[Trio]

Is there any reason not to do a square wheel set up of 22in with 10.5in wide or even 11in all around? This seems more practical. What is the benefit of staggered wheels?

[Trio]

bump, would love anyone's thoughts on this...

[roamio]

I think too wide front tires would make steering less precise and ride harsher. I can't even imagine 315/30/22 on front axle.

[T3PO]

Originally Posted by Trio

Is there any reason not to do a square wheel set up of 22in with 10.5in wide or even 11in all around? This seems more practical. What is the benefit of staggered wheels?

Mostly for aesthetics to give a vehicle a more aggressive look, this is subjective as some folks like the look of a square set up better.

A wider rear tire can provide additional rear wheel traction under more extreme use (drag/track). However, vehicle dynamics are very dependent on many factors, not just tire width so in some cases additional rear tire traction may be desirable or undesirable which is dependent on use case.

A square setup has the everyday practicality of being able to rotate tires, thus typically providing longer tire use with more even wear.

Conversely a square set up due to a wider front tire can give more of a lane channeling effect at highway speeds.

In your example, I would double check if a 315 wide tire can even fit up front without fender trimming/pushing. You may be limited to a smaller width tire for a square set up due to the fittament of the front tire.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by roamio

I think too wide front tires would make steering less precise and ride harsher. I can't even imagine 315/30/22 on front axle.

Wider front is actually going to be more precise and more responsive, reduce under steering … quite a few advantages. Steering effort will increases. The real issue with 315/30R22 in front maybe clearance. Stagger in modern bmw are really for aesthetic and to increase under steering. For a suv, I think square will be a lot more practical tho. M car comes with 295 front. I guess that maybe a good good square width to consider. But do measure and test fit. Please also pay attention to the offset of the wheel. It starts to matter a lot of you want to go wide.

[Trio]

Great insights, thank you all!

[M2joey]

You will do one of two things with a square setup. With a narrow tire / wheel, you will induce a good bit more oversteer. In short, the rear will steer much easier and faster. You will also move more grip to the front of the vehicle. If you go with a wider tire / wheel for a square setup, you will induce understeer. It will take more effort to turn the vehicle.

Most experienced track / HDPE drivers will move to a square setup to improve steering response, move grip to the front and reduce tire expense. However, if you are looking for the ultimate in all-around grip, staggered is the best.

[Trio]

Originally Posted by M2joey

You will do one of two things with a square setup. With a narrow tire / wheel, you will induce a good bit more oversteer. In short, the rear will steer much easier and faster. You will also move more grip to the front of the vehicle. If you go with a wider tire / wheel for a square setup, you will induce understeer. It will take more effort to turn the vehicle.

Most experienced track / HDPE drivers will move to a square setup to improve steering response, move grip to the front and reduce tire expense. However, if you are looking for the ultimate in all-around grip, staggered is the best.

M2joey what would you consider wide/thin tires? I think i'm leaning on 10.5in wheels all around on 315/30/22 tires.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by M2joey

You will do one of two things with a square setup. With a narrow tire / wheel, you will induce a good bit more oversteer. In short, the rear will steer much easier and faster. You will also move more grip to the front of the vehicle. If you go with a wider tire / wheel for a square setup, you will induce understeer. It will take more effort to turn the vehicle.

Most experienced track / HDPE drivers will move to a square setup to improve steering response, move grip to the front and reduce tire expense. However, if you are looking for the ultimate in all-around grip, staggered is the best.

This is in theory correct. But it doesn't stand for X5, at least the non M version. Stock 19 and 20 setup are square with. 19" setup even use 265 width, I don't believe over steering has been the typical behavior even at that width.

Also, typical BMW suspension setup, all are very under steering. This is even try for M cars. Using stagger will just promote more understeer. Your HPDE observation is same as mine, most will change to square setup on track to get a more balance handling. Most will even go for a stiffer rear anti roll bar to reduce understeering even more. HPDE instructors always says, "all germans are push from factory"

[vinibabs]

I have a setup similar to the one your describing right now on my X5 M50i.

I have the 742m rims at the 9.5” width. I have this on all 4 tires. 30k miles in the tires, wear has been impressively even.

The tires I’m running are the Continental DWS06+. They are solid, even in the snow. I have the 285/35ZE22 size.

The reason I went square was mostly due to needing an all season solution that didn’t make me have to change tires for the winter. I figured (without direct experience) that running 315 wide rears in winter would be a recipe for slipping about.

100% the 315 rears look cooler. But the DWS’s have a cool tread pattern and 285 is reasonably wide.

THE PROBLEM: Especially when they’re new, you kind of get a ‘shimmy’ on the highway. Almost like a super slight twitch of the car…as if there’s hide speed wind knocking you about for a second. I think it’s tramlining (following the road grooves) but I’m unsure. I’m running 40/45 PSI on the tires so maybe deflating a bit will help. If anyone has a better suggestion I’m game.

It leaves me wondering if the 315 rears help with the tramlining/ handle in a more stable fashion.

[BlkGS]

The wider rears are used to try to prevent oversteer and I prove standing traction. Wider tires always tramline more, and depending on the tire design it may change tramline behavior too.

It also could be minute alignment issues.

[meecee]

Staggered wheel set up is designed to reduce oversteer by removing front grip and adding it to the back. A understeering car (pushing) is easier to control than one that oversteers (loose).

This was a way in the pre stability and archaic traction control days to minimize BMW's potential legal exposure with high powered, rear wheel drive cars. My first exposure to this was in the mid 90's with e36 M3's with a whooping.....240 hp! Interestingly, the 95 USDM M3 was delivered with a square set up before staggered became the norm with M3's in 96.

Personally, beyond the practical ability to rotate tires easier, I prefer wheel set ups that are square. Beside feeling more neutral overall, a square set up allows the car to rotate easier while cornering.

The same principle can be applied to engine weight distribution. I have driven both the X3 30i and the X340i and I preferred and bought the 30i. The lighter b46 does not stick out as far over the front axles vs the b58 and the handling difference, to me, was stark. The 30i X3 rotated beautifully in the turns, the 40i front end felt heavy and lazy. My 30i X3 also had a staggered wheel set up and it was not great. I drove a square set up and the balance of the car was phenomenal.

I am taking delivery of a CPO x5 40i M sport with a square wheel set up this evening and while the car is larger and heavier than my outgoing X3 M sport, the balance I love is present with the X5 and non staggered wheels.

25 years of Motorsport, car building and set up experience has made it hard to blindly accept what the manufacturer delivers out of the box. Every car Ive raced or driven on track from 130hp e30's, all the way to 300rwhp prepared race cars to my 400hp e90M3, have had a square set up and driven without stability or traction control.

[Ninefourteener]

"Theoretically" a perfectly square setup would minimize wear and tear on the AWD transfer case (which is a known point of failure on X5s)... because technically even the OEM staggered setup has "slightly" different tire circumference.

But... I'm not sure t would impact it all that much.

I suspect that the only reason BMW uses a staggered setup, is for aesthetics.

Now, if you wanted to run a 22" square setup, I would still get the wheels made with different offsets, to give the "appearance" of a staggered setup, while running 4 identical tires

The problem... is you are limited on 22" tire choices. If you run too tall of a tire, you'll rub. If you run too low profile of a tire... you'll dent rims.

I've done both.

If you REEEEEAAAALLLLLY want to run a square-tire setup.... I'd go with 22x10.5 inch wheels (with different offsets), and stick with 275/35/22 tires.

If you get the right tires.... with a wide treadpatch..... they will fit nicely. If you buy cheap tires, or buy tires with narrow treadpatches, your tires will look "stretched" on the rims.

[meecee]

Originally Posted by Ninefourteener

"Theoretically" a perfectly square setup would minimize wear and tear on the AWD transfer case (which is a known point of failure on X5s)... because technically even the OEM staggered setup has "slightly" different tire circumference.

But... I'm not sure t would impact it all that much.

I suspect that the only reason BMW uses a staggered setup, is for aesthetics.

Yes and yes.

The aesthetics a disguise to minimize potential litigation. Clever way to sell and combine a pro and con.

[crabman]

I was thinking of going to 20"x10.5 wheels and 295 section width tires. Mine already has 295 up front, being the reason for that width. I was looking into it but I'm off on a business trip. Looked to me like the rest would need spacers to get the wheel where most people would want it. Can't remember the aspect ratio but one of them is 2/10s of an inch more diameter than the stock front.

Thoughts?

[Ninefourteener]

Originally Posted by crabman

I was thinking of going to 20"x10.5 wheels and 295 section width tires. Mine already has 295 up front, being the reason for that width. I was looking into it but I'm off on a business trip. Looked to me like the rest would need spacers to get the wheel where most people would want it. Can't remember the aspect ratio but one of them is 2/10s of an inch more diameter than the stock front.

Thoughts?

I ran 295/30/22 on the front of car car... and they were REALLY low profile. I cracked a rim... twice.

Maybe they make a 295/35/22? But... that would be a bit taller than stock. Not much, but a little.

Keep in mind... I just purchased a set of Continental Sport Contact 7s... in the OEM sizes.... and I'm running them on 22x10.5 and 22x12 wheels (1" and 1.5' wider than stock)

The treadpatch on the continentals is about an INCH wider than any other manufacturer.... so they don't look stretched on the wheels at all.

The difference between manufacturers is tremendous.

[crabman]

I'm to old to see anything but lost performance when I look at wagon wheels, I'm looking at moving down to 20s.

[nZtiZia]

Originally Posted by Ninefourteener

…
I suspect that the only reason BMW uses a staggered setup, is for aesthetics.
…

there’s more to it than that
https://www.tirebuyer.com/education/...-wheel-setups#

[meecee]

Originally Posted by Ninefourteener

The difference between manufacturers is tremendous.

Oh yes. On my track and race cars Ive used DOT R (40 tread wear) 245/40R17 tires for years.

Hankook z214 in 245/40r17 is more like a 235/40
Yokohama AO55 in 245/40r17 is a true 245
BFG R1 (sadly now retired by the manufacturer) as well as a Hoosier R7 in 245/40 is more like a 255

[meecee]

Originally Posted by nZtiZia

there’s more to it than that
https://www.tirebuyer.com/education/...-wheel-setups#

Good link. In certain applications, staggered, to enhance traction for high HP and torque vehicles that certainly is a must. The Porsche 917k and the monster 917-30 are perfect examples.