Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Mercedes-Benz Wheels & Tires

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-20-1999, 01:13 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 199
What are the advantages/disadvantages with a staggered wheel size setup on the 500E (handling, etc)? And exactly what does the "stagger" refer to? Bigger diameter in the rear (e.g., 18 in rear vs 17 in front)? or does it refer to different widths (e.g., 7.5 in front and 8.5 in rear)? or both? What would be an acceptable staggered setup, starting with 17" wheels as a start?

John

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-20-1999, 07:18 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Posts: 178
The only disadvantage of a staggered setup is that you cannot rotate the tires, everything else are positive. Just look at the E55. Stagger means wider and/or taller wheels on the rear. Staggered setup will improve stablibilities, earlier acceleration out of the corners, later braking points, and most important of all it gives the driver a more confident feel which allows quicker, more consistant lap times.

You should have no problem fitting 8.5 and 9.5, front and rear respectively, on a 500E.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-20-1999, 09:00 PM
Michael's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 2,701
I agree with TommyMB; only downside is the inability to rotate. However, I know that at least one member fit 10 in wide wheels in the back; I've got 17 X 8.5 all around and can definitely see where you could stuff more tire in the back. If unexpectedly I fry the rears (yes, folks, I've pretty much figured out how to tame ASR and lite 'em up) I may switch from 245/45 to 255/40 or 265/40 on the rear (Lee...which one's best?)



------------------
Best regards, Michael
'92 500E
'88 300TE
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-21-1999, 07:53 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Barrington Hills, IL USA
Posts: 136
I run 9" fronts with 255-40-17 and 10" rears with 275-40-17. Additionally the tire selection I have provides approx. 5% larger diameter in the rear. This fools the ABS / ASR computer into allowing more slip for accelleration and more closely approximates threshold braking with ABS engaged. This is great for track use but requires more prudent use in wet street conditions. MB sets up their computer for safety. This change more closely approximates a BMW type performance program. The wider tires really wake the performance up with a 500E. Braking becomes phenominal for a street car.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-21-1999, 12:36 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,342
Michael,
According to the math, 245/45/17 is the right front size as it is only .2% shorter than OEM RR.

Putting 275/40/17 on the back is also a near-perfect match for OEM RR at .3% shorter.

That might be a more prudent street setup.

Lou's 255/40/17 and 275/40/17 rears is no-doubt a wicked package. The rear's are 2.5% taller RR than the fronts. (not OEM RR, but if both front and rear are different the comp will have a hard time knowing neither is OEM RR) Since the "perceived" difference is only 2.5% you should be able to get away with it. My only concern is that the shorter than stock RR will give the car more apparent wheel-well gaps but that is a cosmetic issue.

I wonder if fitting 235/50/16's on the front and 245/50/16's on the back would work similarly on the stock wheels. Not a bad track setup for those who would run a dedicated set of tires on stock wheels AND have a plus 1 or 2 package... The only downside I see would be finding a tire made in both 245/50/16 and 235/50/16. Since the rear 245/50/16's would be 1.6% taller you would have the same approx effect as Lou's 17" setup.

So many setups, so little track time...Lee
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-05-2000, 12:51 PM
need2speed's Avatar
speedaholic
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,253
Holy Cow...BBS recommends an 18X10 rear (RS705) and 18X8.5 front (RS704) staggered setup for the 500E in their RS II 3-piece lightweight rims!

You could also put together a 17X8 front and 17X9 rear staggered combo in their RC one-piece (and cheaper) wheels.

Lee...what would be the ideal tire sizes for the 18" RS II setup?

[This message has been edited by Dean Albrecht (edited 01-05-2000).]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-05-2000, 07:47 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sammamish, Washington
Posts: 38
I've now had a chance to aggressively drive my "new 94 500E" with a new set of Michelin Pilot XGT Z-4's on stock 16" rims staggered with 225x55 fronts and 245x50 rears. Definitely keeps ASR out of the equation and the cars handles fairly neutrally thru turns but slight amounts of throttle will easily induce the right amount of oversteer...In nutshell it is perfect and I would recommend this set-up for those wanting to keep the stock rims. PS. the 245's will not safely fit on the fronts because there is not enought clearance from the shock tower.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-07-2000, 09:12 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,342
Dean,

Ideal could be interpreted either way. Ideal for aggressive driving (similar effect to Lou's setup) or closest to OEM RR.

245/40/18's up front and 275/35/18 in back would be the close to stock RR setup. The 245's are only .1% shorter RR than OEM and the 275's are only .6% shorter RR. With only a .5% difference between them it should keep the stock RR and the ABS/ASR functioning as stock. If you plan to "fool" those systems a bit, as Lou has done, then you may want to try different sizes but I don't see the math working out well in common 18" sizes.

Hope this helps...Lee
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-07-2000, 10:33 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Barrington Hills, IL USA
Posts: 136
Wheel/tire diameters can be approximated from the theoretic sizes, but to get accurate sizing you have to measure the mounted tire on the rim. Different manufacturers have different sizing methods. Call a tech representative at the tire company to get accurate diameters. Major performance gains are there for the work.

------------------
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-07-2000, 03:15 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Barrington Hills, IL USA
Posts: 136
I'm sorry but I had some brain fade. I meant the circumference or revolutions/mile. This can be significantly different from that indicated by the math calculation.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-11-2000, 01:56 PM
need2speed's Avatar
speedaholic
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,253
Well guys...I'm still concerned about one thing. I have heard that the 500E suspension was designed for optimal performance with equal tire sizes on all four corners. MB wheel accessory literature only specifies max 245/45R 17 on an 8.25x17 rim all around whereas they spec staggered front/back sizes for some newer models.

I am looking to purchase a plus one or two package for my E500 and now that I've heard from all of you who run a staggered set-up, I am still wondering if I've missed something here, or is MB out-to-lunch?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-11-2000, 02:59 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,342
Dean,
If anything happens it should be that the car understeers a bit more on a staggered setup vs having the same footprint on all four corners. Some of that understeer can be lessened via playing around with tire pressures. I don't doubt the suspension was designed to have the same size on all four corners, but it shouldn't be a real problem to stagger it. Then again, with that much power/torque on tap sooo easily, understeer can be banished with a little throttle. (before ASR grabs you)

Hope this helps...Lee
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-11-2000, 03:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Barrington Hills, IL USA
Posts: 136
Same size front to rear is mainly to allow for wear rotation. I have not experienced any adverse effect to handling. Max braking and accelleration performance require the largest tires you can fit. This is a relatively big and fast car that is totally under tired from the factory. Big tires really wake up the performance. I run 255/40-17 Front on 9" rims and 275/40-17 Rear on 10" rims. 285's will fit too.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
500E stock wheel sizes and offsets Flavio Mercedes-Benz Wheels & Tires 17 10-09-2006 05:12 PM
Which Wheel to choose for 500E? roas Mercedes-Benz Wheels & Tires 19 02-02-2003 07:32 PM
500E Wheel Offset Question? pls10 Mercedes-Benz Wheels & Tires 1 12-27-2001 08:52 AM
500E spare wheel well - is dealer lying? hanfrac Tech Help 12 12-26-2001 07:43 PM
Staggered setup on 2.3 16v revbond Mercedes-Benz Wheels & Tires 5 04-14-2000 12:02 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page