I am looking to buy a 3 soon and want to get some 18" wheels with it. I definately want something that is fairly lightweight. I found some wheels from Ace, Konig & R-1 that I like but they are pretty heavy. Does anybody have any suggestions? Also, what is the weight of the stock wheels?
18" wheel Q?
- Thread starter RHAGEL
- Start date
Actually, 22 pounds is pretty porky. The Kosei K1-TS in 17" size is 14.1 pounds. The really sucky thing about the stock wheels is they are only 6.5" wide. So for autocross, you're pretty much stuck running the stock wheels, since finding another 17"x6.5" wheel is unlikely...
The Mazda3 should still be competitive in STS class, which allows up to a 7.5 wide wheel.
Remember that even if you maintain the same weight on an 18 inch wheel as a 17 inch...you'll still be decreasing the performance of the car, as the weight of the tire is pushed further out from the hub center.
http://www.mazda6tech.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=32
For an article on unsprung weight.
Remember that even if you maintain the same weight on an 18 inch wheel as a 17 inch...you'll still be decreasing the performance of the car, as the weight of the tire is pushed further out from the hub center.
http://www.mazda6tech.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=32
For an article on unsprung weight.
Is it certain that our 17" stock rims are only 6.5" wide? I'm running 225/45/17's , which supposedly require a 7 to 8.5" rim, and none of the tire places I talked to said anything about this (in fact doing this "plus zero" move was a suggestion made by one of them).
Can anybody fill me in on what problems I could run into because of the rim being too narrow for the tire spec?
Also, after reading the article posted by Crossbow about losing performance by plussing to 18", and its related articles, I've decided to stay at 17", and just go as wide as I can.
Does anybody know what the max width rim and tire are that will fit a Mazda 3 GFX sedan (keeping within OEM rolling diameter specs, of course). I'm riding on Progress Group lowering springs (1.3" all round) and Progress Group rear anti-sway, if that makes any difference.
I'm pretty much a newbie to modding and performance--caught the bug from my 3 when I got her in May
-- so please bear with me if I seem a bit dense.
Thx
Can anybody fill me in on what problems I could run into because of the rim being too narrow for the tire spec?
Also, after reading the article posted by Crossbow about losing performance by plussing to 18", and its related articles, I've decided to stay at 17", and just go as wide as I can.
Does anybody know what the max width rim and tire are that will fit a Mazda 3 GFX sedan (keeping within OEM rolling diameter specs, of course). I'm riding on Progress Group lowering springs (1.3" all round) and Progress Group rear anti-sway, if that makes any difference.
I'm pretty much a newbie to modding and performance--caught the bug from my 3 when I got her in May
-- so please bear with me if I seem a bit dense.Thx
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
Stock wheels are definitely 6.5" wide.
By putting a 225 tire on the stock wheel, you are increasing the amount of stress on the tire sidewall and decreasing the amount of cushion it can provide.
When you do this with a tire with an 80 aspect ratio, it's more or less irrelevant. The huge profile provides more than enough flex to make up the difference. When you do it with a 45 aspect ratio, it's very hard on the tire and could possibly lead to early tire failure.
You're not the first person to do it and you probably won't be the last. That doesn't make it right, however.
You should ALWAYS stay within the manufacturers' recommended wheel sizes.
I'd get your new wheels as soon as possible. If you think you'll want wider tires in the future, buy a wheel that will accept both the current tire and a wider one. Unless you're going full-race with the car, the 225s should be plenty.
By putting a 225 tire on the stock wheel, you are increasing the amount of stress on the tire sidewall and decreasing the amount of cushion it can provide.
When you do this with a tire with an 80 aspect ratio, it's more or less irrelevant. The huge profile provides more than enough flex to make up the difference. When you do it with a 45 aspect ratio, it's very hard on the tire and could possibly lead to early tire failure.
You're not the first person to do it and you probably won't be the last. That doesn't make it right, however.
You should ALWAYS stay within the manufacturers' recommended wheel sizes.
I'd get your new wheels as soon as possible. If you think you'll want wider tires in the future, buy a wheel that will accept both the current tire and a wider one. Unless you're going full-race with the car, the 225s should be plenty.
3Wheeler said:Is it certain that our 17" stock rims are only 6.5" wide? I'm running 225/45/17's , which supposedly require a 7 to 8.5" rim, and none of the tire places I talked to said anything about this (in fact doing this "plus zero" move was a suggestion made by one of them).
Can anybody fill me in on what problems I could run into because of the rim being too narrow for the tire spec?
Also, after reading the article posted by Crossbow about losing performance by plussing to 18", and its related articles, I've decided to stay at 17", and just go as wide as I can.
Does anybody know what the max width rim and tire are that will fit a Mazda 3 GFX sedan (keeping within OEM rolling diameter specs, of course). I'm riding on Progress Group lowering springs (1.3" all round) and Progress Group rear anti-sway, if that makes any difference.
I'm pretty much a newbie to modding and performance--caught the bug from my 3 when I got her in May
Thx
It really depends on the tire you have. I have 225's on the stock for about 10,000 miles now and they are perfectly fine. But mine have a very stiff side wall.
It is kinda foolish to tell someone to get new tires right away when they don't have all of the facts.
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
AzMz3 said:
I'd be interested to see what the inside of your tires look like right about now.
AzMz3 said:
True. That's why I only said what I would do. I wouldn't presume to tell somebody what to do with their car, I only make reccommendations (which is what he asked for).
Simply put, a wider wheel offers more stability for the sidewall of a tire. This increases steering response, handling and cornering stability (as long as you don't go too wide).
Don't take my word for it, though. See what Yokohama has to say about it (see the section in bold):
http://www.yokohamatire.com/utperf.asp
I concur with goldwing on this one...
Even falken's own tire recommendations specifically state that 7 inch wide is the minimum for 225/45/17.
http://www.falkentire.com/tires/az_rs_sizes.htm
Anything of lesser width and they can't be responsible for abnormal tire wear, or for the tire beads blowing off under excessive stress. I'm also well aware they used this tire at rev-it up...but those tires were not kept on the car for more then a day before they were replaced.
Technically its far better to have a thinner tire on a wider rim, then a wider tire on a thinner rim.
I'll try and dig up some photos of the effects of tire width on the strength and stability of tire sidewalls. Its actually pretty drastic, and you can instantly tell (just from the way the sidewall looks) whether the 225 is on a 7 or a 8 inch wide rim.
Even falken's own tire recommendations specifically state that 7 inch wide is the minimum for 225/45/17.
http://www.falkentire.com/tires/az_rs_sizes.htm
Anything of lesser width and they can't be responsible for abnormal tire wear, or for the tire beads blowing off under excessive stress. I'm also well aware they used this tire at rev-it up...but those tires were not kept on the car for more then a day before they were replaced.
Technically its far better to have a thinner tire on a wider rim, then a wider tire on a thinner rim.
I'll try and dig up some photos of the effects of tire width on the strength and stability of tire sidewalls. Its actually pretty drastic, and you can instantly tell (just from the way the sidewall looks) whether the 225 is on a 7 or a 8 inch wide rim.
I see what you guys are saying.
But isn't it true that a 225 in one brand is usually different than a 225 in the other. Isn't it like trying to compare tread wear. I know that I had 225's on a 7 rim and they stuck out more than the stock 17's with the Falkens.
And just curious but what would the inside look like, or what do you suspect it to look like?
But isn't it true that a 225 in one brand is usually different than a 225 in the other. Isn't it like trying to compare tread wear. I know that I had 225's on a 7 rim and they stuck out more than the stock 17's with the Falkens.
And just curious but what would the inside look like, or what do you suspect it to look like?
Falkens are much wider then average width tires. A falken 225 is akin to some tires in a 235. But ya as you said, the sidewall and treadware ratings vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.
In respect to the 225/45/17 falkens, the actual tire width is 9.1 inches!!! As you can imagine on a 6.5 wide rim, that doesn't give you much sidewall reinforcement at all, other then what the tire has itself. (Which is ALOT...falken sidewalls are like god).
The same 225/45/17 width on the toyo's T1-S's is 8.9 inches wide. (Which still recommends a minimum rim width of 7 inches).
Not saying putting either of these tires on the stock rims is a bad thing...but its surely not optimal at all. You'd probably get better lateral stability from a thinner alternative rubber then a 225 on a 6.5 rim. Or you could just replace the stock heavy rims with some K1-TS kosei's (14.1 lbs, but cast, and thus prone to bending on bad roads) at around 200 a pop.
There even have photos of them on a 3. I'm actually buying Kosei's for my winter rims. Hell if I'm going to subject my 17x8 SSR comp's to salt and snow!
In respect to the 225/45/17 falkens, the actual tire width is 9.1 inches!!! As you can imagine on a 6.5 wide rim, that doesn't give you much sidewall reinforcement at all, other then what the tire has itself. (Which is ALOT...falken sidewalls are like god).
The same 225/45/17 width on the toyo's T1-S's is 8.9 inches wide. (Which still recommends a minimum rim width of 7 inches).
Not saying putting either of these tires on the stock rims is a bad thing...but its surely not optimal at all. You'd probably get better lateral stability from a thinner alternative rubber then a 225 on a 6.5 rim. Or you could just replace the stock heavy rims with some K1-TS kosei's (14.1 lbs, but cast, and thus prone to bending on bad roads) at around 200 a pop.
There even have photos of them on a 3
. I'm actually buying Kosei's for my winter rims. Hell if I'm going to subject my 17x8 SSR comp's to salt and snow!
goldwing2000
OG Mazda Mafia
- :
- 2004 Mazda3s Hatch; 346,000 mi (sold)
2024 CX-5 CE; 7,500 mi (so far)
To expand on what crossbow said, a tire's section width is not necessarily indicative of it's tread width. Since section width is measured at the widest part of the tire, the amount of bulge in the sidewall is a huge factor. If you have a tire shaped like a ring bologna (like a 235/75-15), then the tread will be narrower than one shaped like a rubber band (like a 235/35-15). Even if you have two tires of the same size, if one has a significantly stiffer sidewall, there will be less bulge and consequently, the tread will be wider.
Anyway, when you over-stress a sidewall, it tends to overheat and shred the inside of the tire. Yours may be just fine. Personally, it's not a risk that I would choose to take.
But that's me.
Anyway, when you over-stress a sidewall, it tends to overheat and shred the inside of the tire. Yours may be just fine. Personally, it's not a risk that I would choose to take.
But that's me.
Just so no-one's working uder the wrong assumptions, it has been clarified that the Rev-It-Up cars were using special 215-section Falkens, shipped from Japan for the events. There's a post on the Mazda3Forums with the actual quote from the Falken rep, who mentioned that this tire will eventually be made available in the US.
Thanks a lot for all the info, guys.
The upshot of my complaint to the dealer that put the wrong size (225/45/17s) on my stock rims is that tomorrow morning he's putting my original, "traded-in" tires back on and refunding my money. They have 400 km on them.
So now I get to start over again, on the Goodyear Eagle RSA's, but with Progress suspension and sway bar. I really wanted the tires to be first, but fate has decreed otherwise.
The savings cookie jar is going to be stuffed for my next tire venture, when I'm intending to get light 18" rims and ultra high performance summer tires, and try to work a deal on some decent used snowies that fit the stock rims at the same time.
Short shifter's on the way now, too. My mod plan has gone a bit askew....but at least I'm getting my $ back on the tires.
The upshot of my complaint to the dealer that put the wrong size (225/45/17s) on my stock rims is that tomorrow morning he's putting my original, "traded-in" tires back on and refunding my money. They have 400 km on them.
So now I get to start over again, on the Goodyear Eagle RSA's, but with Progress suspension and sway bar. I really wanted the tires to be first, but fate has decreed otherwise.
The savings cookie jar is going to be stuffed for my next tire venture, when I'm intending to get light 18" rims and ultra high performance summer tires, and try to work a deal on some decent used snowies that fit the stock rims at the same time.
Short shifter's on the way now, too. My mod plan has gone a bit askew....but at least I'm getting my $ back on the tires.
