Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
  • We just completed a significant update, but we still have some fixes and adjustments to make, so please bear with us for the time being. Cheers!

Comparison of OEM Aero vs Signature Forged 18inch Wheels: Weight | Range | Feedback

EVM3

Member
Feb 21, 2019
36
45
Cali
Some background:

- Model 3 Non-AWD
- 3 out of 4 wheels bent during a road trip to Santa Barbara, Tesla wouldn't replace them
- suspected autopilot is challenging for any bad road since it only knows to stay within its lanes
- crucial to have stronger wheels otherwise not safe with these Aero cast wheels IMO

Purpose is to have stronger wheels than our aero stock, i don't want to go wider and lose range. I decided to go with Signature SV902 in matte black in 18x8.5 so I can reuse stock Michelin Primacy MXM4 235/45/18. This way I can keep Model 3 design intact with same wheel diameter and width. Also I can do a apple to apple compairson.

OEM Aero vs Signature Forged 18inch SV902 Wheels

Weight (Wheel Only)
Aero: 23lb
Signature SV902: 17.5lb

Weight (With Michelin Primacy 235/45/18)
Aero: 49.5lb
Signature SV902: 44lb

Range
Aero: 244 Wh/mi (7750 miles testing)
Signature SV902: 226 Wh/mi (100 miles testing so far, will continue updating)

Feedback:
- I have only driven 100 miles after putting them on, so I will keep updating this thread.
- after 22lb reduction of unsprung weight, the car definitely felt lighter, noticeable pickup speed right off the line
- forged should be stronger, but need to take another road trip soon to test it out

Since I took the time and money trying to improve our beloved Model 3, I want to share the datas with the forum members. Any comments or input are welcome. Below are some photos, thanks for reading.

photo.jpeg


photo (1).jpeg


photo (2).jpeg
 

EVM3

Member
Feb 21, 2019
36
45
Cali
Those are the stock tires? On an identically sized wheel (18x8.5)?
Because those tires don’t look nearly as stretched as they do on the aero wheels. Gives you some nice curb protection!

Yes these are stock tires, and the SV902 wheels are 18x8.5 from Signature.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: e-FTW

srs5694

Active Member
Jan 15, 2019
1,024
1,148
Woonsocket, RI
What's your mix of city vs. highway (high-speed) driving? The claim is that the aero wheels help aerodynamics, but that effect is most important at highway speeds, not driving around town at 20 mph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SSedan and Dre78

EVM3

Member
Feb 21, 2019
36
45
Cali
What's your mix of city vs. highway (high-speed) driving? The claim is that the aero wheels help aerodynamics, but that effect is most important at highway speeds, not driving around town at 20 mph.

Good question, I should've included this information. I am about 30/70 city vs highway, that aero cap is too much of an eye sore, I just can't do it no more, LOL!
 

EVM3

Member
Feb 21, 2019
36
45
Cali
Seems you also lowered the car? Have you factored it out for the range increasing?

I did lowered and wheels together so I didn't factor in lowering for potential range difference. Can any of you with non-awd, aero wheel contribute to us the Wh/mile number just for compairson?
 

zhu-

custom title
Oct 24, 2018
882
752
NJ
Aero is 18x8.5 ET40

Signature SV902 is 18x8.5 ET24 (so it's more flush fitment and more concave than stock)

Those wheels look great but I've seen an ET25 wheel fit much more flush than how these ET24s look.
 

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
8,973
10,695
San Diego
Quickly used some calculators. I might have screwed this up.
Assuming: 10kg spinning @ radius of 8 inches (this is obviously approximate and probably overestimates the energy of the additional spinning weight?)
At 60mph, vehicle speed in ft/s is at: 88ft/sec, wheel circumference is 6.89ft, so 12.77rev/sec
Angular velocity: 80.2rad/sec
Moment of inertia: m*r^2 = 10kg*0.2m^2 = 0.4kg*m^2
Rotational KE: 0.5*I*omega^2 = 0.5 * 0.4kg/m^2 * 80.2^2/sec = 1286kg*m^2/s^2 = 1286joules

KE of vehicle at 60mph is 1/2*m*v^2 = 1/2*4100lbs*60mph^2 = 669kJ

So an additional 0.2% improvement beyond the weight savings if you lose that rotating weight?

Please correct obvious errors here. Maybe I'm off by a factor of 10 somewhere? I don't have a feel for what is reasonable, though it seems like the answer would be a small (but significant if you're racing!) effect. This answer due to rotational KE only would drop ~10ms off the 0-60. The weight would be an additional 20ms (0.54% of 3.6s), so total would be 30ms better 0-60. That's not nothing!

Some results from people here suggest it could be more like 100ms though (could be vehicle variation or driver weight though). But maybe calculations above are wrong.
 
Last edited:

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top