New tires go on tomorrow

[Rafale]

Service Advisors were not that bright apparently seeing the outrageous number of wheel cracks and the stiff ride on RFTs... The statement about the RFT protecting the wheel better is just plain stupid.

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by Horsedoc67

I am probably in the minority relative to this tire discussion, but I am very happy with the RFT's.(19") I drive on the lousy roads here in SoCal(101, PCH etc) and have hit potholes that made me cringe. I have 4500 mi on the car and at 4000 I had the oil changed and all the wheels inspected for cracks by BMW and none were found. I drive hard in the twistys and fast on the open road and I find the tires perform as well as any conventional tire. I have been driving high performance cars for over 50 yrs although this is my first experience with RFT. I had a conversation with two very bright BMW Service advisors that believe that the stiffer sidewalls of the RFT offers more protection for the wheels than conventional tires.
I have more concern about the HPFP problem as I am planning a 4000 mi road trip later this month with the route being sparsely populated by BMW dealers. It seems a shame not being comfortable taking a high dollar car like this out on the road without the fear of mechanical failure.

All I can tell you my Friend .... Keep on driving, however, if I was you I keep an eye on the wheels. In addition check your tire pressure often. I find I loose a few pounds every week and have to adjust the pressure.

Believe your BMW Advisor if you like I can tell you it is a bunch of BS. The RFT is the most idiotic change BMW has ever made. I my opinion it is a money making situation.

[Silver-Bolt]

Originally Posted by brisk3

so if i were to get the non RFT's the only way for me to put in the correct PSI is by doing the chalk test?

also what about the TPMS? isn't that defaulted to the OEM psi? at i believe 42?

thanks.

Brisk,
The chalk test I found to be the most reliable way to determine the correct air pressure on any tire RFT or non-RFT. Tire manufacturer's will only give you a maximum safe PSI, auto manufacturer's will give an approximate PSI based on the many possible tires a given model may have available. By doing a simple chalk test you will insure you have even wear across the tire and have the maxium contact patch on the road.

I am currently at 35psi front and 36psi rear. No issues with the TPMS system.

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by Silver-Bolt

Brisk,
The chalk test I found to be the most reliable way to determine the correct air pressure on any tire RFT or non-RFT. Tire manufacturer's will only give you a maximum safe PSI, auto manufacturer's will give an approximate PSI based on the many possible tires a given model may have available. By doing a simple chalk test you will insure you have even wear across the tire and have the maxium contact patch on the road.

I am currently at 35psi front and 36psi rear. No issues with the TPMS system.

If I may comment, I think your rear pressure is a bit low. If you drive quite a bit with the roof down I recommend you keep an eye on your rear tires for excessive inside tire wear. Due to the chamber (2.5 degree at the rear) and the extra weight in the trunk with the roof your tires will show premature inside wear. This was pointed out to me by a US Tire Shop Manager.

I further recommend that you keep an eye on your air pressure. As you know with the RFT you cannot tell by looking at it if the pressure is low or not due to the stiffer side wall. I check my pressure on all 4 wheels weekly always on Monday morning and find that I have to adjust each and every tire by 3 to 4 PSI up. For some reason unknown to me there is a slight pressure loss.

I assume if this is left unattended it cannot be good for the RFT in my opinion. Perhaps I am over cautious however having lost 2 rear wheels after driving this car for 18,000 KM to cracks steers a guy in that direction.

I am not trying to be a wise guy here, just sharing facts.

[cdeslandes]

^ what he said. I'd start with the BMW recommended pressure and work my way up (not down) from there.

[Silver-Bolt]

Originally Posted by cdeslandes

^ what he said. I'd start with the BMW recommended pressure and work my way up (not down) from there.

BMW's reccommended pressure is for a RFT and has no bearing on non-RFT tires. The chalk test is accurate. I am also not running the stock tire size. If these were track tires I would use a pyrometer and take three readings per tire. That won't work with street rubber so the chalk test is how I set the pressure on all my vehicles.

[SCBMW02]

Hey Silver, (or anyone), I think I am going to put Conti Extreme DW's on. If I go 275 30-19 in the rear, what do you suggest in front, still 235's? The guys at the performance center give high marks to the Continentals. Talked with Steve Dinan at Road Atlanta and he said Michelin PS2's. Thoughts? Thanks

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by SCBMW02

Hey Silver, (or anyone), I think I am going to put Conti Extreme DW's on. If I go 275 30-19 in the rear, what do you suggest in front, still 235's? The guys at the performance center give high marks to the Continentals. Talked with Steve Dinan at Road Atlanta and he said Michelin PS2's. Thoughts? Thanks

Go to this link here CLICK

Plug in the numbers what you have now and what you plan to use as tire size, it will then tell you what changes you can expect in clearances.

As for the tire make, I've run Michelin on my M3 for 4 years they served me well (winter and summer tires - I plan to do the same on my Z4 for the summer tires as soon as I worn out the RFT, my winter tires will be Non-RFT)

I will get the Pilot Alpin PA3 for my 18x8 winter set Read about this tire here

[Silver-Bolt]

Originally Posted by SCBMW02

Hey Silver, (or anyone), I think I am going to put Conti Extreme DW's on. If I go 275 30-19 in the rear, what do you suggest in front, still 235's? The guys at the performance center give high marks to the Continentals. Talked with Steve Dinan at Road Atlanta and he said Michelin PS2's. Thoughts? Thanks

Personally I wouldn't go wider than a 235 up front. The wider your front tires are the more prone to tramlining the will be. On the street a 225 offers more than enough traction. I will be going with a 235 for a slightly taller sidewall and cosmetic reasons. I do not expect to see any performance increase.

[Rafale]

Originally Posted by SCBMW02

Hey Silver, (or anyone), I think I am going to put Conti Extreme DW's on. If I go 275 30-19 in the rear, what do you suggest in front, still 235's? The guys at the performance center give high marks to the Continentals. Talked with Steve Dinan at Road Atlanta and he said Michelin PS2's. Thoughts? Thanks

DWs have softer sidewalls than the PS2s. They do not feel as accurate on the steering wheel when steering around the center line. These are comments I got from the tirerack and different other reviews. Still a great set of tires for everyday spirited driving though and they could possibly plenty stiff at such a low profile.

[Rafale]

Originally Posted by Silver-Bolt

Personally I wouldn't go wider than a 235 up front. The wider your front tires are the more prone to tramlining the will be. On the street a 225 offers more than enough traction. I will be going with a 235 for a slightly taller sidewall and cosmetic reasons. I do not expect to see any performance increase.

What he said...

[SCBMW02]

Thanks so much for the input.

[marcw]

While the DW might not be able to match the pinnacle PS2's they are also a lot cheaper. $185 vs. $330 for a 235/20/19. In addition they have a higher tread wear rating (340 vs. 220) and come with a 1 year manufacturer road hazard warranty.

Originally Posted by Rafale

DWs have softer sidewalls than the PS2s. They do not feel as accurate on the steering wheel when steering around the center line. These are comments I got from the tirerack and different other reviews. Still a great set of tires for everyday spirited driving though and they could possibly plenty stiff at such a low profile.

[Rafale]

Originally Posted by marcw

While the DW might not be able to match the pinnacle PS2's they are also a lot cheaper. $185 vs. $330 for a 235/20/19. In addition they have a higher tread wear rating (340 vs. 220) and come with a 1 year manufacturer road hazard warranty.

That's assuming you can find them in stock.
I knew of a big price difference but I got a good deal on my PS2s and on 18" the DW were "only" 22% cheaper for the whole set ($990 Vs $788 shipped) so I went with what I knew.

[rmorin49]

I am running 36 in the front and 39 in the rear. Very happy with my Yokohama A/S ENVigor tires, OEM sizes. Absolutely no problems with the OEM TPM sensors.

[brisk3]

so...whats the consensus between the conti DW and DWS...?
what is better...?

[marcw]

The DWS are all season tires. DW is summer only. If you need to drive in climate where the temps dip below 45 degrees Fahrenheit (7 Celsius) then get the DWS. Otherwise stick with DW.

Originally Posted by brisk3

so...whats the consensus between the conti DW and DWS...?
what is better...?

[marcw]

DW are easier to find than DWS it seems. DW 235/35/19 can be had from Tirerack right now.

Originally Posted by Rafale

That's assuming you can find them in stock.
I knew of a big price difference but I got a good deal on my PS2s and on 18" the DW were "only" 22% cheaper for the whole set ($990 Vs $788 shipped) so I went with what I knew.

[rmorin49]

Originally Posted by brisk3

so...whats the consensus between the conti DW and DWS...?
what is better...?

If you are in IL, you will need the tread compound found in the DWS if you want to drive all year round.

[brisk3]

Thanks for the replies.
DWS are cheaper...but is the DWS sacrificing in terms or performance and handling over the DW?

I don't really plan on driving this car in the winter...it's brutal here during winter. ugh.

[Vintage]

We have had the DW set for about 1 month and my wife instantly noticed how awesome they were over the RFTs (me too). As for the difference, the DW is more of a true sport tire whereas the DWS gives up a little dry traction for a little better wet/cold ability (at least that is what I have read). The DW is an awesome handling tire that is comfortable and nearly silent; it receives rave reviews from everyone. So, get the DW over the DWS if you are not going to drive it in constant wet or light snow/ice. The DW also has the benefit of being virtually silent on the road and very comfy over rough pavement. Although, newer tires are always more quiet than the old ones you just tossed. The PS2 is a better track tire than the DW but it is louder and harder on the road - I have had PS2s and they are great performing tires, just a little harder riding and a little louder. The PS2 is a "better" track/aggressive tire over the DW but JUST BARELY and the price difference sold me. Plus, we never track or race the car.

Oh yea, we have the 19" 296s.

[marcw]

If you want insights about the DWS talk to Silver-Bolt. He has them on right now. I'm waiting for my 225's DWS to come in from Tirerack. I'll be running 225 front 275 rear DWS hopefully by this weekend. Trying to get 235 DWS is near impossible right now. They are back ordered everywhere and Continental hasn't released a new production date so it might be a while before they'll be available again. I'm with Vintage... if you don't intend to drive the car when temps are below 45 then go with the DW.

Originally Posted by brisk3

Thanks for the replies.
DWS are cheaper...but is the DWS sacrificing in terms or performance and handling over the DW?

I don't really plan on driving this car in the winter...it's brutal here during winter. ugh.