Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
If what you say is true then why have many BMWs with long lasting All-Season RFTs also trashed their tires in short order, and why, when said RFTs are replaced by GFTs of the same type, do the tires last a long time and not get noisy in the process?
"Put another way, if BMW were to discontinue the use of RunFlat tires, the rapid wear and irregular wear complaints would not be solved."
I completely disagree; I've had two BMWs equipped with GFTs, one with all season tires and one with summer performance tires. The car with the all seasons was turned back in at lease end with 45,000 miles on the clock and the original factory tires were still going strong; I was able to project at the time that those tires were going to see the far side of 60,000 miles before they needed to be replaced.
The second car was turned back in at lease end, also with the factory tires on it; however, given the fact that I had moved to New Hampshire and needed to buy a set of winter wheels and tires, the factory tires only had about 20,000 miles on them. That said, 20,000 miles on summer tires is not too bad, especially when the worst of the four still had 6mm of tread depth (the BMW-FS minimum tread depth is 5mm).
I submit that not only does the RFT design contribute to rough riding and skittish handling, it also contributes to accelerated and irregular tire wear that causes the tires to get noisy and to be replaced much sooner than if the tires on the car were GFTs.
2. Was this from dealer or indie shop?
3. Did you recall hitting something for the 2 days you had DWS?
4. Was there vibration that caused to diagnose bent wheels?
5. Could the bent wheels existed from previous tire set?
7. How many miles on the car?
I took the car to Firestone and guess what, they found a bubble in the wall of on of the tires. I had them put a new tire on but they didn't notice the crack either. 5000 miles later when I bought the DWS set they noticed the bent rims but not the crack. I drove home and returned the next day for a rebalance because the tech? felt balancing a wheel down to .25 was good enough. At this point after spending $625 for tires, $189 for alignment and $15 for tips they didn't want to mount a tire on the cracked rim. Safety issue I was told. I ordered a jack set and 3 wheels to replace 2 bent wheels a the cracked one and had the job redone by a very reputable shop in my area. Now the car rides so smooth and so quite I can't believe it. Also the walls on the DWS's don't flex so the handling is just as the rfs tires. I was considering a 2011 525 but ater 2 bmw's with rft's, I have had enough. Maybe a Lexus. Oh well, time will tell. Car is a 2009 335ix bought in October of 2008 with 26000 miles. The noise and hard ride started at around 5000 miles. The dealer didn't know anything.
BEFORE YOU ARE GOING TO PURCHASE A BMW, BE AWARE THAT THEY COME FROM FACTORY WITH RUN FLAT TIRE, THAT MEANS THAT YOU DON’T HAVE A SPARE TIRE IN YOUR CAR SO YOU HAVE TO PAY EXTRA APPROXIMATELY $ 27 A MONTH ON YOUR LEASE OR FINANCE FOR A TIRE INSURANCE AND THE DON’T TELL YOU ALL THAT I MENTIONED BEFORE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO CLOSE THE DEAL, BMW SAYS THAT THEY USE THOSE TIRES FOR SAFETY REASON, BUT FOR ME THAY ARE A NIGHTMARE BECAUSE THEY ARE SO SOFT THAT THEY DON’T LAST LONGER THAN ANY OTHER PERFORMANCE TIRE AND THEY GET FLAT VERY EASY, THAT’S NOT ALL WHEN THEY SELL TO YOU THE CAR THEY SAY THAT IT IS VERY EASY TO CHANGE THE TIRE IF THE RUN FLAT, YOU JUST HAVE TO SHOW UP AT ANY BMW DEALER AND THEY CHANGE YOU THE TIRE FAST, WOW THAT SOUND GREAT!, BUT IT IS NOT LIKE THAT, ONCE YOU SHOW UP AT THE DEALER YOU HAVE TO DROP THE CAR FOR A DAY BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO CONTACT THE INSURANCE INSPECTOR TO GO BY THE DEALER AND INSPECT THE TIRE AND YOU HAVE TO BE LUCKY IF THE AGREE TO PAY FOR IT, AND ALSO YOU HAVE TO BE LUCKY IF THE DEALER HAVE A LOANER, IT HAPPEN TO ME THREE TIMES SO THIS IS NOT CASUALTY, SO YOU SPEND TWO OR THREE DAYS OF YOUR WONDERFULL LIFE JUST TO CHANGE A TIRE, WITH OTHER TIRE YOU JUST HAVE TO GO TO ANY TIRE STORE AND THEY FIX IT FOR YOU IN 30 MINUTES.
WORLD GREEN CAR AWARD 2008
BMW WON IN 2008 THE WORLD GREEN CAR AWARD, THAT’S IRONIC, BECAUSE THE RUN FLAT TIRE DO NOT ACCEPT REPAIR SO IT DOESN’T MATTER IF THE TIRE HAVE 3 OR 1,000 MILES ON USE AND GET FLAT THEY HAVE TO DISPOSE THE TIRE AND EVERY BODY KNOWS HOW CONTAMINANT FOR THE ECOSYSTEM ARE THEM AND IT DOESN’T MATTER THAT SOME ARE RECYCLED.
IN THE OTHER HAND STANDARD TIRES CAN BE REPAIRED AND LAST LONGER AND YOU DON’T HAVE TO DISPOSE THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LITTLE NAIL ON IT, THAT CAN BE REPAIRED AND YOU CAN ENJOY THEM FOR THEIR LIFE SPAM.
I think they are full-height tires, just skinnier...
New TPMS monitors read a signal from the tire valve... they don't operate off the ABS system, any more.... though, your TPMS light will probably still be on, because evidently your tire is flat, if you are using the spacesaver.
Also, no issues with traction control if the spare is full-height, though you will occasionallly trigger the stability control in turns.. But, the spare is just for emergencies.. it isn't like you are going to drive on it for weeks.
But, if you aren't having issues with your runflats, I'm not sure I'd switch.. just my $0.02
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
FWIW, I'm hating on the word "blind" these days. Why? Because Mr. Murphy doesn't know when to quit. In this case, my wife (who was carrying the family's insurance through her company) got laid off last year, just after I was diagnosed with a cataract in my right eye. Unfortunately said cataract wasn't at all bad (I still had 20/20 vision in spite of the cataract and my age), and insurance wouldn't cover the surgery. Fast forward to this year and, per my ophthalmologist, I’ve been told "my eye has fallen off a cliff;" I'm now legally blind in that eye. Annoying.
In your case the tire protection would have made out.
Put another way, if BMW were to discontinue the use of RunFlat tires, the rapid wear and irregular wear complaints would not be solved.
Absolutely correct!
Tire wear is directly related to:
1. Rubber compound used in construction (soft .vs. hard)
2. Setup of the car's suspension.
3. The driver's characteristics (spirited .vs. tame)
4. Road and environment conditions (road quality, temperature, etc.).
As an example, my wife got over 55K miles out of the run-flats on her 2005 MINI, with visible tread left. On a Dodge equipped with non-run-flat Goodyear GT's, I had bald tires at 35K miles. Back in the 1970's, I had a Ford Courier pickup with 6-ply tires, and when I traded it at 100K miles, it had the original tires on it.... with tread still present. Of course, even when the truck was new those tires had practically NO grip and would break loose on the Interstate in a rainstorm if I floored the gas pedal at 70mph...
BMW sets its cars up with reverse camber, which is great for handling in curves, but horrible for tread wear. This can be seen by following a 328i and watching the rear tire angle as the driver acelerates rapidly... the car squats down, and the spacing between the tires increases at the point where the tire tread meets the pavement.
Generally speaking, comparing run-flats with non-run-flats is like comparing apples to oranges, unless you are comparing like tire construction rubber compounds. A softer tire wears faster, but gives better street performance. The harder the compound, the longer the treadlife.... all other things being equal.
The issue is, most run-flats are also high performance tires....ie, softer rubber compounds. When owners replace them with non-run flats, they are also replacing a tire with one that has a different rubber compound. If the tire wears longer, they feel its due to the tire type, and ignore tire construction.
Regardless if one believes this or not, it is indeed factual.
Now, that isn't to say that run-flats don't have their issues. They are great for urban driving, but if one lives in a rural area (say....Wyoming), run-flats may not be the best choice for you, simply due to replacement supply issues.
At the end of the day, however, I foresee the day when all new cars will be equipped with run-flats. Its a fuel usage issue. Weight of a spare and # of cars on the road....Its another way for car companies to eliminate weight and conserve space....thereby increasing fleet fuel economy.
Of course, by then, supply won't be an issue, as all sizes and brands will be generally available.
Fact: Prior to the RFT debacle, BMWs were capable of rolling on the same set of tires for a long-long time (and the vast majority of folks that have reverted to GFTs are getting great tire mileage on late model BMWs). My two (pre-RFT era) BMWs are just a few examples of this phenomena as well.
You missed one metric: 5. Sidewall dynamics. The sidewall architecture of the Gen1 and Gen2 RFTs contribute to accelerated tire wear.
Comparing how long a tiny Mini went on a set of (all-season?) RFTs to a Dodge with Goodyear GTs (tires that have never been known for longevity) is a bit disingenuous; don't 'cha think?
Your comment about how most RFTs are performance tires is completely false. Fact: BMW sells far-FAR more cars shod with (supposedly long lasting) All-Season RFTs than they do with Summer Performance RFTs.
To say the things you claim to be "Fact" are in fact, "False" is an understatement.
At the end if the day I foresee RFTs going the way of the dodo bird; errr, that until pneumatic tires are gone from the market place entirely. Of course the non-pneumatic tires that are likely to replace virtually all automobile tires are themselves RFTs, but nothing like the crap foisted upon us in this day and age (see the Tweel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweel ).
I learned a long time ago to NEVER attempt a discussion with one who already has his mind made up, regardless of what the facts actually happen to be.
or, maybe not.
http://blog.bavauto.com/bmw-e46/proper-tire-care-part-2-for-longer-tire-life-red- - uce-negative-camber
From the link...
Camber: This is the angle that the wheels/tires make when viewed from the front or rear of the car. If the wheel/tire is perfectly vertical it has zeros degrees of camber. If the top of the wheel/tire tilts outward, this is positive camber. If the top of the wheel/tire tilts inward (toward the center of the vehicle), this is negative camber. Too much negative camber causes the inside of the tire to wear much faster than the outside. This is especially true on BMWs and MINIs which come from the factory with comparatively high negative camber for better control at high speeds. In this case, economy had been compromised – you have to replace your expensive tires more often. This is especially true of BMWs and MINIs that have been lowered (Fig 4) and/or have plus-size wheels and tires.
FWIW, I won't argue that tires will last longer on cars without the rear camber settings that many manufacturers are using these days; just that the RFTs have greatly contributed to accelerated tire wear.
There seem to be reports of RunFlat tires not doing well, and there seems to be reports of RunFlat tires doing fine.
There also seems to be reports of regular tires not doing well, and there seems to be reports of regular tires doing fine.
So there is a awful lot of contradiction in all of this. So how do we sort this out? Is there anyone in a position to see the bigger picture?
I know there are 'for and against' for all tires, but from personal experience where RFTs had severe and irregular wear, fitting non-runflat tires gave a completely normal wear pattern without changing camber, or geometry. I'm now on my second set of non-runflat tires, different high performance tire, again wearing evenly.
RFT's do not wear as well with negative camber, the stiff sidewalls do not allow the tire to flex to any degree like non run-flats.
The wear rate is very similar over in the UK, to tires we have been fitting for years, that is not a big concern for us, just the pre-mature wear that wastes tires. We've had soft compounds on BMW car tires for years before RFTs, but RFTs have to be soft, or the grip levels would be disasterous. It helps compensate for the tire not really getting a good footprint.
Ride issues are our biggest complaint, the crashing over poor road surfaces, and compromised dynamics.
HighlandPete
Always good to hear from you.
1) Is BMW the only luxury company that has RFTs on all their models? and if so, why and when did BMW switch from using GFT to RFT?
2) Do BMW dealerships carry GFT in stock or on order so that you can maybe swap off the RFT's for GFT's before you take it off the dealer lot at time of sale?
3) How long have people typically gotten out of their RFTs before having to replace them with GFT?
4) Has anyone, been able to go to an independent tire shop or service center and get an adjustment made to have the new RFTs taken off and GFTs put on in their place without having to pay full price for the GFTs?
5) How did you go about getting a donut spare tire since BMW doesn't even provide that anymore?
Thanks in advance for your help and information!!!
2-Depends upon the individual dealership, but I suspect no dealer in the US would remove run-flats from a new vehicle.
3-Depends on the driving characteristics of the owner as well as the model/options.. Some get only 5K miles....others get upwards of 40-50K.
4-Unknown. I guess its possible...But, why would any shop do it? Still, I suggest you call around and ask shops/tire dealers in your area.
5-Try places like Tirerack.com. Remember, BMW offers no spare tire well or space for a jack, spare, etc.
2) Nope; in fact some ill-informed BMW dealers actually have the cheek to suggest you'll void part of your warranty if you change. That of course is a lie, but some of the sales and service folks don't seem to know any better.
3) The summer performance RFTs that some as part of the Sport Package are typically good for ten to fifteen thousand miles, some even more. That said, due to the asymetrical tire size, the tires cannot be rotated and they typically start getting really noisy between the eight to ten thousand mile mark. Cars without the Sport Package are typically shod with all-season tires with the same size at all four corners; these tires not only last longer, they can be rotated which can partially mitigate the noise. If you're leasing most folks recommend you replace the RFTs with GFTs well before you get to the 5mm minimum tread deapth (per BMW-FS). Doing this will allow you to put the RFTs back on immediately prior to turning the car back in (once again, per BMW-FS the car must be returned with RFTs).
4) I've not heard of any independent shops effectively buying the RFTs off of a new car, but I'm not saying it's impossible either. In my case, I had the factory tires yanked after only 714 miles and sold them on Craig's list for well over half of the cost of the new tires.
5) Contrary to the previous post, BMW does in fact offer a jack and spare tire kit as an aftermarket accessory; that said, many folks simply opt to buy a kit like this: http://www.tirerack.com/accessories/detail.jsp?ID=38
Keep us posted.
I stated BMW offered no SPACE for a spare or jack...Not that they didn't offer them as accessories.
5-Try places like Tirerack.com. Remember, BMW offers no spare tire well or space for a jack, spare, etc.
Get your fact straight.
As to other brands using RFTs, here in the UK we can opt for RFTs on some Fords, on some VAG models there is the option for RFTs. Mercedes does have a sort of 'half way' tire option. Named an 'MO Extended', allows up to 30miles @ 50mph and then you definitely bin it.
What is surprising many UK users, cars are coming in without any spare tire even on the GFT models, even the mobility kit (pump and goo) can be an option. :surprise:
HighlandPete
Sounds like a real pain in the butt BMW is doing with these RFTs. I don't want to generalize and act as if all RFTs are bad, but maybe it has something to do with the fact that BMW uses cheap brands like Continental and Goodyear for their RFTs rather than more quality brands like Michelin, Bridgestone, and Yokohama?
Just a thought!
Here is a link to a discussion that contains over 1,500 posts; the majority of which are about the Odyssey tires: steve_, "Run-flat, self-sealing, PAX tires for Minivans" #1, 29 Nov 2004 7:27 pm
As far as the quality of RFTs goes, it seems that BMW uses the best of the breed, of course that ain't sayin' much at this point.
From page 211 of the 2010 BMW 328i Owner's Manual...
BMW advises against swapping wheels between the front and rear axles, even if all tires have the same size, as this could impair driving characteristics. If the tires are of mixed sizes, swapping tires between axles is not permissible.
In this I completely agree.
I know that my wife's MINI would never have gotten in excess of 50K miles on her run-flats without rotating the tires every 5K miles (each time I changed her oil, another issue altogether).
Personally, oil change frequencies and tire rotations are probably the 2 main disagreements I have with BMW's policies. However, I feel each owner should decide what's best for himself/herself. No one plan usually fits all, except in rare circumstances.
Interesting how BMW recomended a much more frequent and aggressive maintenance schedule when the customer was paying, but saw fit to greatly reduce (and in some cases, completely eliminate) maintenance events when the 4 year/50K "free" maintenance plan was implemented.
Frankly, I am at a loss why BMW doesn't offer a no-run-flat option, especially since it appears to be moving to its "Joy" slogan and away from its older, more performance oriented "Ultimate driving machine" slogan, coupled with all the bad press given to run-flats.
After all, I wonder just how many buyers of new BMW's actually drive their cars to the max? How many drivers of new BMWs would notice a change from the touted 50-50% front-rear weight distribution to a possible 48-52% due to carrying a donut spare tire???
I guess when you're increasing sales each year, profits are up, etc. the view from the top is "Why change what's working"?"
Or, maybe its something else entirely...
The OLM in my 2002 530i called for the first oil change at ~12,000 miles (which made sense as I picked the car up in Germany and spent a couple of weeks sight seeing, much of that time at high speeds on the autobahn), and the second oil change at ~18,000 miles (which also made sense as the bulk of those miles were tooling back and forth between southern New Hampshire and a client of mine in Long Island). Just prior to each oil change I took an oil sample and sent it out for analysis, and guess what? Both samples came back showing the oil was getting tired but was not yet completely exhausted; changing it any earlier wouldn't have yielded any benefits.
On the tire rotation issue, one of the things I really appreciated about the 530i was that it was the last (I think) BMW model available with the Sport Package and symetrical tire sizes. Said another way, I was able to rotate the summer performance tires and managed to turn the car in at lease end with the factory rubber still on the rims (I did however use a different set of wheels and tires in the winter, for obvious reasons).
Since BMW also specifies high camber angles - which leads to irregular wear, but does benefit handling - it ought to be obvious that handling trumps tire wear in BMW's eyes.
I have yet to meet a BMW owner who knew that his car had RFT on it.
I don't think the subject is ever brought up by salesmen, and the customers haven't a clue for the most part.
At least, I have yet to talk to one who had a clue on this subject.
With that lack of interest/knowledge in the customer base, why should BMW care? I don't know how their sales are doing in the USA, but they would seem to be strong.
Does anyone have a number as to what percentage of BMW are leased vs bought?
The RFTs on my 2009 328i with sports package are quiet and show little wear at 10,000 miles. Go figure.
I believe you. And, I see that as a failure on BMW's part.
IF run-flats are so great, then why not exploit that "greatness" by making sure the owner knows about them?
Or, conversly, if they aren't so great, then why not install non-run-flats, keep the price the same, pocket the extra $$$ and eliminate the controversy entirely?
I wonder just how many would NOT buy a BMW due to the absence of run-flat tires.
Or, why not the best of both worlds.... offer the option?
Really, is it simply that BMW can't figure out how to find the space for a space-saver spare?
However, I would say the majority of drivers use their cars in short, less than 10 mile trips, which, regardless of the lubricant quality, will never get the oil up to its intended operating temperature range (allowing humidity buildup/sludge development, etc.).
While I doubt that in itself will cause many issues during the warranted lifetime of the car, sludge buildup and associated damages do affect engines later on. Obviously, BMW would offer more oil changes if the engine failure rate was so high that it costs more money for repairs than oil changes.
For a lease-owner, I wouldn't care. But, if I intended to keep the car for a long period, more frequent oil changes would be in my future.
I simple see it as cheap insurance, and while others may see it differently,,, all I can say is that it works for me.
Sending used motor oil out for analysis seems reasonable to you and me, but, as the previous posting made it clear about owners and their lack of knowledge regarding run-flats on their car, oil analysis isn't even an option to them (lack of awareness).
Lets face it....I suspect most BMW owners these days don't buy them for their performance...other factors are at play (image, build quality, styling are a few examples). I can count on one had the BMW drivers I know that are performance oriented, and each one of them owns a M-something.
Having discussed this issue in detail with the head of a BMW/MINI parts dept., he made it clear that he personally has seen an increase in oil-related engine failures since the oil change mileage ranges have been extended by BMW, even with the better lubes.
Not scientific, of course, but he's been the parts man there for as long as I can recall (maybe 20 years or more).
Again, no one rule fits all cases, and each owner should find a method that works best for him/her.
There is a barely noticeable difference in the handling between my 325xi and my 328i. If anything, the wagon has a bit better road feel than the sedan. I assumed it was because it is heavier and has AWD.
The 328i might perform better on a track, but for normal driving if I had to make a choice I would take the wagon.
I know from personal experience that many people, including my mother and girlfriends in the past, never notice any differences between tires while I on the other hand could tell a much bigger difference.
I think a lot of BMW buyers do not even notice that they have run flats and just go about their business.
That doesn't surprise me. How many of those owners are really going to push their car? How many of those owners opted for automatics instead of manuals? For that matter, how may could even drive a stick?
The RFTs on the BMW factored into my decision to buy a 2009 G37S-6MT instead of a BMW.