Are the wheels of the 8-wide Ferrari too small?

With all that research & detective work Huw, it looks like you you've been hanging around with Coleen Rooney!!! ??????

Looking at the photo of the real car on the back of the box the Lego wheels certainly look too small, but that may have other explanations as @AustinPowers and @hardwax point out - the Lego build being too thick/tall above the wheels and the tyre vs hubcap ratio, also in reality the hubcaps are much closer to the tyres.

Great work Huw, many thanks!

The wheels are ok, the fenders/arches are too big in proportion.

Now 8 stud wide trains (better 9) will fix every scale problems ;)

Excellent article. The type of content that makes this site a pleasure to visit. Thank you.

The wheels in this set are absolutely fine. :-)
There’s this other set, where they are really undersized: 42093 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1. ;-)
(As long as Huw will not prove the opposite.)

Wow... I had noticed from your comments that this matter of proportionality was somehow boring you Huw, but I did not imagined a second that it would drive you so far in investigation ! Always interesting are those different articles, and now this rational, mathematical demonstration proves that the wheels are not too small but even too big, when our eyes and physical perception saw the opposite! Thanks for the searches and time taken so that we have this crucial answer: yes, they used the good ones. Hope you had a good night nonetheless Huw?
Joke aside, I am always impressed by what our passion for Lego can make us do.

30-40 scale mm? That's really not that much of a difference then.

Whatever you think of the Ferrari F8 Tributo set (and I love it!) this is great research and a very interesting article, and if it prompts a bit more friendly debate all the better for it.

"They may look too small to you on the Ferrari but they are not!"

They are, Huw.

You appear to have conflated Tyre size with Wheel size!

It therefore appears to be an exercise in pure justificationism.

But, we all have eyes.

One only really needs to google a picture of the Ferrari F8 Tributo.

How, I'm not a car fan but I did like the look of the larger version but it's you Huw that impresses me the most! Thanks so much for the extra info, I enjoyed reading it and I'm grateful for the extra lengths you go to.
Thank you !!!!

@Huw - Brilliant! I agree with others that pointed out the real tires are quite low profile, very little rubber visible above the rim. I don’t think that’s a problem for this model though using standard LEGO wheels and tires.

Didn't think the wheels were out of proportion but the exhaust pipes are! That or it's been to Ripspeed! But having to wait until after Christmas to buy it is just rubbish! :)

Yes, it's a problem that I think is a function of the whole design.

It is difficult to apply mathematical reduction to such a thing.

I think mathematically we would have to use calculus to scale through multiple axis.

The thing is, as Huw says above, "a blind man would be glad to see the difference."

Yet we do. We do see the difference. Therefore it really is a problem of design.

I think it will become much more apparent as the slightly taller models are released.

Or rather, the problem may be compounded further.

Data is beautiful.

I personally think it looks great, but I also know that my knowledge of the actual car is limited. From a strictly debate standpoint, Huw has won this argument because the weight of the evidence. I am really impressed with the lengths you guys go to check accuracy though.

This is a very interesting article. I am a speed champions collector and this give me a little more confidence in the name. I also love it when you do articles like this. No matter how many downing comments or comments without something good to say I think you have done an excellent job. You are working with a Lego brick after all so from the more chunky cars to the Minifigures it's impossible to get the car scale perfect and at the same time Minifigure scale.

Now we are just nitpicking. Let's enjoy LEGO for what it is..a toy.

All vehicles are scaled differently in LEGO world.

Looking at pictures of the real thing, sure, the tires are a little too thick on the LEGO version, but it is hardly noticeable.

I will agree the front end definitely looks a little too tall compared to the real thing. But I will give major kudos to the designers for what they accomplished in a small scale. Let's see you complainers design a better version. (but a better version that has limitations like the designers have)

@honbushu said:
"As a scale model, there is no doubt that the 8 stud wide car is much better.
[...]
This is why I prefer the 6 stud wide cars and I will not buy the 8 stud wide cars. The cars are simply too large for a minifig and I think the 6 stud wide cars, even though less realistic, fit in much better in my city. After all, to me at least, Lego is not about model sized realism but about fun, creativity and imagination. "

Agreed completely. If I wanted a halfway accurate scale model, I could get those from any number of companies. The fun in Speed Champions was that they fit the minifigure world.

I love this kind of stuff from the folks at Brickset. This is great! (I thought the wheels looked fine by the way)

Great work, Huw! Wish I had that much spare time! ;-)

I suppose we can debate as much as we want on the rubber thickness and perception of relative size, but it seems the model is reasonably to scale and do a good job at representing the original considering the medium used (minifig scale and suitability for a Lego city is another thing...). As AustinPower pointed out, the major issue with this model is the front 3 studs - they have to go down at least 1 plate if not two. Basically, the 1 by 2 cut out slopping down (don't know the name of that piece) that is positioned sideways on the front of the front wheels has to go and the parts where the Ferrari logo is must go down by a plate or two - should be relatively easy to do. Speed Champions were not my thing before because I thought they were not easily recognizable. 8-wide are much better (IMHO) but suddenly the gain in realism is the counterpart of the loss for suitability for a Lego town (car now larger than trains and trucks). Although we saw 8-wide train for Disney - there is hope!!!!

@colay, buy two of the sets, and you can have a spare tyre/tire! :)

@Huw said:
"They are not, Aston.

From https://tiresize.com/tyre-size-calculator/

245/35R20 tyres fit on a wheel which is 20" diameter, or 508mm, and have 86mm sidewalls.

508mm at 1:30 scale is 16.93mm. 86mm at 1:30 is 2.86mm.

As far I can measure them without resorting to using a caliper, the diameter of the LEGO wheels is 17.5mm and the sidewalls are 3mm. They are slightly bulbous across their width which accounts for the missing 0.5mm.

If there is any discrepancy we are talking fractions of a millimetre and, as my father used to say, a blind man would be glad to see the difference.
"

The diameter may be correct, but I think it is the aspect ratio of the tires that is bothering people.

These look more like 18" rims with a taller 245/45R18 tire, which have the same outside diameter as the 245/35R20

This is the content I love, thanks Huw.

Wonderful article, thank you for this Huw! I love it when you go full nerd!

There are two main factors that contribute to the SC wheels "feeling" small: 1) The visual depth of the wheel design itself, 2) The relationship between the side wall height of the tire and the actual size of the wheel itself.

The Speed Champions wheels create the sense of being "too small" because the tires are not very low profile compared to the real world source material. The Speed Champions sidewalls are substantially taller. This alone makes the wheel appear smaller visually.

Additionally, the wheels present with a completely flat surface, resulting in no dynamic relationship between the shape of the car and the wheel. A wheel with depth to it will inherently continue the lines of the car by absorbing, reflecting and continuing visual movement through dynamic depth.

I was hoping that if they were to redesign the SC wheel at some point, they would have done it in a manner that would allow you to vary the depth of the face of the wheel (by being able to stack the wheel cover on one round plate or on two round plates?), or at least produce an alternate that was more concave like we see in the real world on exotic cars, and most performance-minded cars in general.

Thanks again for the article!

Well done!

Nice sleuth work!

Thank you @Huw for your care about the articles feedback and in the end about us people here visiting Brickset!
When I contacted LEGO before releasing Architecture Statue of Liberty about at least 10 mistakes in scale or in replicating the real statue, they didn't even bother to send me a "Thank you for contacting us".

Now you created a precedent. Next time I will kindly ask you to involve in possible mistakes in Architecture or other themes too.

Can you do it retroactively ? The statue's short raised hand is still a shame...

well, at least with the 8-wide-gauge, there will be even more arguing now!

Love the article, nice detective work there!

@Huw
Thanks, Huw, for mathing the hell out of that question. I'm looking forward to these 8-wide models, especially the new windscreens. I'll need to get some extras to MOC-widen some of my older Speed Champions cars.

Great work Huw, really great work

Consider my mind formally blown.

This has been a really interesting discussion, with some excellent points made.

I will say though that I do remain unconvinced. And furthermore, I think that the problem of relative wheel size will become even more pronounced as later models are released and reviewed.

It is unfortunate that this sort of comparison or investigation doesn’t really lend itself well to the use of reductionist linear mathematical analysis. And as someone else has already implied above, a non-linear (logarithmic) scale or similar would perhaps have been more appropriate in light of the complex relationship between the various axes involved with automotive designs.

But, really, the problem doesn’t require mathematical analysis, it should hopefully, visually ‘prove’ itself, (either way) in time.

It is all a little bit ‘Emperors new clothes’ at the moment. With some people pointing out what appears obvious to them and others automatically accepting of this revision in scale.

It may be that this modified scale ends up attracting those who were never really fans of the original Speed Champions line, whilst alienating those who were. And a consequence of that could be that those who were never really invested in the line to begin with, will simply pick off the Ferrari and the Lamborghini Huracán Super Trofeo EVO (easily the best of the bunch) and then ditch the rest. Ultimately leading to the demise of the line. That is my real concern.

I will continue to do my bit though and pick up all the new sets, mainly because of all the unique parts, colours and livery stickers.

Wish I only had problems like this.

@hardwax said:
"It's the ratio of wheel to rubber sidewall (profile) that looks a little off. I used your image at the top and overlayed a press photo of the real car, the Lego tyre profile is quite fat and chunky, making the wheel look smaller. From rough measurement in Photoshop the tyre is 30-40% too thick.
What diameter is the wheel ? it should be 17mm based on 1/30 scale.
"

Totally agree

In conclusion, I think there IS general agreement, which has come about by excellent researching and reporting by Huw and valid observations by commentators. The wheels/tires are of satisfactory scale to the original car; however the proportions of the LEGO model, above the wheel arches specifically, are too large (by 1-2 plates). This creates the visual effect of the wheels/tires appearing smaller than they are. We must also keep in mind that if the body were shortened in height it would only add to the Minifigure seating issue, as they already sit on the floor and cannot use most hair pieces. In the end though, it is a beauty, and will hold a fond place on a shelf for me (once I figure out where to place it so its' not lost in the jungle).

Not my cup of tea, but some really neat info!!

Worth knowing... don't ask why.

I remember a similar uproar on another site (FBTB?). The site operators were doing a hatchet job on the gorgeous UCS Tumbler because they felt the proportions of the model were way off. Turns out they were comparing it to a set of fake blueprints that had reduced the width to that of a normal car, and by that measure alone, yes, the model appeared highly inaccurate. But all you had to do was compare the model to any still shots or video from the movie (or nearly any molded toy based on it), and you could see that the blueprints were incredibly flawed. Whether or not the Tumbler model is accurate, it's a far sight better than anything you could make based off those blueprints.

@honbushu :
Cars and minifigs are a tough thing to get right. I've designed a few dozen different cars, and along the way I learned that you can either make them accurate, or you can make them look good. By that I mean that the dimensions of the minifig alone fit such wildly different scales (each of the three dimensions is sized to a different scale, plus the size of the head probably adds a fourth) that any car you design to look 100% accurate is going to look goofy with a minifig sitting in it. I had a great time designing Pixar Cars cars because they completely remove the minifigs from the equation.

@Brick_t_ :
You're assuming it was the accuracy of the wheels, and not the bickering, that he cared about. Ironically, he's now taken it from a very objective argument (are the wheels too small) to a very subjective argument (why do the wheels appear to small).

@LegoLover81:
Mattel is intimately familiar with that issue. Barbie dolls are infamous for having unrealistic body proportions that are not only impossible to achieve in real life, but which would make it equally impossible for the individual to function in real life (we're talking ankles that would snap the first time she tried to walk on them, among other things). But there's a very real logic to making the dolls look like that. Without the exaggerated curves on a Barbie doll, the clothes wouldn't hang right. Scaled down that much, large curves become small, and small curves get lost completely. Exaggerating the curves, to a degree, will make them read right even if you can compare the model to blueprints and see that they're completely wrong.

Other builders in my LUG run into the same problem with skyscrapers (there are at least nine buildings in our LUG that are taller than me). Spencer Rezkalla was the first with his Sears Tower, but Jim Garret really kicked things off when he joined the club after building Detroit's Fisher Building (Sears is the only one of these models that's not based on a Detroit building). Jim really introduced the idea of "selective compression" to other builders in our LUG, which has two beneficial effects. The most obvious one is that all but the tallest building currently in the city becomes achievable. The Penobscot and One Detroit Center are the next two tallest buildings after the Renaissance Center, and at 11.5' tall it's actually possible (if tricky) to display them on some of our layouts (Ren Cen would take multiple builders and fill up the layout by itself due to consisting of five towers). So combined with the fact that Detroit has some of the shortest skycrapers of any major US city, pretty much the entire city is possible to build and display, even in the middle of a layout on 30" tables. The other major effect this trick has is that people are used to seeing these buildings in one of two ways. Either they're seen from afar where they're just part of the skyline and the lower floors are often hidden by shorter buildings, or they're seen from the streets that surround them where you're staring practically straight up the side of the building. People really don't have a sense of the true shape of the building because there's often no way to actually see it in real life. So this selective compression technique is to build maybe 2-3 of the lowest floors at true scale to the actual building (people are familiar with this much because it's right at eye level), and then you reduce the floor height by a couple bricks. That's the part you see from an extreme angle at street level, and on older buildings there's usually a clear visual distinction between the lower 2-3 floors and the expanse of identical floors that comprise the middle section. So we're already used to seeing those floors look shorter in height than the ones below them, and it would look odd to see them in true scale to each other.

They are too small. Glad to see some in the comments explaining why.

Also, the move to 8 studs wide from 6 studs wide did not benefit the designs and made the cars too wide for City streets.

I had the same feel as AstonVulcan that wheels are too small. But I do not think that non-linear scale is needed. Under the term "wheel complex" I mean the whole composition including wheel, wheel arches and a empty space between them. So this article proved that the size of wheels is correct. But completly ignored, that wheel arches are out of scale. Also the the half stud wide overhang (or how to say it - I'm not a an english native speaker) damages general flow of the car shape. For those reasons Nissan GT-R feels very unrealistic and ugly. The same issue have both SUVs (Jaguar and Lamborghini).

Because Nissan GT-R R35 is one of my most favourite cars ever, I did my math: https://imgur.com/a/z2pIbek

Because I do not have real size of the inner arch wheel, I took it from the die-cast. And the result is that wheel arch is too small and should be at least 3 mm bigger. Then the "wheel complex" would "feel bigger" and properly sized to the model. Lego needs to design a new wheel arch brick for the next Speed Champions models.

BTW I found a very nice 6 stud wide MOC of Nissan GT-R Nismo here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8sc0MBxM7U