Rear wheels for narrow body - How wide is too wide!?

[esuohdica]

Hi Everyone,

I'm looking at a set of Style 68 staggered wheels for my 1997 Z3 1.9 (narrow body) and wanted to double check that this setup will work on my car?
I know the wide body fits these wheels fine as I've seen lots of posts from guys who fitted these and they look great.
Does the narrow body have issues with this setup?

Fronts 17" 7.5J 225/45/17
Rear 17" 8.5J 245/40/17

Thanks Mark

 

[Mario]

Hello Mark - I know you are looking for style 68s but would you consider a set of Style 18s ? I have one I am thinking of selling with good tires

 

[esuohdica]

HI Mario,

Thanks but the Style 18's are too close to what I already have on there.
Cheers

 

[Rob Kuipers]

Hi Mark,

I'm seeking to do exactly the same (style 68, 7.5Jx17 ET41 front, 8.5Jx17 ET50 rear) on my 1996 narrow body Z3 1.9 M-chassis. I figured out I would problably need to fit 10mm spacers at the rear, to get the ET down to 40.

Hopefully that would be enough, because that is not yet compensating for the extra inch. In theory to keep clearance between rim and suspension strut the same (as BMW does if you look at the 16 (7J ET46) and 17 inch (7.5J ET41) ET values of their OEM rims), an extra (25.4 / 2) ~12mm would be needed (41-12=ET29). But that would take the wheel even further to the outside and shouldn't be necessary as I'm not planning on using (much) wider tyres.

So far, so good. Thing is, 225/45 wide tires would be too small for those rear rims (it is allowed, but would stretch too much, I think).
I would need to go at least 235 or better yet, 245/40. Would that fit without rubbing the wheel arches?

So I'm wondering if you decided to buy/fit/install these rims on your car? If so, could you share your experiences. Does your car have the standard or the M-chassis?

Thanks,
Rob

 

[Antm72]

Are you using this tool?
www.willtheyfit.com
This should tell you what will fit you need to work out with your standard rims what you have left to fill arch size and see if you have the room.
It may be you will fill it with offset . But knowing the space will tell you what space you need to fill with a spacer, or if any is left with the new width and wheel offset.

 

[esuohdica]

Hi Mark,

I'm seeking to do exactly the same (style 68, 7.5Jx17 ET41 front, 8.5Jx17 ET50 rear) on my 1996 narrow body Z3 1.9 M-chassis. I figured out I would problably need to fit 10mm spacers at the rear, to get the ET down to 40.

Hopefully that would be enough, because that is not yet compensating for the extra inch. In theory to keep clearance between rim and suspension strut the same (as BMW does if you look at the 16 (7J ET46) and 17 inch (7.5J ET41) ET values of their OEM rims), an extra (25.4 / 2) ~12mm would be needed (41-12=ET29). But that would take the wheel even further to the outside and shouldn't be necessary as I'm not planning on using (much) wider tyres.

So far, so good. Thing is, 225/45 wide tires would be too small for those rear rims (it is allowed, but would stretch too much, I think).
I would need to go at least 235 or better yet, 245/40. Would that fit without rubbing the wheel arches?

So I'm wondering if you decided to buy/fit/install these rims on your car? If so, could you share your experiences. Does your car have the standard or the M-chassis?

Thanks,
Rob

Hi Rob,

I decided to go with new wheels instead of going down the route of getting refurbs done to second hand OEM wheels. I stuck with the square setup all round, but went up to 17" wheels so 225/45/17 all round.

 

[esuohdica]

Alutec Drive 17" Wheels

• esuohdica
• May 27, 2020

Z3 1997

• esuohdica
• Apr 26, 2020

 

[Rob Kuipers]

Are you using this tool?
www.willtheyfit.com
This should tell you what will fit you need to work out with your standard rims what you have left to fill arch size and see if you have the room.
It may be you will fill it with offset . But knowing the space will tell you what space you need to fill with a spacer, or if any is left with the new width and wheel offset.

Thanks! I used a different one: https://www.wheel-size.com/calc/?wh...40-17X8ET47&fcl=50mm&wcl=30mm&scl=50mm&sr=0mm
These tools help a lot. But I prefer real life experiences from others over my own well educated guesses

 

[Rob Kuipers]

Alutec Drive 17" Wheels

• esuohdica
• May 27, 2020

Z3 1997

• esuohdica
• Apr 26, 2020

Looks great (they both do by the way). But I get what you mean. The OEM rims can get expensive quickly with extra spacers, bolts and some refurbishing!

Can you feel the difference between a 16 and a 17 inch setup (stiffer sidewalls)?

 

[Fraser]

I've got this set up on mine at the minute, and have no problems. The wider tyres at the back fill the arches a lot better than the standard 7.5.

This isn't the best angle, but it's the only one I've got at the minute on the phone. I can get some better photos tomorrow if you need some. I think the rear tyres are actually 245/40/17, this brings the rolling diameter to the closest of the original 225/45/17. Hope this helps.

 

[Stevo7682]

Style 68 should fit nicely on a pre face-lift model
I have them on my face-lift and they could do with 10mm spacers to bring them out a bit so would fit nicer under the narrower rear arches.

 

[esuohdica]

Looks great (they both do by the way). But I get what you mean. The OEM rims can get expensive quickly with extra spacers, bolts and some refurbishing!

Can you feel the difference between a 16 and a 17 inch setup (stiffer sidewalls)?

Hi Rob,

The ride is only very slightly stiffer and really not that noticeable! I'm still amazed that such an old car has absolutely NO rattles over the bumps!

Stevo's post above shows the Style 68's that i had decided on, before going down the new wheels route, and i still think they look great!

Good luck with whatever you decide to do... now if I could only get the central locking to work...!