Anyone found another tire that fits??

[fbt12]

For those who have excessive tire wear, are you doing wheel alignments every time you change 2 or 4 tires?

[i3SGB]

Hi

I am in the UK and have just come to replace the 195/50 R20 Bridgestones on the rear of my i3S and have found Tracmax now offer an alternative in that size, at half the price of the £200+ Bridgestones.

I don't have any experience of these, and a general aversion to cheap rubber (3 children), but an unexpectedly positive experience of cheap Accelera Tyres on a previous Alfa Romeo 159Ti.

Have anyone run an i3S with a pair/set of these on?

Thank you

[Egbert]

This is a specialty car. It has specialty tires. It's just a fact that i3 owners need to accept and deal with. This topic has been discussed ad-nauseam and clearly the answer always comes back to one or two types of tires.

The car eats tires it seems. Which isn't ideal but it is what it is. I personally wouldn't put cheaper tires on this car even if they were available.

For owners who need to change their tires every year....that's alarming and really not reasonable even with this car. Something else is amiss in a case like that.

There are a couple of design choices that further shorten tire life, though-

1. The inner groove on the Bridgestones (EP600) is only 6/32" out of the box, whereas the outer two grooves are at a more typical 10/32". If you live in a state with yearly inspections, they won't let the tire go if any groove is 2/32 or less. So with only 4/32" of wear available to you, tire life is much shorter.
2. Aggressive rear camber settings at -1.7° force more wear on that shorter inside tire groove. I assume this setting is a deliberate choice by BMW to give the car more of that typical BMW handling, and perhaps to help keep the rear from stepping out under regen in less-than-ideal traction situations.

I agree with you that it is what it is- we are but consumers of this product after all. But, it also seems wasteful that after about 16500 miles, I'm going to have to toss these tires in February because of the inside groove depth, while the rest of the tire has 6/32" left in it. I wonder what motivated Bridgestone to make that design choice, but it doesn't seem very environmentally friendly to throw away a tire that has 50% life left in the majority of the tread.

[alohart]

2. Aggressive rear camber settings at -1.7° force more wear on that shorter inside tire groove.

If I decide that our 2019 BEV needs a wheel alignment, I would ask that the rear camber be set to the minimum of -1º 35' (the spec is -1º 40' ± 5'). I doubt that 5' would make much difference in inner rear tire wear, but it might be worth trying.

[Arm]

This is a specialty car. It has specialty tires. It's just a fact that i3 owners need to accept and deal with. This topic has been discussed ad-nauseam and clearly the answer always comes back to one or two types of tires.

The car eats tires it seems. Which isn't ideal but it is what it is. I personally wouldn't put cheaper tires on this car even if they were available.

For owners who need to change their tires every year....that's alarming and really not reasonable even with this car. Something else is amiss in a case like that.

There are a couple of design choices that further shorten tire life, though-

1. The inner groove on the Bridgestones (EP600) is only 6/32" out of the box, whereas the outer two grooves are at a more typical 10/32". If you live in a state with yearly inspections, they won't let the tire go if any groove is 2/32 or less. So with only 4/32" of wear available to you, tire life is much shorter.
2. Aggressive rear camber settings at -1.7° force more wear on that shorter inside tire groove. I assume this setting is a deliberate choice by BMW to give the car more of that typical BMW handling, and perhaps to help keep the rear from stepping out under regen in less-than-ideal traction situations.

I agree with you that it is what it is- we are but consumers of this product after all. But, it also seems wasteful that after about 16500 miles, I'm going to have to toss these tires in February because of the inside groove depth, while the rest of the tire has 6/32" left in it. I wonder what motivated Bridgestone to make that design choice, but it doesn't seem very environmentally friendly to throw away a tire that has 50% life left in the majority of the tread.

I agree...it is wasteful indeed and that's the only aspect that bugs me about these tires. But then again, we live in a wasteful, disposable world where people literally use a plastic spoon or fork for not even a minute and trash it. As consumers, we have more control than we think over these types of issues. Simply don't use, buy, or consume these products.

[Jaybird67]

Not that these sizes are any cheaper or easier to find, but I am currently running 195/50/20's on the front and 215/45/20's on the rear. I have not experienced any tire rub or noticeable change in overall performance. Just wanted to throw this out there for discussion and maybe it will inspire more experimentation in tire sizes that will suitably work on the i3's.

[fkacct]

Thought I'd share that I just found MOMO Toprun M300 tires (newly released in US market) that works well with my 2019 i3S and can easily be obtained for about $75 per tire on ebay. They're all season UHP tires and the only size available is 195/55/20 (Stock i3s 431 wheels are fitted with 195/50r20s). This added 0.8 inches of total diameter to the rear tires vs old tire. rolling circumference is under 3% different vs stock so no issues with traction control. Starting thread depth is 10/32 which is actually normal unlike the crappy Ecopias (what are they at new 6/32?) and the tire rating is 480 A A.

So far I've fitted the rears and all is perfect. I have another set on order to replace the front's 175/55/20. I don't believe spacers will be needed on the fronts to clear the springs as the 431 wheels have enough offset but I can advise once the tires are fitted. 430 wheels will likely need spacers. Fair warning, these tires weigh 23lbs each. That is 2 lbs more than the Ecopia EP500 195/50/20 tires and 5 lbs more than the 175/55/20s. Will it actually make a noticeable difference in range? Not sure.

Momo Toprun M300 $75 per tire on ebay last I checked
https://momo.com/en-us/momo-all-season- ... sport.html

[alohart]

Fair warning, these tires weigh 23lbs each. That is 2 lbs more than the Ecopia EP500 195/50/20 tires and 5 lbs more than the 175/55/20s. Will it actually make a noticeable difference in range? Not sure.

Their E.U. rolling resistance rating is a pretty poor D. This isn't as problematic on a 120 Ah i3, but it would probably be on a 60 Ah i3 with its limited range. I can detect the decrease in rolling resistance when I increase the inflation pressure of the standard Bridgestone tires by 10 psi over recommended, so I suspect that these Momo tires would feel like driving in deep mud to me.

The purchase cost savings might be more than the increased electricity cost as a result of decreased range, so these might make economic sense. However, at only $75 per tire, I would be suspicious about its quality.

[fkacct]

Fair warning, these tires weigh 23lbs each. That is 2 lbs more than the Ecopia EP500 195/50/20 tires and 5 lbs more than the 175/55/20s. Will it actually make a noticeable difference in range? Not sure.

Their E.U. rolling resistance rating is a pretty poor D. This isn't as problematic on a 120 Ah i3, but it would probably be on a 60 Ah i3 with its limited range. I can detect the decrease in rolling resistance when I increase the inflation pressure of the standard Bridgestone tires by 10 psi over recommended, so I suspect that these Momo tires would feel like driving in deep mud to me.

The purchase cost savings might be more than the increased electricity cost as a result of decreased range, so these might make economic sense. However, at only $75 per tire, I would be suspicious about its quality.

Thanks for the input. I'm interested to see the link where you obtained EU rolling resistance test results and also the results for the Ecopia EP500. I've driven them for the past few days so far and can't feel any difference in rolling resistance increase and my kwh/mi remained as before but that may be calculated in a way that can't pickup rolling resistance increase. (For reference, I've had this car for 3 years now so pretty used to the way it feels normally).

I'm replacing the front 175/50/20s tomorrow with the Momos. That should make a larger difference as weight increase is 5lbs per tire and width is increased as well from 175 to 195. These tires are made in Vietnam vs Europe on the $300 per tire Ecopias. Lower manufacturing cost for sure so it might not be horrible just because it is cheap. No way for me to prove this though. $1200 + install + tax is just too much.

[alohart]

I'm interested to see the link where you obtained EU rolling resistance test results

Momo's European Website

and also the results for the Ecopia EP500.

All but one EP500 sizes have a B E.U. rolling resistance (a.k.a., fuel-savings) rating.