Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Arnott
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-22-2006, 01:00 AM
Teutonaddict's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 80
Teutonaddict is on a distinguished road
Whistle 4.6is (Star Spoke 87) wheel weights?

I really dig the clean five-spoke look of the 20" Star Spoke 87 OE wheels on the 4.6is.

When I mentioned to my sales guy that I was planning the swap, he said he thought they were significantly heavier than the seven-spoke Style 168 that were OE on my '05 4.8is. Then again, he doesn't care for mods of any type...

Does anybody know the wheel weights of the 20" 4.6 wheels?

Thanks in advance for your help. You're contributing to the delinquency of a new X5 owner...

-Dave
__________________
'05 4.8is Sapphire Black
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #2  
Old 01-22-2006, 05:15 AM
Hans_ACS's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 361
Hans_ACS is on a distinguished road
yes, but only in kilograms

Front : 12 kg
Rear : 12.6 kg

(this is for the wheels only, tires not included).

I once measured replicas too, and they are much more heavier :

front : 14 kg
rear : 15 kg
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-22-2006, 11:55 AM
DinanX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 762
DinanX5 is on a distinguished road
Thanks Hans - good to know... I've been wondering this myself. (By the way, in English, this equates to 26.46/ 27.78 lbs.)

Anyone know about the 168s?
__________________
- Aaron

/// My X Page ///
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-22-2006, 05:58 PM
Teutonaddict's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 80
Teutonaddict is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans_ACS
yes, but only in kilograms

Front : 12 kg
Rear : 12.6 kg
Dank u, Hans. Danke schön!

That's quite interesting. But now I'm a little confused, as the one weight I've seen listed for my OE Style 168s makes them heavier than the 87's. Confusing only in it contradicts my salesman who's pretty sharp most of the time.

I've seen the 168's reported as 17kg (37.5 lb) front and 17.9kg (39.5 lb) rears in this For Sale thread (http://www.xoutpost.com/showthread.php?t=7617)

So...

Does anybody have different weights for the factory Style 168 wheels?

As always, thanks for the assistance!
-Dave
__________________
'05 4.8is Sapphire Black
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-22-2006, 06:02 PM
DINANM3's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: X5world
Posts: 2,345
DINANM3 is on a distinguished road
i seriously dought there is that much difference in weight between the 87s and the 168s. why would there be. if anything the 168s would be slightly heavier because of more spokes
__________________
Dinan M3

2006 X5 4.4i Sport Current Vehicle
2006 CLS 55 AMG Current Vehicle
2010 FORD F-450 King Ranch Current Vehicle
2012 GL 550 Current Vehicle

1999 M3 Dinan S3 SOLD
2001 M3 Dinan S2 SOLD
2002 M5 SOLD
2004 X5 4.4i sport SOLD
2007 335 XI Lease ended
2009 E92 M3 SOLD
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-22-2006, 06:28 PM
Teutonaddict's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 80
Teutonaddict is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinanX5
(By the way, in English, this equates to 26.46/ 27.78 lbs.)
Thanks, Aaron. BTW, those would be some of the lightest 20" I've come across. Those are within a pound or two of my lightweight Kinesis forged three-pc wheels that I had in 18" sizes on my M5.
__________________
'05 4.8is Sapphire Black
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-22-2006, 08:29 PM
DinanX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 762
DinanX5 is on a distinguished road
Yes, that is very light!! If these numbers are correct, then the 87s will definitely be a better performing wheel than the 168s... I would think that 11+ lbs per wheel is enough of a rotational mass difference to feel even on the big 'ole X5.

By the way, I've never met a car sales guy that has his facts and figures straight...
__________________
- Aaron

/// My X Page ///
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-22-2006, 08:47 PM
ricky.agrawal's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sugarland (Houston) Texas
Posts: 774
ricky.agrawal is on a distinguished road
11lb per wheel is plenty. Isn't it for every four lb of unsprung it's like feeling 1hp?

That means about three hp * 4 = 12hp 'freed' up. Even if you don't feel it accelerating or breaking, you'll feel it turning.
__________________
2005 LS430 || 2006 LX470
My Computer Helps Save Lives
admin @ mbworld.org
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-22-2006, 10:36 PM
Teutonaddict's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 80
Teutonaddict is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by DINANM3
i seriously doubt there is that much difference in weight between the 87s and the 168s. why would there be. if anything the 168s would be slightly heavier because of more spokes
I agree with your first statement--I doubt BMW would 'upgrade' or change to a factory wheel that's 40+% heavier than the one it replaces... Looks like I'm going to have to visit the dealer and take some first-hand measurements.

The more spokes = more weight principle only works if the spokes are of the same size and structure on both wheels. So I could see cases where the inverse were true.

Oh well. More to come!
__________________
'05 4.8is Sapphire Black
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-22-2006, 10:51 PM
ricky.agrawal's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sugarland (Houston) Texas
Posts: 774
ricky.agrawal is on a distinguished road
The more spokes = more weight also only holds true if the rims are same density and a lot of other factors.

Aren't the stock BMW rims made by gravity cast? If that's the case, I don't think they'll be uniformly dense all the way around.

Do you think that the 168's were reported with tires and the 87's were reported without tires?
I just did some searching, seems like average tires are in the 20ish pound range.

Style 87
Front: 26.46
Rear: 27.78

Style 168
Front: 37.5
Rear: 39.5

If the Style 168's had tires on them, and the 87's didn't, that means the Style 168's are 17.5 / 19.5.. which makes my theory very unreasonable.

BTW: If you compare the weights of the Style 87 rims listed above, to rims on www.iforged.com that means that these one piece OE BMW rims (I have no idea how they are constructed) weigh very close to custom three piece forged rims. Cool!
__________________
2005 LS430 || 2006 LX470
My Computer Helps Save Lives
admin @ mbworld.org

Last edited by ricky.agrawal; 01-22-2006 at 10:57 PM.
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





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:59 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.