Everyone seems to be spinning their wheels with very creative reasons why 18" is too heavy, 17" is not, and 15" is bad. It's like a story that's been passed down and altered each time it's told. Probably using common sense one could surmise that the 95-96 SE with 15" rims was the fastest of all Maxes to date, possibly due to its hopefully lighter rims/wheels. My 215/55's weight about 41 lbs, and I've seen posts that the 5th gen weighs more. Yep, that 5th gen will achieve most likely higher numbers by putting 4th gen rims '95 15 inchers on. The real way to overcome all this physics is to spend g's.

Is it realistic to have hollow-spoked rims on a Maxima? Not really. Spend $600 per rim on a Maxima? Silly. I don't think .7 mph in the 1/4 mile or .3 lost in 0-60 is enough to argue against looks that are achieved by aftermarket +1 or +2 wheels/tires. If you're after performance, then the stock size tire size with an upgraded more expensive rim is gonna give you acceleration numbers.

It's amazing that unsprung weight is a joke to many on this forum. Some aren't even clear on the roles of the spring vs. shock! This dude has a decent write up. The 540i test is today very old news:


Dude's write-up

I would tend to agree that there is no case for 18's on a pure performance basis, and unless you're spending $3000 or more on the tire/wheel package chances are the 17's are cutting into performance. If your car came with 17's well you know that they are not expensive rims (ie not lightweight), so you'd probably do better numbers wise with a 15". You'd only be going down from 225 to 215 anyway.

 

2002 is the fastest maxima to date and 15's do not fit on it..

 

I remember this thread back when Andi was on this forum ... I went from stock 215/55R16 rims to 235/45ZR17. Well, I picked up a nail so put the crappy 16" Dunlops back on the front until I get the Bridgestone fixed, so I just went and weighed the two setups. The stock wheel/tire combo is 37 lbs, the 17" setup is 45 lbs. Though I do understand unsprung weight, I know I had enough power (before the LSD) to spin either set of wheels. Since I prefer autocross and back road driving to drag racing, the extra cornering traction of the wider tires and lower sidewalls was worth it. At this point, however, I'm a bit tired of getting beat up on bad roads, and the stock size tires are more comfortable.

As for the role of spring vs. shock, I've been running coilovers for awhile. I remember reading a comment on here recently about European cars going about their suspension differently than Maximas (or Hondas etc) with a softer spring and stiffer shock settings. My Alfa Romeos had relatively soft springs, certainly compared to what I have on here, but they stuck to the road like glue, even with some body lean. I think an ideal setup would let the car ride stable while the suspension did more of the work. We lower the car to drop the center of gravity for handling, then using stiff springs we toss the whole car up and down on bumps. I might try going back to softer springs and stiffen the struts up pretty firm. With progressive springs and bumpstops, handling should still be good. The main thing I notice with a really stiff suspension is the steering is incredibly accurate. That is something I'll miss if I change ...