Porsche Macan Forum banner

21 - 28 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Discussion Starter #21 (Edited)
Thanks FE.

Lower profile does not necessarily give better lateral grip, but often it signifies what an engineer is trying to achieve - as such it often does mean exactly that. (With a performance road car it can simply be aesthetics and packaging).
,
Large amounts of "aesthetics and packaging" on the road these days, making a comfortable ride quite a suspension design challenge

Also needs to be remembered that tyres form part of a whole suspension system (which even also include chassis rigidity). So what you are trying to achieve needs to be considered as exactly that. What works for one setup may be horrific on another.
Of course another approach for me might be to get in a grader.

Edit: A question FE, if you don't mind. It looks as though the minimum wheel diameter possible is 18", to clear the calipers, though I'm wondering if there's wheels with rims that are not as deep, meaning a 17" might be possible if the actual rim [might be using the wrong term here] was lower profile. Maybe steel would have better strength/thickness properties?
 

·
Registered
'18 Macan S, '10 997.2 S 6spd SPASM
Joined
·
25 Posts
I have run a square setup on our Macan for a bit — take-off from my sq5. 295 on 10.5” wheels front and rear. Looked cool, and handling was more balanced. At the expense of steering feel IMO.

To the op, I think the biggest limiting factor is going to be clearance re the front suspension uprights. Already tight with stock wheels/tires. As long as you keep front and rear rollout close to equal, you should be “ok” from the POV of damaging the car. Have fun


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
I have run a square setup on our Macan for a bit — take-off from my sq5. 295 on 10.5” wheels front and rear. Looked cool, and handling was more balanced. At the expense of steering feel IMO.

To the op, I think the biggest limiting factor is going to be clearance re the front suspension uprights. Already tight with stock wheels/tires. As long as you keep front and rear rollout close to equal, you should be “ok” from the POV of damaging the car. Have fun


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just to be clear on what you did ... was the front width increase entirely out/increased track or did you manage to get a little closer to the suspension uprights? It's good to know thaqt 295 will fit under the front guards :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Thanks FE.

,
Large amounts of "aesthetics and packaging" on the road these days, making a comfortable ride quite a suspension design challenge


Of course another approach for me might be to get in a grader.

Edit: A question FE, if you don't mind. It looks as though the minimum wheel diameter possible is 18", to clear the calipers, though I'm wondering if there's wheels with rims that are not as deep, meaning a 17" might be possible if the actual rim [might be using the wrong term here] was lower profile. Maybe steel would have better strength/thickness properties?
Steel is a good option if you are planning on rock hopping - any dings can often be emergency repaired with a sledgie! Aluminium will usually crack and not be repairable - unless you plan on carrying a MIG with you. You will just have to play or get engineering drawings so you can check fitment regardless of steel or aluminium. You will still have the issue of finding tyres that work - unless you are OK to risk not being roadworthy. Happy to help you once you have worked out what will fit wheel wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
Steel is a good option if you are planning on rock hopping - any dings can often be emergency repaired with a sledgie! Aluminium will usually crack and not be repairable - unless you plan on carrying a MIG with you. You will just have to play or get engineering drawings so you can check fitment regardless of steel or aluminium. You will still have the issue of finding tyres that work - unless you are OK to risk not being roadworthy. Happy to help you once you have worked out what will fit wheel wise.
The flip side of that is that steel are very heavy. I run Steelies on my 4WD mainly because they were the size I was after. A quality alloy wheel won’t give you any issues off-road.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Steel is a good option if you are planning on rock hopping - any dings can often be emergency repaired with a sledgie!
No rock hopping for me though the sledgie has a certain appeal :). I imagine I'd need some serious under-body protection if I wanted to take it that far.

You will just have to play or get engineering drawings so you can check fitment regardless of steel or aluminium.
Yes, point taken.

The flip side of that is that steel are very heavy. I run Steelies on my 4WD mainly because they were the size I was after.
If I went for a 17" rim [more checking needed but I think there's a good chance that will fit], it's clearly a fair bit smaller than a 19" or bigger. What weight difference do you think there might be?

You will still have the issue of finding tyres that work - unless you are OK to risk not being roadworthy.
That's the biggy. A 245/65 R17 111S Goodrich All Terrain would suit me well but of course it's only 180kmh rated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
You would need to contact the manufacturer(s) to get wheel weights. For the tyres same thing, but I expect something like 3kgs per tyre more to what you have now at a rough guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Is Australia the only place where the tyre speed ratings are limiting in this way?

[Basically, if you own a Macan or vehicle with a U [200kmh] or higher rating, there's no legal way to fit an off-road tyre, which are usually S, 180 kmh or so]
 
21 - 28 of 28 Posts
Top