-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I'm assuming you're interested in this to reduce vulnerability to impact damage? A 245 / 45 - 18 is probably the largest rolling diameter you can fit inside the restrictions of the front suspension assembly. The problem is that the upper control arm curves out and you only have an extra centimeter of rolling diameter over stock, before you're rubbing up against the control arm, which precludes fitment of course. A 255/45 - 18 has rolling diameter of 27 in, and that may simply be too large. In any case, the only way you could test this would be to mount a Tire to an 18in wheel and test fit. Unfortunately, at that point you own the tire, as most shops will not fit non standard sizes on and then let you return the tire once it's mounted. In other words, if you mount it you own it. A 225 / 50 - 18 has a rolling diameter of 26.9, but that's cutting it close, and the tire is not really wide enough or with enough load capacity to support the vehicle.
In any case the 245 / 45 - 18 is going to be significantly less vulnerable to impact damage than the 20 in option of the 235/35 - 20. The increasing tread width of the 245 / 45 actually offers a non-trivial increase in Impact resistance over the stock width.
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed reply. Yes, it is to reduce vulnerability to impact. It’s also my assumption that a taller profile is more forgiving and I can get more miles and wear and tear out of it. I’m not driving on the edge of handling, so I’m not prioritizing what handles best. I think the tall sidewall also looks good (I could be against the grain here of the low-profile looks preference).
I’m gonna have to take my front wheels off to get a better idea of what you mentioned. I vaguely recall a thread with Mountain Pass Performance where they discuss clearance issues.
Are there others with pictures?
I’m gonna have to take my front wheels off to get a better idea of what you mentioned. I vaguely recall a thread with Mountain Pass Performance where they discuss clearance issues.
Are there others with pictures?
I believe the MPP thread was more about Tire width limitations and whether you could fit a 275 / 35 vs just a 265 / 35 in the 19-inch wheel size. That was more about Collision with the lateral portion of the front spindle instead of the top portion but it's really the same piece of the suspension that is setting limits on both width and rolling diameter at the front. At the rear it's a different story with a whole lot more room.. There are many pictures in various threads , and actually you can simply look in to your front wheel wells and see yourself that the top of the tire is snugged into a space underneath that Central front spindle. There's not a lot of room. Tops, one centimeter. That means your rolling diameter cannot be 27 and a half or even 27 inches. I'll dig out a picture and post it later.
Last edited:
I would think the benefits of a higher profile would be small. And for that you get clearance problems and a speedometer that reads too low because of the extra tire circumference. A tire not made specifically for Tesla or electrics will probably have a higher rolling resistance than the OEM tire. The 18" tires should be fine. Keep in mind that a significantly longer lasting tire may also have a longer stopping distance. That was always a good reason to buy sportier tires.
It's even simpler in a sense. You cannot get a 50 Series tire that is adequately wide to fit on the model 3 in an 18in wheel size. Rolling diameter is too large for even a 225 / 50 and even at this inadequate size in terms of width, the tire would rub up against the front aluminum spindle. The highest profile Tire you can fit on a Model 3 is 45 series in an 18in wheel size. But a 245 / 45 - 18 tire will give you a meaningful increment of impact protection on an 18in wheel, and its rolling diameter will fit inside the limitations of the front suspension. But that's it.
lbowroom
Plaid, white on black, CF, 8/27/21, Track Pack
I've never heard a direct report about a test fitment. However its rolling diameter is 27 in, and that's a bit more than a centimeter taller then the stock 235 / 35 - 20 which has roughly a centimeter of clearance from the front Central suspension spindle. It's possible that there's a millimeter or so of clearance, so I can't be certain that it doesn't fit, but you'd have to buy the tire and mount it to test it out. If it doesn't fit you've done an expensive experiment.
lbowroom
Plaid, white on black, CF, 8/27/21, Track Pack
When you say a centimeter taller, is that overall diameter? A centimeter clearance to the spindle is a radius dimension which means the tire would still have 5mm clearance.
T3SLA3
Member
I have bought a second hand set of tyres and rims, 245/40-19” with an offset of +45mm.
My initial calculations appeared to be fine, but the discussions above about ‘front top control arm clearance’ has me worried now.
The idea was the outside of the tyre would be the same as stock, but the inside of the tyre would be 10mm closer to the car.
My M3P- is not due for another month or so, no firm delivery details yet...
Anyone have thoughts on this?
My initial calculations appeared to be fine, but the discussions above about ‘front top control arm clearance’ has me worried now.
The idea was the outside of the tyre would be the same as stock, but the inside of the tyre would be 10mm closer to the car.
My M3P- is not due for another month or so, no firm delivery details yet...
Anyone have thoughts on this?
SammichLover
Banned
Stock 18" MXM4 tires have a diameter of 26.3", 0.7" = 18mm. Best I could measure those have at best 12mm clearance on top, probably a hair less. So you're talking about less than 3mm clearance for something with a 27" diameter. That's very close, about room to slide in 2 dimes, one stacked on the other, between. That's it, as an estimate. You'll need to take a shot with physical fit test, as mentioned prior, to see if it has even that much.
SammichLover
Banned
Those will be similar height but are likely slightly taller sidewall by (245-235)/235 = 4.3%, although exact tire model will be a factor so check the spec sheet. As well the tire shape on the shoulders matter, generally that'll be determined by the tread width spec. Higher number there than stock means you're taller further out to the edge of the tire.
Still I wouldn't expect only 10mm closer to be much concern, there's a lot more room on the inside edge than the top side before you get to the part where the curve down begins.
Watts_Up
Well-Known Member
The following Model 3 wider tires are fine and look great:
Last edited:
SammichLover
Banned
255/40 are wider but they're actually somewhat shorter tires. You can see they mention this down the thread a ways.
I think your entire premise is flawed:
1. There is a pretty significant amount of sidewall on the 18's. Impact vulnerability will never be zero, but it is pretty darn low with the 18" tire.
2. Not sure what you mean by "forgiving," but it is definitely not a safe assumption to believe you can be more miles out of a taller sidewall. Sidewall and tire life are independent attributes. The caveat is that you may find more ultra long life tires in that range, but there are plenty of options in the factory size that have long treadlife. One thing to consider is that tires age. As they get older, they get harder. As they get harder, their performance goes down. Don't discount this too much. It is very much a real thing. A tire that is a few years old should be replaced, regardless of wear.
I'd also suggest that even though you don't prioritize handling, safety is another factor that comes into play. A hard tire will reduce handling, but also braking. And it will also reduce your ability to make emergency evasive maneuvers, or since we are talking Tesla here, the ability of the car to make emergency maneuvers when it detects a likely collision.
T3SLA3
Member
Thanks for that info about the inside clearance. Sounds like there is still hope. I will see for sure when I swap out the 18” Aeros for 19” RAYS.
Right you are! My mistake. I'm going to get out there with a small ruler and try to measure it more precisely. Dumb mistake for sure. That would mean a 255 / 45 - 18 in all probability would fit at least in the vertical dimension - but then there's the lateral squeeze as you expand the sidewall as that suspension spindle is tight on both sides. And since you're expanding both vertically and laterally in relationship to the line of the wheel, I suspect it's going to still be very very tight. That is a seriously big tire.
That sounds like a reasonable estimate. And you have to keep in mind at higher speeds tires expand slightly so that one to two millimeters of clearance may disappear at 80 to 90 miles an hour.
Since you don't have the thinner performance rotor hats, you got a little more room to play with in terms of positively offset Wheels. What's the width of the wheel? 45 is going to be cutting it close, particularly if it's 9.5 inch. But if it's 9 in you should be okay. Check back in with us though to confirm because it becomes a critical data point. I have to order some custom wheels myself and I have to figure out how much offset I can get away with. For sure it's better to have an extra millimeter of poke compared to being a millimeter short of clearance
Last edited:
T3SLA3
Member
The rims are 19” x 8.5”.
Using willtheyfit.com, comparing to stock wheels, they should be similar in all dimensions, but 10mm closer to the car / strut.
Similar threads
