Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Interest in Wheels/Tires Designed for Range Increases of 8-13%?

Interest in Which Size/Finish?


  • Total voters
    30
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I would love an aero cap that would fit on my 20” performance wheels.

https://teslike.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/mi6b.gif

Based on the chart above, I don't know if aero covers would do as much on a 20". I think if Tesla offered 18", 19", and 20" Wheels and tires that cleared P3D+ and all other Tesla Model 3s would be the way to go. Let anyone get whatever they want. But it is against Tesla's "streamline" approach.
 
I need confirmation, but the 18" Aeros may only need spacers to have the calipers clear the spokes. I know on another FB thread, an owner did that. But he never provided information on the sized spacers, etc. And without proof of pictures, I can't confirm or deny. Hence my initial comment on if we have confirmation.
Wouldn't that mess up a lot of, or all, the efficiency gains from the Aeros? Having tires stick a little further out the sides seems like a bad idea when you're worried about drag. Maybe it's better than the stock 20" but would it actually be better than MXM4 mounted on some random 18" that had a big enough barrel to clear the calipers?

A lot of the MXM4 gains, I suspect, is that they are actually a lot narrower on the tread than most other 235 tires. Certainly the PS4S and other performance minded summer tires. This extra gap under the edge of the tire probably minimizes turbulence getting pushed under the car, and is just generally less frontal area pushing air. That isn't really related to the rims at all.
 
Wouldn't that mess up a lot of, or all, the efficiency gains from the Aeros? Having tires stick a little further out the sides seems like a bad idea when you're worried about drag. Maybe it's better than the stock 20" but would it actually be better than MXM4 mounted on some random 18" that had a big enough barrel to clear the calipers?

A lot of the MXM4 gains, I suspect, is that they are actually a lot narrower on the tread than most other 235 tires. Certainly the PS4S and other performance minded summer tires. This extra gap under the edge of the tire probably minimizes turbulence getting pushed under the car, and is just generally less frontal area pushing air. That isn't really related to the rims at all.

That narrowness likely also allows the air curtain openings (or whatever they're called) in the front bumper cover area to be more effective by allowing a cleaner flow path around the front wheel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SammichLover
I would be very interested in the 17" wheels for a Model 3 long range.
Better ride, quieter, more range, and less likely to bend a wheel in a big pothole...all good!

Have you made any progress?
Thank you for your efforts
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noodles
^^^ a few things. First off tire is more aerodynamic then rim. The smaller the rim the more tire. Also the smaller the rim the taller the tire, tire is lighter then rim therefor less rotational mass. Less rotational mass equals less energy to get it rotating. I’ll add most likely small differences but all other variables equal for energy use 17 < 18 < 19 < 20.

there is no functional or performance advantage of larger wheels. I would bet a 3 would be faster around a track, faster on Autocross, ride better, and be more efficient with a 16 or 17” than a 19 or 20. The problem is for the last 10-20 years consumers have been taught bigger rims look better and are better for performance. Not sure where this came from, late 1990’s hip hop? video games? fast n furious? But it is wrong.
 
I think a larger part of the aftermarket is chasing range over performance.
I'm mostly concern about look and the Tesla wheels look great.

I would never spend Thousand of Dollars for new wheels for little range increase or different look
that nobody else will notice or at the contrary people would think that I am dumb to spend money on it.

- I found the Tesla 18" Aero with plastic cover very ugly.

- I like the Silver 19" Sport and older 20" Performance.

- I don't like the new Black 20" Performance (with black rim, curb-rash are visible one mile away).​
 
Last edited:
^^^ a few things. First off tire is more aerodynamic then rim. The smaller the rim the more tire. Also the smaller the rim the taller the tire, tire is lighter then rim therefor less rotational mass. Less rotational mass equals less energy to get it rotating. I’ll add most likely small differences but all other variables equal for energy use 17 < 18 < 19 < 20.

there is no functional or performance advantage of larger wheels. I would bet a 3 would be faster around a track, faster on Autocross, ride better, and be more efficient with a 16 or 17” than a 19 or 20. The problem is for the last 10-20 years consumers have been taught bigger rims look better and are better for performance. Not sure where this came from, late 1990’s hip hop? video games? fast n furious? But it is wrong.

So the tire is more aerodynamic than a smooth rim?

Rotating weight is grossly over fixated on around here, yes it is a factor but so is regenerative braking so unlike an ICE much of the energy wasted in acceleration of a heavier wheel can be recaptured. Fixation on lite weight may make sense for stop and go where you can't get the most from regen due to traffic. On the highway thought the energy saved with lite wheels will be a non-factor.

A lot of you fixate on the academic and think a technical difference translates to a practical one and are eager to go past the point of diminishing returns.

On rim size I will agree I think rims have gotten larger than necessary for handling performance. I come from playing with a car that that was available with 15 or 17" rims with tires in the 27-28" range. With that much side wall in play there was a definite handling improvement going to the 17".
IMO 18" is a healthy balance for a 3, more sidewall can roll in corners.
Once you get into very short sidewall the tire can skip on cracks and bumps especially in curves I think you are at that point with the 3 on 20s or the S on 21s
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jedi2155
I specificly want a light weight rim that WILL accept the aerocap
I will buy it!!! and that's coming from someone who never buys aftermarket rims

but my m3 is not standard. it's long range. it weighs more

17 rims weigh less than 18 tf better range and better ride confort! and the fact that it will be 1 inch thinner?
 
Last edited:
Given Tesla's buying power and R&D capability don't you thinking they could add a little range and hold price they would have if rim.weight were such a big factor?

Yes tire/wheel package weight reduction will increase range some but you are grossly overestimating by how much.
 
So the tire is more aerodynamic than a smooth rim?

A lot of the aero drag from the rim comes from ventilation drag, where the high pressure air from the wheel well flows through the wheel spokes to the lower pressure area next to the wheel face. Due to simple mechanics (moment arm), the drag of the spokes rotating though this moving air is greater, the bigger the diameter of the wheel. So, a smaller dia wheel means less aero drag, and better efficiency. Due to packaging the brakes, there is a limit to how small the wheel can be.

Using a wheel that has a larger diameter than is needed to clear the brake calipers is total BS, and only motivated by cosmetic appearance. It has no other advantages, only downsides.
 
Last edited:
So the tire is more aerodynamic than a smooth rim?

Rotating weight is grossly over fixated on around here, yes it is a factor but so is regenerative braking so unlike an ICE much of the energy wasted in acceleration of a heavier wheel can be recaptured. Fixation on lite weight may make sense for stop and go where you can't get the most from regen due to traffic. On the highway thought the energy saved with lite wheels will be a non-factor.

A lot of you fixate on the academic and think a technical difference translates to a practical one and are eager to go past the point of diminishing returns.

On rim size I will agree I think rims have gotten larger than necessary for handling performance. I come from playing with a car that that was available with 15 or 17" rims with tires in the 27-28" range. With that much side wall in play there was a definite handling improvement going to the 17".
IMO 18" is a healthy balance for a 3, more sidewall can roll in corners.
Once you get into very short sidewall the tire can skip on cracks and bumps especially in curves I think you are at that point with the 3 on 20s or the S on 21s
Formula 1 cars run 13” rims with an almost 7” sidewall. They have no issues with sidewall roll and poor handling... There is a move to change the F1 standard to 18” so the cars look “more modern”, many of the teams/manufacturers are concerned, claiming the cars will go slower on 18” then on 13”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clivew
A lot of the aero drag from the rim comes from ventilation drag, where the high pressure air from the wheel well flows through the wheel spokes to the lower pressure area next to the wheel face. Due to simple mechanics (moment arm), the drag of the spokes rotating though this moving air is greater, the bigger the diameter of the wheel. So, a smaller dia wheel means less aero drag, and better efficiency. Due to packaging the brakes, there is a limit to how small the wheel can be.

Using a wheel that has a larger diameter than is needed to clear the brake calipers is total BS, and only motivated by cosmetic appearance. It has no other advantages, only downsides.
you're giving me the urge to pull out my System Dynamics and Race Car Vehicle Dynamics text book
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clivew