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 & SM-10 M2 & M2 Competition Wheels

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      05-22-2020, 01:04 PM   #221
tokki
Private First Class
Canada
204
Rep
183
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mdkcrf250r View Post
I couldn't disagree more. Try to get any other wheel company to reply to the constant asks and questions of random forum members. Not to mention this pandemic thing happening. There are a lot of different options depending on your wants/needs. Suspension set up/brand, ride height, tire model, offset, wheel width, square, staggered, track, street, tire width, profile size. They're trying to get as much rubber under the fenders as possible and that means possible fitment issues if you have an uncommon setup. If you can't figure it out, let me know what wheels you want, the width, the tires you'd like to run and what you intend to use them for and I'll tell you what offset and widths will work. Apex is doing fantastic work and always have. I've been a customer for a long time and can't say enough about their awesome customer service.
The bottom line is, if you are going to offer a M2C specific wheel set up, you should not have to be advised to run any kind of spacer and/or camber plated. Period. Now if your car is slammed or you want to run extremely aggressive widths, that's the consumer's choice and consumer should then have to do their due diligence but Apex should be offering a set that works on an otherwise stock M2C without any nonsense. They could offer a secondary optional set called Aggressive fitment or something where whatever tinkering is advised for people wanting to run a lot of negative camber or aggressive tire widths. I'm not slamming their customer service, I have no issue with that. This is more of a business-side critique. Honestly a 9.0 inch width at the front running a slight narrower tire paired with the same 10.5 inch rear with the 295 would have been the ticket. They could have sold those sets and called it M2C specific and pretty much everyone from stock to lowered could have run them without any issue.
__________________
2019 M2C Sunset Orange 6MT
Eventuri Intakes
Eisenmann Valved Full Exhaust
Appreciate 1
VisualEcho6625.50
      05-22-2020, 01:12 PM   #222
VisualEcho
Banned
VisualEcho's Avatar
United_States
6626
Rep
4,145
Posts

Drives: '18 M2 6MT
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Missouri

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2018 BMW M2  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokki View Post
The bottom line is, if you are going to offer a M2C specific wheel set up, you should not have to be advised to run any kind of spacer and/or camber plated. Period. Now if your car is slammed or you want to run extremely aggressive widths, that's the consumer's choice and consumer should then have to do their due diligence but Apex should be offering a set that works on an otherwise stock M2C without any nonsense. They could offer a secondary optional set called Aggressive fitment or something where whatever tinkering is advised for people wanting to run a lot of negative camber or aggressive tire widths. I'm not slamming their customer service, I have no issue with that. This is more of a business-side critique. Honestly a 9.0 inch width at the front running a slight narrower tire paired with the same 10.5 inch rear with the 295 would have been the ticket. They could have sold those sets and called it M2C specific and pretty much everyone from stock to lowered could have run them without any issue.
This.
Appreciate 0
      05-22-2020, 01:15 PM   #223
VisualEcho
Banned
VisualEcho's Avatar
United_States
6626
Rep
4,145
Posts

Drives: '18 M2 6MT
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Missouri

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2018 BMW M2  [10.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2PUTT View Post
all depends on tire/tire size selection and suspension. keep in mind that not all 255 (or whatever size you choose) tires are the same actual width. some run wider than others.
But it's bad practice to be so close on the specs that it comes down to the exact tire you choose. The vast majority of guys that want aftermarket wheels want the same tire, with the same near-flush fitment, and the same minimal drop, and M2 or M2C-specific wheels should (you would think) be made to accomplish that with a minimum of effort.
Appreciate 0
      05-22-2020, 02:48 PM   #224
Mdkcrf250r
Private First Class
United_States
122
Rep
141
Posts

Drives: 2018 M2
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Texas

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokki View Post
The bottom line is, if you are going to offer a M2C specific wheel set up, you should not have to be advised to run any kind of spacer and/or camber plated. Period. Now if your car is slammed or you want to run extremely aggressive widths, that's the consumer's choice and consumer should then have to do their due diligence but Apex should be offering a set that works on an otherwise stock M2C without any nonsense. They could offer a secondary optional set called Aggressive fitment or something where whatever tinkering is advised for people wanting to run a lot of negative camber or aggressive tire widths. I'm not slamming their customer service, I have no issue with that. This is more of a business-side critique. Honestly a 9.0 inch width at the front running a slight narrower tire paired with the same 10.5 inch rear with the 295 would have been the ticket. They could have sold those sets and called it M2C specific and pretty much everyone from stock to lowered could have run them without any issue.
But that's exactly the difficulty in pleasing everyone. You want a narrow tire on a 9" wheel. I sure don't.
Appreciate 1
Rundskop145.00
      05-22-2020, 03:03 PM   #225
tokki
Private First Class
Canada
204
Rep
183
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mdkcrf250r View Post
But that's exactly the difficulty in pleasing everyone. You want a narrow tire on a 9" wheel. I sure don't.
No, I want the widest tire that will fit without having to jimmy around and run the risk of rubbing everything. You can go wider than stock without running into these issues if the specs are right and chosen thoughtfully. There is no difficulty in pleasing everybody in this situation. This is how you do it: Offer a baseline wheel and tire set up that will work for the majority of M2C owners that would be a set up that works for stock ride height and stock camber. Then offer a secondary, more aggressive set up meant for those that are okay with potential rubbing and/or having to fit spacers/camber plates to work. You simply cannot be serious in offering a M2C specific set up that either rubs or will require camber plates and/or spacers in order to fit. That's amateur league.
__________________
2019 M2C Sunset Orange 6MT
Eventuri Intakes
Eisenmann Valved Full Exhaust
Appreciate 1
G80BSM282.50
      05-22-2020, 05:13 PM   #226
ApexWheels
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
ApexWheels's Avatar
1417
Rep
2,650
Posts


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

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokki View Post
Man Apex really dropped the ball on this wheel release from the get go. It should not take 10 pages of posts to decipher what works and what doesnt. First they say camber plates are needed, then they kind of back pedal and say well dont need them. Then you got a whole butt load of people needing to run spacers on these so called M2 specific wheels. This is a joke. If you want to offer a wheel set up that would work on the M2/M2C fine. But don't say as if it its custom built for the M2 when you gotta run camber plates and/or spacers to get things not to rub of suspension components or the actual damn sheetmetal of the car. If you are having issues with the front, offer a half inch narrower wheel with a custom offset that will work without any camber plates or spacers for stock or modestly lowered set ups. I'm suprised no one has the balls to say it like it is.

Hi tokki,

You brought up some fair points in regard to our M2C 19” EC-7 wheels, and I would be more than happy to offer some insight and clarity on the subject.

First off, APEX is a performance-oriented company. We strive to create wheel fitments that are able to maximize the capabilities of a given chassis by supporting desirable tire sizes in a variety of popular tire compounds. In the case of the M2 Competition, the factory wheels are 19x9” and 19x10”, respectively. When we initially began the development of our M2C-specific 19” EC-7 wheels, we looked into how we could improve upon the factory wheel and tire sizes to best meet the demands of the owners who enjoy “spirited diving” and more specifically HPDE’s (high performance driving events). If we were to offer aftermarket wheels in the same widths as the factory setup, there would be little value added to the community, and no real motivation to upgrade from their factory wheels other than a change in aesthetics.

When we approach a new project at APEX, the first question we ask ourselves is, “what is the pain point the customer or community is experiencing?”. Since 18” wheels cannot possibly clear the massive M2C brakes, we knew owners would be on the hunt for 19” wheels that could perform and stand up to repetitive abuse on track. Instead of going the easy route and directly copying the widths and offsets we had already mapped out for the 18” M2 (non-Comp) wheels we released years prior, we brought an M2C in-house to perform extensive fitment testing. This is what led to the change from 10.5” ET40 to 10.5” ET45 for the 19” rear wheels to ensure proper fender clearance.

As our OP states, these 19” wheels are versatile in the sense that they can be used in two configurations depending on the driver’s priorities, tire goals, and overall personal preference: 19x9.5” ET28 square, and the more popular 19x9.5” ET28 / 19x10.5” ET45 stagger. Our staggered fitment has a 1” delta from front to rear just like the factory wheels, however, the wider widths will better support wider compounds enthusiasts often desire. A 9.5” wheel is favorable over a 9” wheel in both scenarios, as it reduces understeer and improves turn-in by supporting wider front tires in the staggered setup, while also offering enough width to perform well in a rotatable square configuration (9” wheels front and rear would not be ideal).

To be clear, these fitments will not require any spacers with stock suspension, and it would be quite rare that negative camber is needed. I should also note that we used (265 / 295) Toyo R888R r-compound tires in our staggered test fitment, which are known to run a bit wider than your average summer tire. This means enthusiasts should expect even more inner and outer clearance when running a popular street tire like a Michelin PS4S.

With all that being said, there are a number of contributing factors that affect clearance as others have mentioned. Thin front spacers may be needed if a customer is running an aftermarket suspension that reduces inner suspension clearance due to the larger silhouette or extended spring stack height (location of the lower spring perch). Suspensions known to impede wheel and tire clearance include KW coilovers, M Performance Suspension (rebranded KW), Ohlins Road & Track, and a few others. Height adjustable sleeve kits are known to be the worse out of the bunch. If 5mm spacers are used, effectively lowering the offset to ET23, then it is possible that a small amount of negative camber is required to clear the fenders upon suspension compression. For enthusiasts running these suspension types that do not want to run spacers and are okay with running a larger stagger from front to rear, we will soon have an EC-7 19x9” ET30 that can be used as a direct fit up front.

Looking back at our OP, I think we created some confusion by adding an asterisk on the fitment chart stating that negative camber was a requirement up front, and reiterating the same messaging to a degree below in our written material. We will be updating that chart and the written text below to avoid confusion going forward. Although the 265 R888R mounted on the 9.5” ET28 wheel did not rub or cause any fitment issues on our test run, we recognized that we needed to play it safe as many enthusiasts would be putting this setup through its paces on the race track where hoping berms and major suspension compression is at play. Today, with more miles logged on these wheel and tire configurations without modifications necessary from a variety of enthusiasts, we have more consistent and accurate data to go off of.

We appreciate the discussion, and I hope my response brings more clarity in regards to these fitments, and on how we approach projects like this at APEX.
__________________
Appreciate 13
CSBM52695.50
tokki203.50
2PUTT511.50
mcvaughan702.00
Thevesh30.50
Bruuuce341.50
mrmjk125.50
VisualEcho6625.50
Rundskop145.00
      06-01-2020, 03:12 PM   #227
iBrakeLate
Private
92
Rep
76
Posts

Drives: 2020 M2 Competition
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Miami

iTrader: (0)

What would be the widest "Square" setup APEX wheels that could be run on an M2C with Ohlins without going too crazy on the camber? Will be running camber plates.

Last edited by iBrakeLate; 06-01-2020 at 04:43 PM..
Appreciate 0
      06-02-2020, 02:13 PM   #228
Expert@ApexWheels
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Expert@ApexWheels's Avatar
3467
Rep
6,683
Posts


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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by iBrakeLate View Post
What would be the widest "Square" setup APEX wheels that could be run on an M2C with Ohlins without going too crazy on the camber? Will be running camber plates.
Hi there,

Our recommended square setup for the M2C will be the following 19" EC-7 fitment:

Front & Rear: 19x9.5" ET28 with 265/30-19 tires
-Available in EC-7 design only.
-Front negative camber may be required, depending on ride height, tire brand and compound.
-275/30-19 tires can also fit, but requires additional front negative camber.
-At least a 5mm front spacer required with certain aftermarket suspensions. Larger may be needed depending on tire size, brand and compound.

With a 19x9.5" ET28 wrapped in a 265/30-19 tire at all four corners, you would need at least a 5mm front spacer and likely touch of additional front negative camber to fit this setup. As an alternative, you can also run a wider 275/30-19 tire with a bit more front negative camber and potentially a larger spacer. The actual camber requirements will be dependent on your specific tire selection and suspension setup.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

-Geirsen
__________________

Last edited by Expert@ApexWheels; 06-02-2020 at 02:55 PM..
Appreciate 0
      06-03-2020, 01:01 PM   #229
iBrakeLate
Private
92
Rep
76
Posts

Drives: 2020 M2 Competition
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Miami

iTrader: (0)

The tire selection on the 265/30/19 selection is pretty limited, so that setup goes out the window.

Going need to do more research to see if 265/35/19 and 295/30/19 combo is a possibility with the Ohlins R&T.
Appreciate 0
      06-03-2020, 07:52 PM   #230
08bonnie
Enlisted Member
39
Rep
41
Posts

Drives: JLU Wrangler
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Tampa

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tokki View Post
The bottom line is, if you are going to offer a M2C specific wheel set up, you should not have to be advised to run any kind of spacer and/or camber plated. Period. Now if your car is slammed or you want to run extremely aggressive widths, that's the consumer's choice and consumer should then have to do their due diligence but Apex should be offering a set that works on an otherwise stock M2C without any nonsense. They could offer a secondary optional set called Aggressive fitment or something where whatever tinkering is advised for people wanting to run a lot of negative camber or aggressive tire widths. I'm not slamming their customer service, I have no issue with that. This is more of a business-side critique. Honestly a 9.0 inch width at the front running a slight narrower tire paired with the same 10.5 inch rear with the 295 would have been the ticket. They could have sold those sets and called it M2C specific and pretty much everyone from stock to lowered could have run them without any issue.
This x 10
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2020, 07:18 AM   #231
Ollie RS
Private
Ollie RS's Avatar
Poland
42
Rep
76
Posts

Drives: BMW M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Warsaw

iTrader: (0)

Has anyone fitted satin black EC-7 wheels on a Hockenheim Silver M2c?

I can't seem to find any photos of this setup
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2020, 10:10 AM   #232
mcvaughan
Lieutenant Colonel
mcvaughan's Avatar
United_States
702
Rep
1,917
Posts

Drives: F87 Competition
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Katy, TX

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie RS View Post
Has anyone fitted satin black EC-7 wheels on a Hockenheim Silver M2c?

I can't seem to find any photos of this setup
Here you go.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Matt
Appreciate 6
CSBM52695.50
F80_Katz760.00
M2 GT65.50
      07-07-2020, 06:42 PM   #233
F80_Katz
F80_Katz
760
Rep
438
Posts

Drives: 2020 M2 Competition
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: New Jersey

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2008 Bmw E90 M3  [0.00]
Any updates in production for satin black?
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2020, 08:46 PM   #234
M2 GT
Private First Class
M2 GT's Avatar
66
Rep
88
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: US

iTrader: (0)

18x10 ET33?


Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvaughan View Post
Here you go.
Appreciate 0
      07-07-2020, 11:15 PM   #235
mcvaughan
Lieutenant Colonel
mcvaughan's Avatar
United_States
702
Rep
1,917
Posts

Drives: F87 Competition
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Katy, TX

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M2 GT View Post
18x10 ET33?


Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvaughan View Post
Here you go.
Apex recommended staggered setup. 9.5 and 10.5.
__________________
Matt
Appreciate 1
M2 GT65.50
      07-08-2020, 02:48 AM   #236
Ollie RS
Private
Ollie RS's Avatar
Poland
42
Rep
76
Posts

Drives: BMW M2 Competition
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Warsaw

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvaughan View Post
Here you go.
Thanks a lot! They look great
Appreciate 1
mcvaughan702.00
      07-08-2020, 07:58 AM   #237
JackieChiles
Lieutenant
JackieChiles's Avatar
226
Rep
473
Posts

Drives: 2011 MR M3 6MT
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Texas

iTrader: (1)

I love the ec7, but am really only interested in the ec7-r at this point.

Hopefully apex offers the ec-7 r in 19s soon.
Appreciate 1
F80_Katz760.00
      07-14-2020, 02:59 AM   #238
Twinsturbo
Private First Class
Sweden
23
Rep
130
Posts

Drives: M2 Competiton AW MT
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sweden

iTrader: (0)

Anyone had the staggered fitment mounted on a car with Bilstein B16 Coilovers?

Did you need a spacer? Was thinking of just lowering springs but i do think im going to a B16 Chassi instead..
Appreciate 0
      07-14-2020, 02:25 PM   #239
Montaver
Lieutenant Colonel
Montaver's Avatar
No_Country
2067
Rep
1,630
Posts

Drives: 718 GT4 & M340i LCI
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: NY

iTrader: (0)

255/275 RE-71R on MCS2WNR, -3.0 of camber. Apex recommended M2C fitment, no spacers.
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 5
      07-23-2020, 06:46 PM   #240
blitzyo
Private First Class
53
Rep
155
Posts

Drives: 19' M2C
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Bootmod3

iTrader: (0)

Are ec-7r 19s planned? I would buy them yesterday.
Appreciate 1
F80_Katz760.00
      07-24-2020, 01:58 PM   #241
Expert@ApexWheels
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Expert@ApexWheels's Avatar
3467
Rep
6,683
Posts


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

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montaver View Post
255/275 RE-71R on MCS2WNR, -3.0 of camber. Apex recommended M2C fitment, no spacers.
Looking good! How did this setup handle on track?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blitzyo View Post
Are ec-7r 19s planned? I would buy them yesterday.
They are in the works for sure but we don't yet have an ETA for them. We hope to have more info soon!

-Tom
__________________
Appreciate 1
blitzyo53.00
      08-10-2020, 07:23 PM   #242
chiefsubjugator
Private First Class
91
Rep
135
Posts

Drives: 2020 M2C 6MT LBB
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Northern California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApexRaceParts View Post

Looking back at our OP, I think we created some confusion by adding an asterisk on the fitment chart stating that negative camber was a requirement up front, and reiterating the same messaging to a degree below in our written material. We will be updating that chart and the written text below to avoid confusion going forward. Although the 265 R888R mounted on the 9.5” ET28 wheel did not rub or cause any fitment issues on our test run, we recognized that we needed to play it safe as many enthusiasts would be putting this setup through its paces on the race track where hoping berms and major suspension compression is at play. Today, with more miles logged on these wheel and tire configurations without modifications necessary from a variety of enthusiasts, we have more consistent and accurate data to go off of.

We appreciate the discussion, and I hope my response brings more clarity in regards to these fitments, and on how we approach projects like this at APEX.
I have to admit, the camber/no camber requirements are confusing as heck. I have the recommended M2C wheels, EC-7 19X9.5" ET28 up front and 19X10.5" ET45 in the rear. Everything on my car is stock. What size MPS4S can I run in front without adding camber? is 265/30/19 possible, or should I stick with 255/30/19.

Also if I do add camber, will the BMW camber correction hubs that some folks are putting on their cars do the trick?

Thanks APEX!
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 05:00 PM.




m2
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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