Alfa Romeo Giulia Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Educate me on the plus/minus of these wheel and tires setups concerning ride and handling. My current (BMW 135i 6MT) and previous (MB SLK 320 6MT) were both staggered, but was not thrilled with not being able to rotate and thus replacing fronts and backs at different times. When the time comes to special order a 2019, this is the only decision I have left to make.

Thanks all
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Staggered vs square wheels/tires ??

Anybody have thoughts on this?


Educate me on the plus/minus of these wheel and tires setups concerning ride and handling. My current (BMW 135i 6MT) and previous (MB SLK 320 6MT) were both staggered, but was not thrilled with not being able to rotate and thus replacing fronts and backs at different times. When the time comes to special order a 2019, this is the only decision I have left to make.

Thanks all
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
810 Posts
Ton of threads on this already. One main thing to think about considering you're still in the ordering phase is that I believe you're limited to a same width wheel/tire on AWD vs RWD. RWD has the option of staggered.
 

·
Registered
2018 Q4 with Fiamenghi Ti exhaust, Race Mod, and Tecnico wheels.
Joined
·
7,671 Posts
Ton of threads on this already. One main thing to think about considering you're still in the ordering phase is that I believe you're limited to a same width wheel/tire on AWD vs RWD. RWD has the option of staggered.
AWD needs the wheels to be all very close to the same diameter. The need for the width to match is a hotly debated point. According to MacGeek, AWD Veloce Giulia (sport?) comes with staggered wheels.

The inability to rotate the wheels is an issue with keeping the diameter of front versus rear closely matched particularly on a machine that is part-time 4WD like Giulia.
 

·
Registered
Tipo 33 Stradale 1/18 scale
Joined
·
3,635 Posts
my front and backs have done 21,000 klms and have about the same fingernail worth of tread left on both front and rear

this car has a near perfect 50/50 weight distribution, adaptive shock absorbers, tyre pressures checked regularly and adjusted if needed and quite possibly could be the reason why i am getting near perfect identical wear

RWD 2.0 petrol, Bridgestone Potenza S001 AR runflats

225/40/19
255/35/19
(37psi front - 39psi rear)

and i love the more aggressive staggered look
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
For AWD, as lockem notes, a staggered setup is likely to wear the AWD system prematurely. If @MacGeek can provide the engineering “acceptable” variance, you might be able to size the tires to minimize that, but it is still unnecessary wear.

As for the most compelling reason for a staggered setup, the Giulia 2.9T certainly qualifies. A high horsepower, RWD car can benefit from larger rears, but does the 2.0T gain the same benefit, maybe. The AWD 2.0T is faster 0-60 than the RWD due to traction, but we don’t have any clear data on the advantage wider rears offer to the RWD in this format. Certainly the wider rears will offer a smaller additional contact patch than the extra two fronts, and the wider rears will be subject to the he same conditions as the narrower rears, so I wouldn’t expect a huge difference.

Honestly, I think it goes to two things; getting non-run-flats and looks. Your mileage may vary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lockem

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
810 Posts
if i am not mistaken, Giulia AWD only utilises AWD in certain traction conditions, the rest of the time the car is wholly RWD anyway

EDIT : an interesting read, AWD vs RWD comparison and test

https://www.caranddriver.com/alfa-romeo/giulia
You are correct and I forget the % of time it's mostly RWD. I have the same setup as you and haven't noticed any issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Papa Gallo

·
Registered
‘19 Giulia Ti Sport Q4
Joined
·
3,887 Posts
Obviously, for RWD, bigger rears give more traction and fight oversteer.

For AWD, driven fronts do the same as bigger rears on a RWD (but better), so there is no compelling performance reason to run wider rear wheels on AWD.

That said, in an auto-apportioning AWD system like Q4 which defaults to RWD, I think there is no problem with running staggered wheels providing the overall circumference of the tires is reasonably close. I say this because I believe that until slip is detected, 100% of torque is apportioned to the rear, so there is not continual rotational speed variance front to rear to stress the drive system.

Additionally, if the wider rears give additional traction, then it stands to reason that torque will be apportioned to the front less frequently, ostensibly reducing (in a given scenario) the time torque is split, and therefore the time circumference difference may be a factor to system wear.

I’m not an expert on these matters, however, so these are just my speculative thoughts based on a rudimentary understanding of 4WD systems in general, and the Q4 AWD system specifically. I certainly defer to those with more knowledge.

It’s hard to deny that fat rear rubber still looks hot, a vestige of classic motorcar performance though it may be!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
573 Posts
With a full time AWD a square setup is very important. With how Alfa set up the AWD having rear wheel bias and the AWD system basically not engaging until the rear looses trackion my thought is the wider rears (more traction) would just delay the AWD system from kicking in.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top