AFM Web

Go Back   Ford Mustang Forums > Mustang Forums > Mustang Tech > Wheels and Tires
Welcome to AllFordMustangs.com. We look forward to you registering on our forum and making your first post.
Reply
 
Old 06-01-2008   #1 (permalink)
415roushJAYR is offline Rookie


Joined: May 2008
Posts: 26 Threads: 14
 415roushJAYR's Country Flag
San Francisco   California
Default light-weight wheels for 2001 mustang gt?

any brand of wheels that are light weight in the 18' inch size? staggered! did not want to put japanese wheels on my car such as roja and rayswheels. but i will if i cant find any others
__________________
FRISCO 415
415roushJAYR is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2008   #2 (permalink)
dakine858 is offline Made Member

5.0L Member


Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,705 Threads: 18
 dakine858's Country Flag  View dakine858's 80 photos  View dakine858's 2 products for your review  View dakine858's HomePage
San Diego   California
Send a message via AIM to dakine858
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 415roushJAYR View Post
any brand of wheels that are light weight in the 18' inch size? staggered! did not want to put japanese wheels on my car such as roja and rayswheels. but i will if i cant find any others
Here is some enlightening info for those people that think they'll get accelleration improvement from removing a pound from the wheels compared removing a pound from the chassis

Some, but not all, of the work in getting the car to 60 is giving it translational kinetic energy (TKE). This is the energy of the whole car plunging straight along at 60 ignoring anything rotating, say like it was skidding on frictionless ice with the engine off. Some more of the work, but not all the rest, is giving rotational kinetic energy (RKE) to the wheels and tires. (I’m also going to do these calculations for engine flywheels and post on the performance forum.) Since work = power x time, if you reduce the work required by reducing these energies, you get to 60 faster.

First, I’ll compare 1 lb on the car with 1 lb on a wheel:

The TKE = 1/2 x the mass x (velocity squared). For a 1 pound mass (lbm) on the car going 60 mph (= 88 ft/sec), the required TKE = [1/2] x 1 lbm x (88 x 88) ft ft / sec sec = 3872 lbm ft ft / sec sec

The RKE = 1/2 x the rotational inertia x angular velocity squared. The rotional inertia (RI) = mass x (radius squared). The angular velocity (w) is in radians = rev/sec x 2 pi radians/rev.

Assuming that the wheel and tire mass is lumped at a diameter of 18” (= radius of .75 ft), a 1 lbm on the wheel has an RI = 1 x (.75 squared) = .562 lbm ft ft.

With a tire circumference of 76” (= 6.33 ft), 88 ft/sec is 13.9 rev/sec. w = 2 x pi x 13.9 = 87.3 rad/sec

So RKE = 1/2 x .562 lbm ft ft x 87.3 x 87.3 / sec sec = 2143 lbm ft ft / sec sec.

Taking 1 pound off a wheel saves both TKE and RKE. But the ratio compared to taking a pound off the chassis is only 1.6 = (3872 + 2143) / 3872. That is, taking 1 pound off a wheel is the same as taking 1.6 pounds off the chassis FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCELLERATION. Sorry, but guys hoping for 5 sec. 0-60 times by lightening the wheels and tires just aren’t gonna make it...

As a sanity check, let’s see how this works with Garfield’s lightweight wheel test.

Assuming a car weight of 2800 lb and a weight of 200 lb for his set of 17" s-lites and runflats, the calculations above give that the wheel and tire RKE is an additional 4% above the TKE to get the car to 60. (For just doing a ratio, you can use the weight in pounds instead of the pounds in mass. The pounds weight ratio is 430,000/10,842,000. And no cracks from the Newton-kilogram-meters/sec guys)

Garfield saved 11 lb per wheel and, I’m guessing, 2 lb per tire, for a total savings of 52 lb. This reduces the TKE required by 52/2800 = .019 = 1.9% He also saved 52/200 of the 4% wheel and tire RKE, for another 1% savings. With a total savings of 2.9%, the reduction from his 'stock' 6.9 sec time should be about .029 x 6.9 sec = .2 sec.

Plus, you're going to lose some traction and handling ability with lightweight wheels.
__________________
1984 Mustang 331 stroker
1990 Mustang 5.0L convertible
dakine858 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Borla Stingers for my 2004 Mustang Mach 1! spartacus 4.6L Talk 15 06-14-2009 01:22 AM
Mustang GT... Knight Rider hood lights for the GT500KR style hood 68coupe&06GT 2005-2009 Mustang Talk 51 05-15-2009 10:07 PM
2006 Mustang GT... help with JLT CAI tuning mayhem151 2005-2009 Mustang GT Tech 8 08-30-2008 11:21 AM
2006 Mustang GT... Rear Upper Control Arm Install help GT speeder13 2005-2009 Mustang GT Tech 72 06-29-2008 07:47 AM
2005 Mustang GT ... What color are the turn signal wires? AlaskanGT 2005-2009 Mustang GT Tech 6 09-27-2007 09:56 AM

sponsors

Mustang Photos
Add to Favorites    Link to us    Contact    Directory    Site Rules    Archive    Terms of Use    Privacy    Top Sites    RSS    Meet Our Sponsors    Advertise   
AllFordMustangs is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company. ©Copyright 2002-2010 All Auto Enthusiasts Network

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112