BeardedRobot
***
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
- Messages
- 15
Has anyone out there replaced the stock wheels on their eGolf? The stock wheels are beyond fugly, imo...
Setting aside any potential aesthetic debates, I'm wondering if anyone has noticed any impact on range by changing to a more conventional wheel design. I'm assuming that the stock wheels are designed as they are to minimize aerodynamic losses at high speeds. That said, the stock wheels (though I haven't weighed them) are undoubtedly heavy, so VW is accepting a power and torque loss (higher unsprung weight and rotating mass) in favor of the aerodynamic gains.
My theory is that by choosing a lightweight wheel of more traditional (and aesthetically pleasing) design, you may be able to make up for the potential aerodynamic losses with the gain in power and torque. I seem to remember an old racer's rule of thumb that every pound of unsprung weight saved is worth 5hp; and something similar for every pound of rotating weight to gains in torque.
So, assuming equivalence in tires/rolling resistance, I think you could make the case that lighter, non-aerodynamic wheels might result in higher miles/kWh than heavy, aerodynamic wheels- especially if your average speed is relatively low (as aerodynamics play a much smaller role at low speeds).
Any real-world experience out there to support or refute? Or am I trying too hard to justify what is really just an aesthetic decision?
-JM
Setting aside any potential aesthetic debates, I'm wondering if anyone has noticed any impact on range by changing to a more conventional wheel design. I'm assuming that the stock wheels are designed as they are to minimize aerodynamic losses at high speeds. That said, the stock wheels (though I haven't weighed them) are undoubtedly heavy, so VW is accepting a power and torque loss (higher unsprung weight and rotating mass) in favor of the aerodynamic gains.
My theory is that by choosing a lightweight wheel of more traditional (and aesthetically pleasing) design, you may be able to make up for the potential aerodynamic losses with the gain in power and torque. I seem to remember an old racer's rule of thumb that every pound of unsprung weight saved is worth 5hp; and something similar for every pound of rotating weight to gains in torque.
So, assuming equivalence in tires/rolling resistance, I think you could make the case that lighter, non-aerodynamic wheels might result in higher miles/kWh than heavy, aerodynamic wheels- especially if your average speed is relatively low (as aerodynamics play a much smaller role at low speeds).
Any real-world experience out there to support or refute? Or am I trying too hard to justify what is really just an aesthetic decision?
-JM