Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday April 18, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
Click here to visit TireRack
Tire & Wheel Forum sponsored by The Tire Rack

Losing traction? Need new tires?
Click here to visit the NASIOC Upgrade Garage...
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Tire & Wheel

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-09-2004, 01:18 AM   #1
Kaishi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 25521
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bellevue, WA
Vehicle:
2005 WRX Wagon
World Rally Blue

Default SSR comps vs Rota Attack

I'm looking for a new set of tires/wheels for my WRX wagon.

I've decided on 215/45/17 tires (closest ratio to stock that will fit on a wagon).

Now I need some wheels.

I'm stuck between getting SSR comps or some rota attacks. My question is, will the ~4lbs per wheel difference between the rotas and SSR comps make a big difference?

If so, will this difference be worth the price of the SSR comps (just over 2x the price of rotas)?

Also, should i go with a 17x7 or 17x7.5 for those tires?
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Kaishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 01:22 AM   #2
cnk
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 10757
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Limited 6MT
DGM

Default

IIRC, every 1lb of unsprung weight is like 50lbs of weight from the car. So a difference of 4lbs per wheel adds up. Also, if you go with the SSR's I believe you can only get them in a 17x7.5" size. I run these on my sedan and couldn't be happier. They're expensive and I did consider the Rota's, but in the end, the weight differential led me to the SSR's.

Calvin
cnk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 01:24 AM   #3
Kaishi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 25521
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bellevue, WA
Vehicle:
2005 WRX Wagon
World Rally Blue

Wink

Awesome, thats what I was thinking too.

Now I just have to find a way to sneak 4 wheels past my wife.
Kaishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 01:49 AM   #4
ripvw
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 27790
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by cnk
IIRC, every 1lb of unsprung weight is like 50lbs of weight from the car. So a difference of 4lbs per wheel adds up...
yes, if true it would add up to the equivalent of 4 x 4 x 50 = 800 lbs of dead weight from the car just by getting some lighter wheels

no offense, Calvin, but I think your numbers are a little on the high side

whatever the real numbers are, it's still better to have lighter wheels. I own the Attacks, but I lust after the SSR's. If you can afford them - go for it.
ripvw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 02:35 AM   #5
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

I noticed the difference when I put tires that are 3 pounds, each, heavier on my car.


....and I love my SSR's
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 08:46 AM   #6
dbrier
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6598
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: West side of Indianapolis
Vehicle:
2012 Mazdaspeed3
Crystal White Pearl

Default

The SSRs have a better Subaru offset. 50 if I remember right.
You should be able to run 225 on a wagon with that setup.
Go for the 7.5 in wide wheel.

There are many people who run 225 on wagons using rota wheels with the 48 offset with no problems. On the other hand, there are a few who have minor rubbing with that size tire. I always err on the side of caution and I run the 215 on my Attacks.

The extra 2mm should protect you from rubbing. I someday want the SSR Comps with 225. $$$$ is the only thing holding me back.
dbrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 09:29 AM   #7
robbswrx
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 38975
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Harleysville, PA
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
WR Blue

Default

I run SSR's on my o4 wagon w/ Kuhmo 712 225's with no rubbing
what so ever, I highly recommend them! BTW i also live in
eastern PA where they spend squat on reoad repair, very strong
wheel too

robb
robbswrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 09:54 AM   #8
Chuck H
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20442
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Chelmsford, MA
Vehicle:
KTR tuned 2003 WRX
VF34 equipped, 270 whp

Default

I have a sedan, not a wagon, but I have the SSR's as well. I couldn't believe the difference between them and the stockers. You can definitely feel the difference in wheel weight, especially on launching.
Chuck H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 10:01 AM   #9
cnk
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 10757
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Limited 6MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ripvw
yes, if true it would add up to the equivalent of 4 x 4 x 50 = 800 lbs of dead weight from the car just by getting some lighter wheels

no offense, Calvin, but I think your numbers are a little on the high side

whatever the real numbers are, it's still better to have lighter wheels. I own the Attacks, but I lust after the SSR's. If you can afford them - go for it.
Did a quick search. . .there's a lot of controversy over the real ratio. Seems that some have settled on a 1:4 ratio, which means a 4lb difference would be equivalent to 16lbs of sprung weight. Still adds up in the end.

Calvin
cnk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 10:23 AM   #10
Kaishi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 25521
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bellevue, WA
Vehicle:
2005 WRX Wagon
World Rally Blue

Default

Wohoo, 225's on a wagon!

SSR comps it is then.
Kaishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 11:37 AM   #11
tribegolfer
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 26850
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Austin, TX
Vehicle:
2005 SRT4
white

Default

You're not going to notice the difference in wheel weight. Tire weight is way more important since the weight is farther from the rim. But if you want to spend that much and never race them, go for it.
tribegolfer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 04:46 PM   #12
Kaishi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 25521
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bellevue, WA
Vehicle:
2005 WRX Wagon
World Rally Blue

Default

Is there a place you can see the wieght of various tires?

I looked on tirerack, and hit up google and didn't find anything.

Currently, i'm looking for a good all season tire, that doesn't sacrifice comfort or increase noise. I live right outside seattle, so wet performance is important.
Kaishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 05:02 PM   #13
ripvw
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 27790
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Kaishi
Is there a place you can see the wieght of various tires?
see this thread:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...hreadid=592703
ripvw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 05:26 PM   #14
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

Good, light tires include the Kumho MX( ) and the Toyo T1-S( )
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 09:17 PM   #15
Len
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 39937
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2011 328i 6MT
LMB

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by cnk
Did a quick search. . .there's a lot of controversy over the real ratio. Seems that some have settled on a 1:4 ratio, which means a 4lb difference would be equivalent to 16lbs of sprung weight. Still adds up in the end.

Calvin
Correct ratio is 2 :1 maximum, but more like 1.7:1. 4:1 is physically impossible. No need for a controversy. It's a clear cut physics.
Len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2004, 09:50 PM   #16
cnk
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 10757
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Limited 6MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Len
Correct ratio is 2 :1 maximum, but more like 1.7:1. 4:1 is physically impossible. No need for a controversy. It's a clear cut physics.
To be honest. . .I could care less at this point. The fact of the matter is that reducing unsprung weight is better for performance plain and simple.

Calvin
cnk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2004, 01:52 AM   #17
lucien2
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1519
Join Date: May 2000
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Baltimore, hon!
Vehicle:
1998 Volvo V70R
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by dbrier
The SSRs have a better Subaru offset. 50 if I remember right.
You mean a better Impreza offset Some of us run +48mm from the factory.
lucien2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2004, 03:09 AM   #18
Len
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 39937
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2011 328i 6MT
LMB

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by cnk
To be honest. . .I could care less at this point. The fact of the matter is that reducing unsprung weight is better for performance plain and simple.

Calvin
Yes. But the question is how much better and (more importantly) whether it's worth the additional investment. I too prefer lighter wheels in general, but I wouldn't spend, say, additional $500 just to reduce 1 lb per corner knowing the aforementioned ratio. Then again to some people that might be a worth while investment, depending on how demaning a driver you are.
Len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2004, 08:24 AM   #19
Chuck H
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20442
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Chelmsford, MA
Vehicle:
KTR tuned 2003 WRX
VF34 equipped, 270 whp

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Len
Correct ratio is 2 :1 maximum, but more like 1.7:1. 4:1 is physically impossible. No need for a controversy. It's a clear cut physics.
Just curious where you got that "clear cut" physics number from, since I've seen lots of different numbers and lots of different explanations. Determining the difference in acceleration on a car between just adding a pound to the cars weight and adding a pound to the rotating mass of a wheel/tire isn't the easiest calculation on earth to do.
Chuck H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2004, 08:16 PM   #20
Len
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 39937
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2011 328i 6MT
LMB

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Chuck H
Just curious where you got that "clear cut" physics number from, since I've seen lots of different numbers and lots of different explanations. Determining the difference in acceleration on a car between just adding a pound to the cars weight and adding a pound to the rotating mass of a wheel/tire isn't the easiest calculation on earth to do.
If you are really interested in boring calculations, maybe you wanna check out this thread.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...light=unsprung

But in the end I said it was clear cut because,

1. Non-rotating mass and acceleration are directly related (twice the mass, twice slower the acceleration)

2. The factor we use to calculate the rotational inertia is directly related to the non-rotating mass.

It's really not a long calculation. For instance, for a uniform disk (the best case) we use a factor of 0.5 to get the rotational inertia. If you calculate how much power it takes to accelerate this disk by rolling it on a slip-less surface, you'll reallize that it's just like accelerating a non-rotating object that's (1 + 0.5 =) 1.5 times heavier than the disk on a friction-less surface.

The same goes for a thing ring (where all mass is concentrated at the edge, the worst case) where we use a factor of 1.0 and we get (1 + 1.0 =) 2 times heavier equivalent non-rotating mass. So there you have the factor of 1.5 ~ 2, and even if you consider the wheel size, tire weight, etc etc, this factor will be intact.

Now realistically a wheel/tire conbo is not as good as a uniform disk but not as bad as a thing ring either, so it should lie between 1.5 to 2.
Len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2004, 09:41 PM   #21
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

The difference between 35 pounds/corner(13 pound wheel like the SSR+22 pound tire like the Kumho MX)....and 45 pounds/corner(20 pound wheels+25 pound tires) is ENORMOUS .

The above numbers are NOT exact and are for reference only.

If you can't tell the difference in 10 pounds/corner, you really REALLY need to be driving a Yugo.
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2004, 12:14 AM   #22
cnk
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 10757
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NJ
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Limited 6MT
DGM

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Len
Yes. But the question is how much better and (more importantly) whether it's worth the additional investment. I too prefer lighter wheels in general, but I wouldn't spend, say, additional $500 just to reduce 1 lb per corner knowing the aforementioned ratio. Then again to some people that might be a worth while investment, depending on how demaning a driver you are.
It's a pretty simple methodology if you think about it. Determine your budget and then get the lightest quality rims you can afford. For most people, they don't even care about rim weight, only about what looks good. . .hence why there are so many people running around on 18" rims. For me, modifying a car means improving upon it, which meant getting a rim that was either equal to or lighter then the stock WRX rim of 16.5lbs.

Calvin
cnk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2004, 12:33 AM   #23
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by cnk
It's a pretty simple methodology if you think about it. Determine your budget and then get the lightest quality rims you can afford. For most people, they don't even care about rim weight, only about what looks good. . .hence why there are so many people running around on 18" rims. For me, modifying a car means improving upon it, which meant getting a rim that was either equal to or lighter then the stock WRX rim of 16.5lbs.

Calvin
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2004, 04:15 AM   #24
Fubaru
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6046
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: San Francisco
Vehicle:
'08 Prius

Default

Cool looking & light weight, sure, but be prepared to replace a wheel or two because of street damage.

I had the Rota Attacks on my old WRX and broke one doing a hard turn. A spoke just sheared completely apart.
I didn't hit a curb or anything, it just broke taking a tight corner. There were a few other WRX owners who reported the same thing happening on this board.

I think if you search on 'SSR competition' you'll also find a lot of complaints that they are fragile as well (easily bent).
Fubaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2004, 04:35 AM   #25
Len
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 39937
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2011 328i 6MT
LMB

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by cnk
It's a pretty simple methodology if you think about it. Determine your budget and then get the lightest quality rims you can afford. For most people, they don't even care about rim weight, only about what looks good. . .hence why there are so many people running around on 18" rims. For me, modifying a car means improving upon it, which meant getting a rim that was either equal to or lighter then the stock WRX rim of 16.5lbs.

Calvin
Not that I'm against your methodology, but different people have different priorities on things like performance, looks, and durability. Unless you have unlimited budget, you always have to make comprimises. Especially with affordable rims, light weight usually comes at the expense of durability, which to me is at least as important as performance. Therefore my choice tends to be more complicated than just the lightest rims in my price range.

Uncle Scotty, 10 lbs/corner is around 70 lbs effective mass and that's about the difference between the sedan and the wagon. I think that's good weight saving, especially considering the fact that most people that go plus-size end up gaining at least a few lbs/corner. What I'm saying is that that's the actual weight you saved, around 70 lbs. Did you feel it was a lot more than that?
Len is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTT: 18x8 Anthracite SSR Comps for Steel Grey or Gold Rota Torque or G-Force DieselClown Tri-State Area Private Classifieds 1 05-30-2006 04:30 PM
17" Rota SSR Comps in Gold FEELER hoxypad Private 'For Sale' Classifieds 14 02-02-2006 02:29 PM
rota attacks vs battle vs sub-zeros? jhong567 Member's Car Gallery 2 02-12-2003 01:40 PM
P1's vs. SSR comps. wrxplode Brakes, Steering & Suspension 7 06-27-2002 08:59 PM
SSR Comps vs OZ SL Rim poll Keirik Brakes, Steering & Suspension 22 12-23-2001 05:04 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.