MR2 Championship

Hi Chaps,

I'm getting a lot of queries about wheel offsets at the moment. I'm always open to comments and suggestions, but here's a quick explanation of why the rules are the way they are.

In order to keep all cars as equal as possible, wheels are limited to the stock sizes. However, we realised some time ago that while the standard offset for the wheels was ET39, most aftermarket wheels in circulation for the mk1 were ET38. In an attempt to make this supply of cheap, used aftermarket wheels available to competitors the 2mm tolerance was introduced into the regulation governing track. It is for this reason that the offset is not specified within the wheel regulations.

The problem is that if we free up the regulations governing offset we may end up with a situation where a certain value is visibly advantageous and to be competitive everyone will have to shell out for aftermarket wheels. Equally, we could allow the use of spacers to bring out wheels that are too inboard to the correct offset. This would in turn add additional complication to the scrutineering and elegibilty process.

I'm all for allowing modifications to cars where appropriate, but don't want to introduce unnessecary complication / expense / potential for abuse.

Feedback on this is very much welcomed!

Patrick
Formula Official

Patrick

The wheels that we ran this year on Nicks car (Mazda mx5 BBS alloys) were et45 offset. As the wheels are the wrong offset (i.e too narrow) we debated using spacers. I assume that this will not be allowed as a few people ran them?

We do have another set of wheels which i believe are BMW BBS Alloys of the correct size so it's not a great problem, but they weigh about 2.5kgs more per wheel so i'll have to cut his other leg off too!

Chris

Am I right in thinking that an increase in offset and therefore a reduction in track is actually detrimental to the handling rather than a benefit ?

In theory yes, though i doubt 5mm would make much difference.

In theory the blue book does allow the use of spacers of no more than 2.5cm thickness, but not extended studs.

However, checking the track of every vehicle would be a right pain! So i can see where the problems and issues arrise. How about wheels with bigger offsets must be spaced back out to standard track of the vehicle? Its one option i suppose, but difficult to police.

Perhaps clarifying the rules by stating the track can not exceed standard by more than 2mm would be more effective.

If the cars are going to be checked we need to know what standard is and how to simply and reliably check our cars in advance of Snetterton.

Personally I'm not going to bother!

Dave

I dont actually own any original wheels as my car came with aftermarket ones, mine are the same as several others ET45 and as such create a narower track on the car.

I would agree that we should look at increases rather than decreases in track. I am certinly not looking to buy more wheels.

Blocky wrote:Perhaps clarifying the rules by stating the track can not exceed standard by more than 2mm would be more effective.

Sounds reasonable

nick_r wrote:I would agree that we should look at increases rather than decreases in track.

Blocky wrote:Perhaps clarifying the rules by stating the track can not exceed standard by more than 2mm would be more effective.

Sounds reasonable without anyone gaining an advantage through an increase in track, and i wouldn't have thought it advantageous to decrease track?

I suppose an ET45 is -6mm per side, so 12mm overall. Is just over 1cm of track actually going to translate into much difference in the real world?? Either way for that matter?

Perhaps the sensible way is to say no offsets lower than +38? After all, if it is higher it is not really advantageous?

Is there any further news on the offset debate ?

It's on the agenda for the Annual Formula Discussions on the 22nd. FWIW, I'm currently thinking that setting a maximum offset (of +38 ) is the way to go.

Cheers,

Patrick

I hope you mean minimum!