APEX Is Back And Ready To Build A Better Mustang Wheel

Don't forget the 19's. Tire selection is very skimpy for 18's that are anywhere close to the stock diameter. But don't care about 20's, all the style wheel makers have that market well covered.

Personally I am interested in 10-12" widths. With 10.5, 11.5, and 12 currently having no good off the shelf options. An affordable and reasonably light 10.5" that would work square front & rear without a spacer might create the new standard in Mustang track/performance wheels.

PS - Is the Survey link correct? All I see is a different forum, not like the prior Survey you had.

This all looks like some awesome feedback !

Grintch said:

An affordable and reasonably light 10.5" that would work square front & rear without a spacer might create the new standard in Mustang track/performance wheels.

Click to expand...

Square without spacer would limit width.

As you lower the offset so the front clears the strut inboard, you then run into the rear outboard fender.

I run 19x11ET50 w ~27" OD 305 MPSS square with 25mm front spacer. Outboard front fenders (modded) and inboard strut space is 1-3mm. The 25mm spacer front basically converts the front 19x11ET50 into a 19x11ET25.
That means a 19x11ET25 would work for me up front.

For front and rear same offset, close the gap from ET50 rear and ET25 front.
Thats 25mm and you have to get it from narrower rim width both inboard (front) and outboard (rear).

This means roughly ET37.5 rounded down to ET37 for front strut inboard clearance.
So 18x10ET37 or 19x10ET37.

19x11 square set up using a spacer please.

sigintel said:

Square without spacer would limit width.

As you lower the offset so the front clears the strut inboard, you then run into the rear outboard fender.

Click to expand...

That's why I asked for a 10.5" wheel rather than 11" or more. I prefer to avoid spacers, especially wider than 5 or 6mm where you need extended studs or two bolted joints.

Plus we already have a handful of 19x11 ET50-55 wheels starting as cheap as $250 (SVE). While there are no 18 or 19x10.5 square (ET35ish) options for less than double that, and only a couple at all.

But more options would be great, especially if they are lighter, cheaper, and/or stronger (not sure I would trust the new inexpensive SVE GT350 replicas to hold up to track use).

Grintch said:

That's why I asked for a 10.5" wheel rather than 11" or more. I prefer to avoid spacers, especially wider than 5 or 6mm where you need extended studs or two bolted joints.

Click to expand...

Square without spacers will limit wheel width to factory widths and offsets. Anything beyond a 9" wheel will likely require different offsets or wheel spacers at one axle. On the Mustang any wheel spacer will likely require longer wheel studs, i do not trust a bolt on wheel spacer in track conditions and prefer a hub centric spacer with longer studs to transfer the load to the wheel hub.

My setup uses the EC-7 ET43 10" wheel with a 15mm spacer on the front and no spacer in the rear, I have added 1" longer wheel studs and this setup allow for 305/35ZR18 tires front and rear with the ability to rotate the wheel to either axle. Wider than a 10" wheel will require a larger offset to clear the rear and a larger spacer in the front to clear the strut.

Dave

I currently have 19x10 ET40s on the front that would work front or rear with no issues up to a 285 tire. BUT are iffy for a 295 or more up front. So the limit is NOT 9" (or the 8.5" that several wheel makers offer as the Mustang front fitment to go with 10" rears).

ET43 is not a great offset for the s550. I suspect the optimum for a 10" or 10.5" wheel is somewhere around Et30-35. And that should allow my first choice Hoosier 295/40-18 track tire to be run in a pure square setup without spacers.

Now my only way to test is to buy new wheels & new tires, and maybe experiment with spacers. Which is cost prohibitive for a consumer but shouldn't be a problem for Apex to develop the right Mustang fitments.

Grintch said:

I currently have 19x10 ET40s on the front that would work front or rear with no issues up to a 285 tire. BUT are iffy for a 295 or more up front. So the limit is NOT 9" (or the 8.5" that several wheel makers offer as the Mustang front fitment to go with 10" rears).

ET43 is not a great offset for the s550. I suspect the optimum for a 10" or 10.5" wheel is somewhere around Et30-35. And that should allow my first choice Hoosier 295/40-18 track tire to be run in a pure square setup without spacers.

Now my only way to test is to buy new wheels & new tires, and maybe experiment with spacers. Which is cost prohibitive for a consumer but shouldn't be a problem for Apex to develop the right Mustang fitments.

Click to expand...

If what you are wanting can be done that would be great but I am not sure it will workout, next time I have the car on the alignment rack I can take some additional measurements and see how much room there is to play with.

Dave

I've enjoyed my apex wheels the last year

Good for cars and coffee (275/35/18 RE71R's)

and AutoX:

and track(w/ 295/40/18 Ho Ho's):



PP brake clearance:



I'd personally love an 18 x 11 front(315) and 18 x 12 rear(335), but I know that's a long shot. I'd be fine with a 18x11 square that clears the pp brakes, with or without spacer.

So everyone's in agreement. 18X10, 18X10.5, 18X11. Offsets for square with a spacer up front. Once those are available a run of 19's.

Our only question is how many can fit on a pallet?

The currently available APEX BMW 18x11ET44 work square w front spacers using hubs redrilled for 5x120 and Aluminum center ring. Same for their new 19x11ET44.
Hub redrill is like $60 a corner plus rears get backing plate spider. Super not worth it in low volume but if we had like 10 sets getting done at a time... If Apex balks on S550, Ill post up when I need spares cut.

On a side note, anyone else going thru hubs? Thank goodness they are so cheap. No wonder they redesigned the GT350 hubs....

sigintel said:

On a side note, anyone else going thru hubs? Thank goodness they are so cheap. No wonder they redesigned the GT350 hubs....

Click to expand...

I assume you are having issues with the front hubs not the rear, I carry one of each but as of yet have not had one go. I am setting up a set of Pirelli slicks so I would not be surprised if I have to soon after they go back into use.

Dave

ddozier said:

Thanks Ryan for the response, I really do think you can sell a small run of the EC-7 18x10" ET43 and have them pre-sold before the production run is made. The trick would be getting everyone to decide on a single finish to keep things simple if it is not going to be a stocking item for you going forward. If this is to be a limited run, please let us know as it would likely change the count on the number of wheels I would want. If the time line would allow for a March delivery and it was going to be limited to only this one run I would likely buy a spare wheel or two to have on the shelf in case of damage to an in service wheel.

To meet my timeline my deadline for at least one set of wheels to be ordered from a competitor is next Friday, so any info you can offer about the prospects of a production run would be appreciated. I would really like to continue using the Apex wheel.

What do you think would be a min. number of wheels in the 18x10 sizes that would make this happen.

Dave

Click to expand...

Dave, very much appreciate your input and continued support here. I agree, there are many enthusiasts looking to outfit their S197 and S550 for the upcoming season, and although many desire an 18x10.5" square fitment or some other specification or APEX design, I think we all recognize that delivering completely new SKUs will not fall into the desired short-term timeline.

I believe getting a pre-sale Group Buy together in effort to bring back the pre-existing EC-7 18x10" ET43 would be the best way to satisfy that immediate demand. This tooling is already available to us, and with the help of my production team, we were able to squeeze in a production run. We are very excited to announce that an EC-7 18x10" ET43 pre-order Group Buy will go live early next week. Please note, we will do our very best to deliver these units as soon as possible, but we must account for production related tasks and timelines. It would be fair to say that these units would ship to customers around April 1st.

As described earlier in this thread, the EC-7 18x10" ET43 has a proven track record, and will clear a vast majority of popular BBK's including the S550 PP BBK, S197 14" Brembo BBK, as well as the S197 GT500 15" Brembo BBK. We will create a new thread in the appropriate commercial section of this forum, along with S197forum.com in effort to kick off that Group Buy

stoli said:

I know I would prefer to run a spacer and have a true square setup of 18x11.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your input, we have a feeling that many enthusiasts here will agree.

TNcoupe said:

[MENTION=27979]ApexRaceParts[/MENTION] will the 18x9 et 35 fit the S550 with 6 piston Brembo?

Click to expand...

ddozier said:

I know the EC-7 18 x 9 ET30, 18 x 9.5 ET35, and the 18 x 10 ET43 all clear the PP brake system on the S550.

As far as I know at least in the EC-7 they never made a 18 x 9 ET35.

Dave

Click to expand...

Correct, we previous produced an EC-7 18x9" ET30, 18x9.5" ET35 & 18x10" ET43. All three have fantastic BBK clearance as mentioned The current survey we have going will help determine what wheel specifications, and in which of our 4 designs enthusiasts would like to see produced.

Grintch said:

Don't forget the 19's. Tire selection is very skimpy for 18's that are anywhere close to the stock diameter. But don't care about 20's, all the style wheel makers have that market well covered.

Personally I am interested in 10-12" widths. With 10.5, 11.5, and 12 currently having no good off the shelf options. An affordable and reasonably light 10.5" that would work square front & rear without a spacer might create the new standard in Mustang track/performance wheels.

PS - Is the Survey link correct? All I see is a different forum, not like the prior Survey you had.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your valuable feedback, all points noted. We absolutely recognize that a 19" diameter is important to the community, and hope that enthusiasts voice their opinions through the survey. The link in the original post of this thread is still accurate and active, and should take you to our APEX website. Please let me know if you are experiencing otherwise.

Paul@PKAUTODESIGN said:

This all looks like some awesome feedback !

Click to expand...

Indeed!

sigintel said:

Square without spacer would limit width.

As you lower the offset so the front clears the strut inboard, you then run into the rear outboard fender.

Click to expand...

Correct, and thank you for your input. The idea is really to understand how many customers are comfortable with running spacers up front in effort to achieve an 18x11" wheel up front. We have been offering square fitments like this for the BMW community and racers for many years, but we have found that some enthusiasts may prefer to step down in wheel width in effort to achieve a direct bolt-on fitment at all four corners. At the end of the day, there will be variables at play. Vehicle ride height, suspension type/brand and tire size/brand are some of the major factors which will effect whether or not customers have proper strut clearance. There will always be scenarios where customers have to install spacers for proper clearances.

The enthusiasts community is very diverse, and we hope to offer a variety of Mustang SKUs so that racers, weekend warriors and daily driven enthusiasts all have fitment options that best suit their specific needs and are in alignment with their specific vehicle setup. In order for this to happen, we need all type of enthusiasts to voice their opinions through the surveys.

bbrilli said:

19x11 square set up using a spacer please.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your input!

Grintch said:

That's why I asked for a 10.5" wheel rather than 11" or more. I prefer to avoid spacers, especially wider than 5 or 6mm where you need extended studs or two bolted joints.

Plus we already have a handful of 19x11 ET50-55 wheels starting as cheap as $250 (SVE). While there are no 18 or 19x10.5 square (ET35ish) options for less than double that, and only a couple at all.

But more options would be great, especially if they are lighter, cheaper, and/or stronger (not sure I would trust the new inexpensive SVE GT350 replicas to hold up to track use).

Click to expand...

Good input, thank you. Please note that with any spacer thickness, customers should always run extended hardware to properly support them.

ddozier said:

Square without spacers will limit wheel width to factory widths and offsets. Anything beyond a 9" wheel will likely require different offsets or wheel spacers at one axle. On the Mustang any wheel spacer will likely require longer wheel studs, i do not trust a bolt on wheel spacer in track conditions and prefer a hub centric spacer with longer studs to transfer the load to the wheel hub.

My setup uses the EC-7 ET43 10" wheel with a 15mm spacer on the front and no spacer in the rear, I have added 1" longer wheel studs and this setup allow for 305/35ZR18 tires front and rear with the ability to rotate the wheel to either axle. Wider than a 10" wheel will require a larger offset to clear the rear and a larger spacer in the front to clear the strut.

Dave

Click to expand...

Curious to know, what compounds are you using, Dave?

Grintch said:

I currently have 19x10 ET40s on the front that would work front or rear with no issues up to a 285 tire. BUT are iffy for a 295 or more up front. So the limit is NOT 9" (or the 8.5" that several wheel makers offer as the Mustang front fitment to go with 10" rears).

ET43 is not a great offset for the s550. I suspect the optimum for a 10" or 10.5" wheel is somewhere around Et30-35. And that should allow my first choice Hoosier 295/40-18 track tire to be run in a pure square setup without spacers.

Now my only way to test is to buy new wheels & new tires, and maybe experiment with spacers. Which is cost prohibitive for a consumer but shouldn't be a problem for Apex to develop the right Mustang fitments.

Click to expand...

ddozier said:

If what you are wanting can be done that would be great but I am not sure it will workout, next time I have the car on the alignment rack I can take some additional measurements and see how much room there is to play with.

Dave

Click to expand...

Hard to accurately compare and contrast until we are specific about suspension type/brand and tire size/brand being used.

Brent Dalton said:

I've enjoyed my apex wheels the last year

Good for cars and coffee (275/35/18 RE71R's)

and AutoX:

and track(w/ 295/40/18 Ho Ho's):



PP brake clearance:



I'd personally love an 18 x 11 front(315) and 18 x 12 rear(335), but I know that's a long shot. I'd be fine with a 18x11 square that clears the pp brakes, with or without spacer.

Click to expand...

What a beauty, Brent! Thank you for sharing. Have you taken our survey by chance? Also, if you do not mind me asking, what suspension are you on, and what size spacers were needed up front when running the 295 Hoo Hoo's?

Optimum Performance said:

So everyone's in agreement. 18X10, 18X10.5, 18X11. Offsets for square with a spacer up front. Once those are available a run of 19's.

Our only question is how many can fit on a pallet?

Click to expand...

The more survey responses we receive, the better we can serve the community. So far we have certainly seen a lot of discussion around those specifications, and we are hoping that survey statistics sing the same tune.

Happy to discuss dealer involvement, and we appreciate all opportunities for partnership.

sigintel said:

The currently available APEX BMW 18x11ET44 work square w front spacers using hubs redrilled for 5x120 and Aluminum center ring. Same for their new 19x11ET44.
Hub redrill is like $60 a corner plus rears get backing plate spider. Super not worth it in low volume but if we had like 10 sets getting done at a time... If Apex balks on S550, Ill post up when I need spares cut.

On a side note, anyone else going thru hubs? Thank goodness they are so cheap. No wonder they redesigned the GT350 hubs....

Click to expand...

No balking here, we are excited and committed to delivering for the Mustang community. Hoping to get as much feedback as possible through our customer surveys so that the community decides what is worthy of production.

- Ryan

ApexRaceParts said:

I believe getting a pre-sale Group Buy together in effort to bring back the pre-existing EC-7 18x10" ET43 would be the best way to satisfy that immediate demand. This tooling is already available to us, and with the help of my production team, we were able to squeeze in a production run. We are very excited to announce that an EC-7 18x10" ET43 pre-order Group Buy will go live early next week. Please note, we will do our very best to deliver these units as soon as possible, but we must account for production related tasks and timelines. It would be fair to say that these units would ship to customers around April 1st.

Curious to know, what compounds are you using, Dave?

- Ryan

Click to expand...

This is very good news, let us know within this thread when the group buy opens, so all that are subscribed can get in on the offer. Spread the word and lets make this happen. The sooner the better.

I am running 305/35/18 NT01 for regular use and 305/680-18 DH Pirelli Slicks for when the time matters.

Dave

ApexRaceParts said:

What a beauty, Brent! Thank you for sharing. Have you taken our survey by chance? Also, if you do not mind me asking, what suspension are you on, and what size spacers were needed up front when running the 295 Hoo Hoo's?

Click to expand...

Hi Ryan,
Thanks! I believe we talked via email back in March after Steve left. I have taken the survey.

I have afe/pfadt coilovers and a 1/2 inch spacer. I also have the ARP extended wheel studs.

Front clearance with the 1/2 inch spacer. With the 295/40/18 Hoosier R7's, it's tight, but doesn't rub:



No spacer in the rear. Plenty of clearance: