stop watch

Edited May 12, 2017 by Olaf
spelling

[Olaf 3235]

speaking of sway bars, when I went to the 17" 194's and 225/45 &Z 245/40's from 205/55R16, I spent a good deal of time cruising the Search Tricycle™ and learned up on antirollbars, reading much of what was written here, and discussing with @Herbmiester   

I found that the increased grip - and (to my mind) the increased leverage the road has on my suspension (through the wider tyres and shorter sidewalls) - brought roll to the fore.  I'd already renewed shocks, mounts, ARB bushes etc.  So I searched out part numbers for fatter ARBs in the online parts catalogues, and sourced some from Brent @BM WORLD and bought new bushes to suit.  Serious transformation for not much coin.  Something to consider, though as yours is a 330 you probably already have reasonably beefy ones and 17" already yeah?

Whatever you do, if you go staggered rims, don't put square tyres on.  It feels nasty in comparison.  HTH.

EDIT:  PS, @Herbmiester hopefully one day you get a chance to resample my e46, it's come a long way since your last drive.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Olaf

[Olaf 3235]

29 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

Well done Olaf , perhaps you could use the search quadricycle  to find my commentary on roll bars and spring rates etc. rather than having to reiterate the discussion.

 In short you need to consider Spring Rate, roll bar Stiffness and Rebound control  as 'one equation' - you should not make one change in isolation.

I've only got my 'P' plates on the search trike, William.  Someone with true Wizard status will need to produce the required evidence.

I wasn't in a position to revisit the entire equation; in my case, the bars+wheels+tyres delivered the required improvement.  If I had my time again, I'd have done Motorsport shocks and springs as well.

[agent75 37]

Thank you for the brilliant replies.  I found the square vs staggered discussion and have read with interest.  i will be heading to a track day in a month in the 330 and will still have the non staggered 8" style 47 wheels (vin says it should have 7" style 79 but they're deff not) with half worn 225/45 17  Dunlop SP Sport Maxx tyres.  At least i'll have a frame of reference for when I put some staggered wheels and new tyres on.

 

[agent75 37]

On 5/13/2017 at 8:19 AM, 3pedals said:

It may have been deleted by one of the moderators who doesn't like my Germanic directness and pithy sense of humour .

 Sway should be fine

You may like to exercise both of these traits when i tell you that I've taken my E30 to 4 track days on 16" x 7.5" rims with undersized 195 50 16 Archilles ATR sport tyres (seriously, Archillies (heal)? not a great name for a tyre).  I should mainly be mocked for the stretched tyres but they came with the wheels and I'm a gorse pockets.  they were actually quite good, certainly better than the new 195 65 14 Falken ZE912s I have on some basket weaves.  Getting some Potenza RE003 shortly for that 

[agent75 37]

On 5/13/2017 at 9:02 AM, Olaf said:

speaking of sway bars, when I went to the 17" 194's and 225/45 &Z 245/40's from 205/55R16, I spent a good deal of time cruising the Search Tricycle™ and learned up on antirollbars, reading much of what was written here, and discussing with @Herbmiester   

I found that the increased grip - and (to my mind) the increased leverage the road has on my suspension (through the wider tyres and shorter sidewalls) - brought roll to the fore.  I'd already renewed shocks, mounts, ARB bushes etc.  So I searched out part numbers for fatter ARBs in the online parts catalogues, and sourced some from Brent @BM WORLD and bought new bushes to suit.  Serious transformation for not much coin.  Something to consider, though as yours is a 330 you probably already have reasonably beefy ones and 17" already yeah?

Whatever you do, if you go staggered rims, don't put square tyres on.  It feels nasty in comparison.  HTH.

EDIT:  PS, @Herbmiester hopefully one day you get a chance to resample my e46, it's come a long way since your last drive.

Some good info.  My wheels are 17 x 8 but are not what the car came from factory with by the look of VIN decode.  My sway is 23mm front and 18mm rear with a quick measure.  

[zero 1160]

3 hours ago, agent75 said:

Some good info.  My wheels are 17 x 8 but are not what the car came from factory with by the look of VIN decode.  My sway is 23mm front and 18mm rear with a quick measure.  

Thats the second biggest stock front swaybar.

There was a 24mm only found on the 330i msport.

There was also a 26mm bar found on the m3 but it will not fit up without modification.

[Olaf 3235]

From when I did my research:

Factory parts:

Front:

23mm front bar (325i Touring standard)

23.5mm front bar (31356757168),

and a 24mm front bar (Bar: 31351094542, Bushing 31351094556). Cabrio MSport

Rear:

18mm is 33551095758 (325i Touring standard)

19mm is 33551094545 (Touring with Msport)

20mm is 33556751267 (Bushing 33551096669) - Cabrio

For comparison, Eibach set is 27mm/21mm, Racing Dynamics 27mm/24mm.  M3 runs 21mm or 21.5mm rear.

I ended up running 24/20 as I wanted more bar given I didn't want to change springs and already had new shocks.

Hope that helps.

Edited May 14, 2017 by Olaf
punctuation

[Olaf 3235]

Very interesting, William.  

This explanation marries well with my experience.  

Given I went from 23/18 to 24/20, the measley increase in the front of 9%, was enhanced by a nearly 20% increase in the rear bar stiffness... helping to make the rear more readily follow the front, diminishing the safe understeer bias from the factory.  

The result was a more comfortable and enjoyable ride/drive, without so much bar that the shocks/springs feel un-matched. Along with the bigger wheel/tyre package, I arrived at less lock required into corners at highway speed, and a more neutral drive overall.  A bit more drive out of corners too. 

A good experience for a relative neophyte on bar/spring changes!  And it all suits my driving style.

would you say that when someone goes out to more aggressive 27/24 bars for the e46, they'd need to be changing shocks and springs as well?

[Herbmiester 909]

With my E46, the 27/21 eibach setup reduces roll noticeably. Combined with the excellent Ohlins setup it makes for a very predictable car in the corners. I found having a square setup (RE003) did reduce understeer but to be fair I have never rated the Pirelli P zero Rosso's that came with the car, I suspect they may be past their best and in comparison with the RE003's they were vague and had less grip. The square setup really allowed you to just tuck the front in even without having power down to rotate; there was oversteer if you wanted it although the ASC caught it pretty quickly. In all fairness if I had better front tyres I suspect the smaller front (staggered setup) would work well and probably be neutral. With a manual I suspect you would need less front tyre as you would be more easily able to control the rear. That said ts and auto and by manually selecting you do get some rear control.