BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
M2 Technical Topics > Wheels / Tires -- Sponsored by The Tire Rack > APEX | NEW 19 EC-7 M2 & M2 Competition Wheels & Discussion

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-06-2019, 02:41 PM   #23
BAN_M2C
Colonel
BAN_M2C's Avatar
United_States
2884
Rep
2,478
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sunshine State

iTrader: (2)

I asked this on Instagram but never got an answer, maybe you guys will answer here.

What are the sizes including offset you are recommending on these?

Also, more importantly, what is the total weight of this set?

I started doing the math based on the specs used on the Black M2C and the total weight was almost comparable to the stock wheels which are pretty heavy.

I would like to see you guys do ARC8 in M2C fitment since those wheels are lighter than the EC7.

I compared the ARC8 weight (in same sizes) to the EC7 and the whole set was much lighter, almost same weight as the 763M.

Is it that the ARC8 design DOES NOT clear the brakes even in 19" with the recommended offsets you are saying for the EC7?
__________________
2019 M2 Competition Ordered
2017 LBB M2|2011 BSM 135i|Follow me on IG
2019 M2 Competition|2017 LBB M2 (Sold)|2011 BSM 135i|1974 Granarot 2002
Appreciate 0
      04-06-2019, 03:05 PM   #24
AlpsRider
Colonel
AlpsRider's Avatar
1403
Rep
2,213
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition, LBB, 6MT
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

All of the wheel specs and recommended offsets are in the first post.
Appreciate 1
      04-06-2019, 10:55 PM   #25
ApexRaceParts
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
755
Rep
2,299
Posts


Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by paradocs98 View Post
These shots of EC-7s in 18" fitments (the blue M2 posted by Ryan and the silver posted by cntzl) look a bit different compared to the pics in the initial post above. Which face profile are these? The 18" wheels look like they may be the shallower face profile 1 or 2 compared to what I assume is the deeper profile 3 featured in the first APEX post of this thread... Can Ryan confirm?
Great eye, the photos posted by cntzl and I are of our EC-7 18x9.5" ET35, which has a profile 2 medium concave face profile. As the original post states, the M2 specific 19" EC-7 wheels being offered to the community (19x9.5" ET28 & 19x10.5" ET40) have a more aggressive profile 3 deep concave face profile

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAN_M2C View Post
I asked this on Instagram but never got an answer, maybe you guys will answer here.

What are the sizes including offset you are recommending on these?

Also, more importantly, what is the total weight of this set?

I started doing the math based on the specs used on the Black M2C and the total weight was almost comparable to the stock wheels which are pretty heavy.

I would like to see you guys do ARC8 in M2C fitment since those wheels are lighter than the EC7.

I compared the ARC8 weight (in same sizes) to the EC7 and the whole set was much lighter, almost same weight as the 763M.

Is it that the ARC8 design DOES NOT clear the brakes even in 19" with the recommended offsets you are saying for the EC7?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlpsRider View Post
All of the wheel specs and recommended offsets are in the first post.
AlpsRider is correct, all of the specifications and respective weights are listed in the original post

We understand enthusiasts will have different preferences when it comes to design, however, through community surveys we have found the EC-7 to be very popular. We believe the design lends itself to the F87 M2 chassis, and they are extremely resilient on and off the race track. We are always open to offering these wheel specifications in another design, like the ARC-8, if the demand is there.

19" ARC-8's will clear the M2C brakes, and there are sizes currently available that M2C enthusiasts can use. ARC-8 19x9.5" ET33 square, with 5mm spacers up front would be one of them. Here is a photo of 19" ARC-8's over the massive M4 CCB's.



- Ryan
Appreciate 0
      04-07-2019, 02:44 AM   #26
Ramos
Colonel
Ramos's Avatar
649
Rep
2,728
Posts

Drives: 2014 M235
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: So-Cal

iTrader: (6)

The note that says that fronts will require camber to clear the fenders, does that apply to either tire size or only the 275's?
How much negative camber is required? And can it be achieved without camber plates?
Appreciate 0
      04-07-2019, 10:52 PM   #27
ApexRaceParts
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
755
Rep
2,299
Posts


Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramos View Post
The note that says that fronts will require camber to clear the fenders, does that apply to either tire size or only the 275's?
How much negative camber is required? And can it be achieved without camber plates?
9.5" wide wheels under the front fenders will typically require negative camber to prevent rubbing, but the minimum camber requirement will vary from car to car. There are many contributing factors like tire size, tire brand (not all are created equal), vehicle ride height and even particulars like effective spring rates.

We positioned our 18" and now 19" M2 specific front wheels as close to the suspension as possible (9.5" ET28 offset) to mitigate the amount of negative camber required, while still maintaining proper clearance to account for tire deflection under load. Any higher of an offset and you are likely going to make contact with the suspension and would have to install small spacers to gain back the clearance needed. We came up with a direct bolt on solution that does not require spacers.

There may be customers out there that are able to accommodate the 9.5" ET28 up front with the stock camber settings, but they are likely at stock ride height and have a relatively thin 255 or 265 compound mounted. With that said, in most instances, a modest amount of negative camber will be beneficial to prevent rubbing. You can pull the factory camber pins and that will typically net you somewhere between -1.6 & -1.8 degrees.

At the end of the day, for performance driving enthusiasts, adjustable camber plates are one of the best modifications you can do to the car. Whether its canyon runs or HPDE's, negative camber will offer a host of benefits beyond extra fender clearance. Negative camber should not be thought of as a barrier.

Do you plan to track the car?

- Ryan

Last edited by ApexRaceParts; 04-08-2019 at 12:15 AM..
Appreciate 1
Ramos648.50

      04-08-2019, 04:42 AM   #28
Evil///M
Professional Hitman
Evil///M's Avatar
United_States
125
Rep
988
Posts

Drives: M2C | Colorado Z71
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: 602

iTrader: (12)

Garage List
Really like the wheel design!
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-08-2019, 10:27 AM   #29
Proctor750
Lieutenant
372
Rep
500
Posts

Drives: E30 M3
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hattie B's

iTrader: (0)

YES!







Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramos View Post
...can it be achieved without camber plates?
You will roast the outside of your tires without camber plates. Worth the investment as they will pay for themselves in tires if you track regularly.

This is ignoring the performance gained.
Appreciate 1
      04-08-2019, 08:17 PM   #30
Ramos
Colonel
Ramos's Avatar
649
Rep
2,728
Posts

Drives: 2014 M235
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: So-Cal

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Proctor750 View Post
[SIZE="7"]YES![/SIZE]







Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramos View Post
...can it be achieved without camber plates?
You will roast the outside of your tires without camber plates. Worth the investment as they will pay for themselves in tires if you track regularly.

This is ignoring the performance gained.
Yeah for sure but I was curious if the M2C had enough stock camber adjustability with just moving the pins like the E46 M3 had, saves you the cost and hassle of camber plates.

Either way, it's worth it I guess to invest in camber plates.
Appreciate 1
      04-10-2019, 12:38 AM   #31
Derkluge
New Member
United_States
2
Rep
6
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Southern CA

iTrader: (0)

Are there any wider-than-stock tires - but with a stock aspect ratio (i.e., 35) - that would work on these wheels, assuming the car has a stock suspension? (Something like F:255/35/19; B:285/35/19?)
Appreciate 0
      04-10-2019, 06:48 AM   #32
Megator
Private First Class
28
Rep
104
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: NL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cntzl View Post
Apex wheels quickly became my favorite too when I started tracking my M4. I used to run satin black EC-7 18x10" and 18x11" staggered setup on the M4 and now I'm running satun black EC-7 18x9.5" square setup with 275/35/18 NT01s on the M2C. I'm pretty happy with the setup so far
Any suspension work to fit that square setup? and what ET did you choose?
Appreciate 0
      04-10-2019, 10:35 AM   #33
cntzl
Brigadier General
cntzl's Avatar
United_States
4272
Rep
3,437
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2C 6MT
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: San Mateo, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megator View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by cntzl View Post
Apex wheels quickly became my favorite too when I started tracking my M4. I used to run satin black EC-7 18x10" and 18x11" staggered setup on the M4 and now I'm running satun black EC-7 18x9.5" square setup with 275/35/18 NT01s on the M2C. I'm pretty happy with the setup so far
Any suspension work to fit that square setup? and what ET did you choose?
They are ET35 so front requires 12mm or bigger spacers. I run -3 front and -2 rear camber. Also, the car is slightly lowered on Ohlins.
Appreciate 0
      04-10-2019, 11:25 AM   #34
Megator
Private First Class
28
Rep
104
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: NL

iTrader: (0)

So from what I have read you need camber plates in order to achieve that camber?
Appreciate 0
      04-10-2019, 11:45 AM   #35
cntzl
Brigadier General
cntzl's Avatar
United_States
4272
Rep
3,437
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2C 6MT
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: San Mateo, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megator View Post
So from what I have read you need camber plates in order to achieve that camber?
Correct. I have Ground Control camber plates.
Appreciate 0
      04-10-2019, 12:49 PM   #36
Sebastian212az
Private First Class
United_States
206
Rep
109
Posts

Drives: m2 competition
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApexRaceParts View Post


You asked, we listened! We're excited to announce that we've started production of an M2C-specific track setup that clears the new 2NH 400mm front/380mm rear factory big brake setup. Since no 18" wheel can fit over this monstrous brake setup, 19" wheels are required. Through community feedback, we decided to produce these fitments in our popular EC-7 design in widths and offsets that were specifically designed with the goal of maximizing tire width under the fenders with minimal modifications.

We referenced our existing 18" wheel specifications devoted to the standard M2 (18x9.5" ET28 / 18x10.5" ET40), and after much discussion and research, we have decided to make a small change to the rear wheel offset that you'll appreciate. Many M2 enthusiasts expressed concern with rear fender clearance, and since our mission is to provide M2 Competition owners with 19" wheel solutions that properly accommodate popular track/race compounds, we have decided to raise the rear offset from ET40 to ET45. This small, yet meaningful change in offset will move the rear wheels 5mm inboard where there is room to spare, while maintaining a flush fitment in relation to the fenders. The result is wheel specifications tailored for 265/30-19 front and 295/30-19 rear tires, and while other staggered tire combinations will work, the majority of popular r-compounds like Toyo R888-R, Michelin Sport Cup2, and Pirelli Trofeo R are only available in this size configuration (more on that topic below).

Implementing the optimum wheel offsets means no spacers are required with stock suspension, lowering springs or a wide variety of aftermarket coilovers. As expected, small 3mm or 5mm spacers may be required up front with coilovers that are known for compromising clearance such as KW, Öhlins, or the BMW M Performance Coilover kit.

Not only will these wheels provide value to those lucky enough to call themselves M2C owners, but they are also ideal for any standard M2 owner who prefers 19" wheels. We welcome any and all feedback regarding these fitments and look forward to seeing them mounted on more cars.

"APEX EC-7"




"Wheel Sizes"




"Fitment Recommendations & Tire Availability"




[SIZE="4"]Staggered vs. Rotatable Square Configurations[/SIZE]

As defined in the chart above, we anticipate the most popular setup to be the staggered wheel fitment wrapped in 265/295 tires. There are pros and cons of both staggered and square configurations, and a laundry list of contributing factors to conclude which is superior like chassis type, suspension components, alignment settings, HP and TQ figures, whether or not aero is present, etc., so for the sake of brevity lets keep the comparison high level.

Earlier generations like the E36, E46, and even the E9X M3 are typically better suited running a rotatable square setup. Not only does the ability to rotate wheels and tires on all four corners of the car have a dramatic impact on the seasonal tire budget, but these chassis also respond very well to square configurations from a performance perspective. Squaring things up is an easy way to dial out unwanted understeer while improving turn-in, and it often results in a more neutral handling experience overall. Square fitments can limit your tire width, as you are bound to what you can manage to fit under the narrower front fender arches. With the E36 (S50/S52), E46 (S54) and E9X (S65) M3 generations, the respective naturally aspirated power plants are not pumping out overwhelming amounts of horsepower or torque, therefore, with negative camber dialed in enthusiasts are able to stuff compounds that are plenty wide under the front fenders, and the rears simply follow suit. In short, by going with a rotatable square setup for the aforementioned chassis, you really aren't sacrificing rear end grip to gain all of the benefits square fitments have to offer.

Enter the F8X M generation which scavenges power through forced induction, the conversation becomes a little more interesting. It is up to the driver to decide which wheel and tire configuration best suit his/her personal skill level behind the wheel, driving style, seasonal budget, and ultimately goals and intentions when attending HPDE's. These cars can make some serious power with very simple modifications like a tune, so rear end grip becomes more of a concern. While one driver piloting an F8X M is perfectly satisfied running 275's on all four corners of the car to gain all of the benefits of a square setup, another driver in pursuit of shaving down lap times or finishing on the podium will prioritize maximizing front and rear end grip at all costs. As they say, big HP figures look attractive on paper, but you have to be able to put that power down to the pavement. This is most noticeable when applying throttle on corner exit, and cars like the Mustang GT350 and Camaro ZL1 1LE find themselves in the same predicament.

The last major contributing factor is tire availability. With 18" wheels, there is an overwhelming amount of support from tire manufactures, and for many years this diameter (and smaller) was the primary focus for manufacturers offering track and race compounds. As the industry shifts to larger brake setups and in turn larger diameter wheels, tire manufacturers are slowly expanding their 19"+ offerings. At the end of the day, you can have the perfect wheel specifications, but they are of no value to you if there aren't tires to choose from. Tire availability or lack thereof in your desired compound may influence your decision you to run a square or staggered configuration. The good news is that we are offering both solutions.

We took the liberty of listing tire options in each of the respective configurations with an emphasis on performance street tires, r-compounds, semi slicks, and racing slicks. We are really hoping more extreme summer and r-compounds become available in the appropriate 19" sizes. If we missed anything, just let us know and we will edit the list.

[SIZE="4"]Tire Availability - Staggered Configurations[/SIZE]

F: 265/30-19 / R: 285/30-19

Performance Street
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91
Firestone Firehawk Indy 500

Extreme Summer
None available

Streetable Track and Competition
None available

Semi-slicks & Slicks
None available

F: 265/30-19 / R: 295/30-19

Performance Street
Michelin Pilot Sport 4S [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91

Extreme Summer
None available

Streetable Track and Competition
Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Toyo R888R

Semi-slicks & Slicks
None available

F: 275/30-19 / R: 295/30-19

Performance Street
Michelin Pilot Sport 4S [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91

Extreme Summer
None available

Streetable Track and Competition
None available

Semi-slicks & Slicks
None available

F: 275/30-19 / R: 305/30-19

Performance Street
Michelin Pilot Sport 4S [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Continental Extremecontact Sport
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91

Extreme Summer
None available

Streetable Track and Competition
None available

Semi-slicks & Slicks
None available


[SIZE="4"]Tire Availability - Rotatable Square Configurations[/SIZE]

F&R: 265/30-19

Performance Street
Michelin Pilot Sport 4S [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91

Extreme Summer
None available

Streetable Track & Competition
Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Toyo R888R

Semi-slicks & Slicks
None available

F&R: 275/30-19

Performance Street
Michelin Pilot Sport 4S [COLOR="Blue"]* APEX favorite *[/COLOR]
Continental Extremecontact Sport
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo2
Kumho Ecsta PS91
Firestone Firehawk Indy 500
Dunlop Direzza DZ102

Extreme Summer
Nitto NT05

Streetable Track & Competition
None available

Semi-Slicks and Slicks
None Available

"Photos"


The photos below depict how well the 19" EC-7 wheels compliment the beautiful lines of the M2 and M2C, however, please note that these cars are equipped with slightly different width, offset and tire specifications.











- Ryan
What front lip is that?
Appreciate 0
      04-14-2019, 02:12 PM   #37
BAN_M2C
Colonel
BAN_M2C's Avatar
United_States
2884
Rep
2,478
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sunshine State

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApexRaceParts View Post
We understand enthusiasts will have different preferences when it comes to design, however, through community surveys we have found the EC-7 to be very popular. We believe the design lends itself to the F87 M2 chassis, and they are extremely resilient on and off the race track. We are always open to offering these wheel specifications in another design, like the ARC-8, if the demand is there.

19" ARC-8's will clear the M2C brakes, and there are sizes currently available that M2C enthusiasts can use. ARC-8 19x9.5" ET33 square, with 5mm spacers up front would be one of them. Here is a photo of 19" ARC-8's over the massive M4 CCB's.

- Ryan
Dont get me wrong, EC7 is an amazing design, I have them on my 135i.

But I would like a track setup more on the lighter side. The setup you guys offer for M2C has a total weight of 94 pounds which is an improvement compared to the approximately 101 pounds the stock 788 weigh.

I checked on the page but ARC8 dont come in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45. You do offer a 19x9.5 ET33 which with a 5mm spacer gets to same front spec but 10.5 rear I found only comes in ET22.

How many sets you would need interest in to build the ARC8 set in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45?

If I go off of the weight you guys list for 9.5 and 10.5 ARC8 the total weight for a set would be roughly 87 pounds which is a solid improvement over the stock 788M wheels.
__________________
2019 M2 Competition Ordered
2017 LBB M2|2011 BSM 135i|Follow me on IG
2019 M2 Competition|2017 LBB M2 (Sold)|2011 BSM 135i|1974 Granarot 2002
Appreciate 2
      04-15-2019, 10:19 AM   #38
Proctor750
Lieutenant
372
Rep
500
Posts

Drives: E30 M3
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hattie B's

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAN_M2C View Post
Dont get me wrong, EC7 is an amazing design, I have them on my 135i.

But I would like a track setup more on the lighter side. The setup you guys offer for M2C has a total weight of 94 pounds which is an improvement compared to the approximately 101 pounds the stock 788 weigh.

I checked on the page but ARC8 dont come in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45. You do offer a 19x9.5 ET33 which with a 5mm spacer gets to same front spec but 10.5 rear I found only comes in ET22.

How many sets you would need interest in to build the ARC8 set in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45?

If I go off of the weight you guys list for 9.5 and 10.5 ARC8 the total weight for a set would be roughly 87 pounds which is a solid improvement over the stock 788M wheels.
I thought there was some kind of clearance issue with the big 2NH brakes using arc 8 19's? What I mean is even if they were the correct offset the spokes would contact caliper? I swear I read that somewhere - maybe apex can comment as I do prefer the arc8 over the EC7 but at this point I'll take whatever fits. I'm not fast enough for the corner weight to matter yet.
Appreciate 1
BAN_M2C2883.50

      04-15-2019, 02:10 PM   #39
Expert@ApexRaceParts
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Expert@ApexRaceParts's Avatar
976
Rep
4,200
Posts


Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAN_M2C View Post
Dont get me wrong, EC7 is an amazing design, I have them on my 135i.

But I would like a track setup more on the lighter side. The setup you guys offer for M2C has a total weight of 94 pounds which is an improvement compared to the approximately 101 pounds the stock 788 weigh.

I checked on the page but ARC8 dont come in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45. You do offer a 19x9.5 ET33 which with a 5mm spacer gets to same front spec but 10.5 rear I found only comes in ET22.

How many sets you would need interest in to build the ARC8 set in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45?

If I go off of the weight you guys list for 9.5 and 10.5 ARC8 the total weight for a set would be roughly 87 pounds which is a solid improvement over the stock 788M wheels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proctor750 View Post
I thought there was some kind of clearance issue with the big 2NH brakes using arc 8 19's? What I mean is even if they were the correct offset the spokes would contact caliper? I swear I read that somewhere - maybe apex can comment as I do prefer the arc8 over the EC7 but at this point I'll take whatever fits. I'm not fast enough for the corner weight to matter yet.
Proctor750 is correct. Because of the concave design of the ARC-8 face, caliper clearance becomes an issue. With the size of the rotors and calipers, the barrel clearance would be so tight that you'd risk damage if a pebble were to get stuck between the caliper and the barrel. The EC-7 was designed with brake clearance as the priority, making it the perfect choice for the M2C.

--Dylan
Appreciate 1
      04-15-2019, 05:05 PM   #40
BAN_M2C
Colonel
BAN_M2C's Avatar
United_States
2884
Rep
2,478
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Competition
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Sunshine State

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Expert@ApexRaceParts View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BAN_M2C View Post
Dont get me wrong, EC7 is an amazing design, I have them on my 135i.

But I would like a track setup more on the lighter side. The setup you guys offer for M2C has a total weight of 94 pounds which is an improvement compared to the approximately 101 pounds the stock 788 weigh.

I checked on the page but ARC8 dont come in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45. You do offer a 19x9.5 ET33 which with a 5mm spacer gets to same front spec but 10.5 rear I found only comes in ET22.

How many sets you would need interest in to build the ARC8 set in 19x9.5 ET28 and 19x10.5 ET45?

If I go off of the weight you guys list for 9.5 and 10.5 ARC8 the total weight for a set would be roughly 87 pounds which is a solid improvement over the stock 788M wheels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proctor750 View Post
I thought there was some kind of clearance issue with the big 2NH brakes using arc 8 19's? What I mean is even if they were the correct offset the spokes would contact caliper? I swear I read that somewhere - maybe apex can comment as I do prefer the arc8 over the EC7 but at this point I'll take whatever fits. I'm not fast enough for the corner weight to matter yet.
Proctor750 is correct. Because of the concave design of the ARC-8 face, caliper clearance becomes an issue. With the size of the rotors and calipers, the barrel clearance would be so tight that you'd risk damage if a pebble were to get stuck between the caliper and the barrel. The EC-7 was designed with brake clearance as the priority, making it the perfect choice for the M2C.

--Dylan
Thanks, that's all I needed to know.

I was about to just say fuckit and order them from my shop guys and do the test fit but wanted to avoid getting them and then having the spokes hit the caliper.

Hopefully you guys come out with an ARC8 or another set that is actually light that clears the 6 pots.

If not I see myself getting the 763m for track duty.
__________________
2019 M2 Competition Ordered
2017 LBB M2|2011 BSM 135i|Follow me on IG
2019 M2 Competition|2017 LBB M2 (Sold)|2011 BSM 135i|1974 Granarot 2002
Appreciate 1
      04-16-2019, 06:28 AM   #41
AlpsRider
Colonel
AlpsRider's Avatar
1403
Rep
2,213
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition, LBB, 6MT
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Expert@ApexRaceParts View Post
Proctor750 is correct. Because of the concave design of the ARC-8 face, caliper clearance becomes an issue. With the size of the rotors and calipers, the barrel clearance would be so tight that you'd risk damage if a pebble were to get stuck between the caliper and the barrel. The EC-7 was designed with brake clearance as the priority, making it the perfect choice for the M2C.

--Dylan
It's too bad that BMW didn't think of that. My 788M front wheels both have grooves from rocks getting stuck between the calipers and the barrel.
Appreciate 1
      04-16-2019, 11:23 AM   #42
ApexRaceParts
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
755
Rep
2,299
Posts


Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derkluge View Post
Are there any wider-than-stock tires - but with a stock aspect ratio (i.e., 35) - that would work on these wheels, assuming the car has a stock suspension? (Something like F:255/35/19; B:285/35/19?)
Keep in mind the definition of an aspect ratio. Aspect ratio is the ratio of the height of the tire's cross-section to its width. For example, in a size P245/35 R19 tire, the 35 means that the height is equal to 35% of the tire's width. The bigger the aspect ratio, the bigger the tire's sidewall will be.

Here is the important part that many forget. As you increase tire width over stock, the aspect ratio should naturally decrease in an effort to keep the rolling diameter as close to stock as possible. In other words, a 35 aspect ratio and a 30 aspect ratio can actually be close or equivalent in sidewall height at the appropriate respective widths. If you kept the same aspect ratio with a substantially wider tire, you would end up with a tire/sidewall that is much taller than stock - this would quickly lead to issues. Often times the wider tire is slightly shorter, but still very much acceptable.

Example

Stock front tire - 245/35-19 = 25.75" tall
Correct aftermarket front tire - 275/30-19 = 25.5" tall
Difference in diameter = -0.25" or -1%

vs.

Stock front tire - 245/35-19 = 25.75" tall
Incorrect aftermarket front tire - 275/35-19 = 26.58" tall
Difference in diameter = -0.83" or 3.1%


If you only increase the tire widths by one size over stock, 255/35-19 front and 275/35-19 rear, you can get away with running a 35 aspect ratio as the increase in height over stock is nominal. The popular Bridgestone RE-71R's come in these sizes, so I have a feeling many enthusiasts will try these out with our wheels.

Stock front tire - 245/35-19 = 25.75" tall
Correct aftermarket front tire - 255/35-19 = 26" tall
Difference in diameter = 0.27" or 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megator View Post
Any suspension work to fit that square setup? and what ET did you choose?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cntzl View Post
They are ET35 so front requires 12mm or bigger spacers. I run -3 front and -2 rear camber. Also, the car is slightly lowered on Ohlins.
The EC-7 18x9.5" ET35 square setup that cntzl is running only requires 5mm spacers up front to clear the stock suspension along with a wide variety of aftermarket coilovers. With that said, coilovers known to compromise inner strut clearance like KW and Ohlins will require thicker spacers. Those suspension designs just eat up a lot of inner clearance.

- Ryan

Last edited by ApexRaceParts; 04-16-2019 at 11:31 AM..
Appreciate 1
      04-17-2019, 01:33 PM   #43
Proctor750
Lieutenant
372
Rep
500
Posts

Drives: E30 M3
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Hattie B's

iTrader: (0)

FYI to anyone who joined the Group Buy for the EC 7, I clicked to join the gangup thing but didn't realize there was a second step to "lock in" your per-order. I had to go back and hit the "PLEDGE" option to actually be part of the group buy.
Appreciate 0
      04-17-2019, 01:47 PM   #44
Expert@ApexRaceParts
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Expert@ApexRaceParts's Avatar
976
Rep
4,200
Posts


Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Proctor750 View Post
FYI to anyone who joined the Group Buy for the EC 7, I clicked to join the gangup thing but didn't realize there was a second step to "lock in" your per-order. I had to go back and hit the "PLEDGE" option to actually be part of the group buy.
Thanks for pointing this out! We've sent this feedback to the GangUp team and will be reviewing ways to make it more apparent that pledging is required in order to actually lock-in your allocation.

--Dylan
Appreciate 1
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40 PM.




m2
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST