[swift17]

FWIW: your mention of it being "really rainy so far" during you first experience with these tires may explain some of the perceived efficiency issues.

I gave the tires the benefit of the doubt and disregarded higher energy use on the rainy days, but even on the days where it's been 55 degrees and sunny, with HVAC off and driving 75mph, I'm getting 340 Wh/mi steadily on relatively flat ground. Driving these exact same highways on the Conti ProContact RX's (which I put 47k miles on doing a 240 mile round trip commute for a year) at the same speed never averaged higher than 285-300 Wh/mi (which my TeslaFi data shows, I made sure to compare the two). To see these tires getting 330-350 Wh/mi at the same speeds/temps is nuts, that's a huge increase.

 

[kuzzy]

Replaced the stock 18 Michelin's with Conti PureContact LS tires about 2 months ago. No discernible change in noise level or change in range from the originals. My wife drives the car the most and she is hard on tires (she managed 15k on OEM Pirelli's on a Saab95) so we only got about 19k out of the originals. We probably could have squeezed a thousand or 2 more miles out of them but with the weight of the care and typical winter conditions here it was not worth pushing it.

Anyway just wanted to share that so far so good with these tires. Efficiency has not changed one bit. Averaging 297Wh/Mi before and after the change. Like I said no real change in noise level and handling seems about the same. Lots of comments about rim protection on here and these do stick out more than the OEM tires and offer at least a little protection from scuffing the rim on a curb. At least if going slow you would feel the tire hit first and not the rim giving you time to react.

 

[Tchris]

I think I'm going to swap out the Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Plus 2's I got for these. I'm only about 300 miles into the Pirelli's, but so far efficiency is horrible. I'm averaging 340 Wh/mi compared to the 299 Wh/mi lifetime average with the OEM Conti ProContact RX's.

Even low speed drives around town (35-45mph with HVAC off on sunny 50 degree day) uses over 300 Wh/mi... seems way to high even for new tires. I'll give it another week or so and if nothing changes I'm getting rid of these.

Any particular reason you went with the Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Plus II vs the P7 All Season Plus? The Plus have a lower rolling resistance than the Continental PureContact LS, so I would expect that the Plus would be a more efficient tire than the PureContact LS. I haven't been able to find the rolling resistance rating on the Plus II. I was expecting that it would be about the same as the Plus, but evidently not.

 

[FRC]

Any particular reason you went with the Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Plus II vs the P7 All Season Plus? The Plus have a lower rolling resistance than the Continental PureContact LS, so I would expect that the Plus would be a more efficient tire than the PureContact LS. I haven't been able to find the rolling resistance rating on the Plus II. I was expecting that it would be about the same as the Plus, but evidently not.

I believe that the Plus is now out of production, replaced by the Plus II.

 

[Tchris]

I believe that the Plus is now out of production, replaced by the Plus II.

I know the Plus is available for purchase at Discount Tire and Tire Rack, and is listed in Consumer Reports latest testing and reviews. The Plus II must be a new tire as there are no reviews or ratings available that I could find. Most of the specifications between the two look similar, although the Plus II has deeper tread cut. The description for the Plus highlights fuel efficiency and quiet ride, whereas the Plus II does not. I have narrowed my search for replacement tires down to the Continental PureContact LS and the Pirelli Cinturato P7 Plus. I was really leaning toward the Pirelli's due to better rolling resistance and quieter ride. Now I'm not so sure.

 

[vinnie97]

Wow, the OEM replacements are on the high side of tire pricing. With the poor tread performance of these, I'm not inclined to try them again. I understand the hypothesis that those sent to the vehicle manufacturers are of lower QC, but this doesn't encourage me to give these another go, especially with the price shown at TireRack right now. Those Continental PureContact LS, for instance, are far more attractive based on some takes here.

 

[BobD]

How does the Michelin Cross Climate compare with the Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Plus? I wanted to stick with Michelin tires, if possible, to get warrantee credit from Michelin on my OEM tires.

 

[swift17]

Any particular reason you went with the Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Plus II vs the P7 All Season Plus? The Plus have a lower rolling resistance than the Continental PureContact LS, so I would expect that the Plus would be a more efficient tire than the PureContact LS. I haven't been able to find the rolling resistance rating on the Plus II. I was expecting that it would be about the same as the Plus, but evidently not.

I had done a lot of research on the Plus and saw many people reporting them to be poor in wet conditions. Some Model S owners also said they couldn't handle 0-60 without the tires squealing and traction light flashing (they took video of this as well). I was going to go with them regardless, but then someone on this forum mentioned the Plus II which I hadn't heard of. I found out they were on tirerack and specifically mentioned improved wet traction and braking, so I started to look into them more to see if anything else had changed such rolling resistance, weight, and handling/noise characteristics.

I knew they were using a new tread compound, but I wasn't sure if the Plus II's were still classified as low rolling resistance since they no longer included the "EcoImpact" branding. The description on Tire Rack mentions that they're made with low rolling resistance compounds to improve fuel efficiency, so it lead me to believe they were still LRR tires. I even contacted Pirelli to verify this, but they said they weren't able to confirm if the Plus II's were low rolling resistance EcoImpact tires as well... thought it was odd they couldn't confirm but I bit the bullet and went with the II's anyway knowing I had 30 days to decide on them.

I know the Plus is available for purchase at Discount Tire and Tire Rack, and is listed in Consumer Reports latest testing and reviews. The Plus II must be a new tire as there are no reviews or ratings available that I could find. Most of the specifications between the two look similar, although the Plus II has deeper tread cut. The description for the Plus highlights fuel efficiency and quiet ride, whereas the Plus II does not. I have narrowed my search for replacement tires down to the Continental PureContact LS and the Pirelli Cinturato P7 Plus. I was really leaning toward the Pirelli's due to better rolling resistance and quieter ride. Now I'm not so sure.

Can definitely confirm that if you're looking for improved rolling resistance, the Plus's II's are not a good option. They are certainly not LRR tires, infact they have a 0.9 inch larger contact patch (5% bigger) than the Plus and are also 2 pounds heavier per tire, both of which eat into efficiency. I knew this going into buying them, but I thought maybe the new tread compound would be even lower rolling resistance to offset the efficiency decrease caused by the increased weight/larger contact patch. That theory I had has now been proven incorrect - the tread does not make up for it, it simply is a less efficient than the Plus was and by a significant margin it seems.

 

[Tchris]

I had done a lot of research on the Plus and saw many people reporting them to be poor in wet conditions. Some Model S owners also said they couldn't handle 0-60 without the tires squealing and traction light flashing (they took video of this as well). I was going to go with them regardless, but then someone on this forum mentioned the Plus II which I hadn't heard of. I found out they were on tirerack and specifically mentioned improved wet traction and braking, so I started to look into them more to see if anything else had changed such rolling resistance, weight, and handling/noise characteristics.

I knew they were using a new tread compound, but I wasn't sure if the Plus II's were still classified as low rolling resistance since they no longer included the "EcoImpact" branding. The description on Tire Rack mentions that they're made with low rolling resistance compounds to improve fuel efficiency, so it lead me to believe they were still LRR tires. I even contacted Pirelli to verify this, but they said they weren't able to confirm if the Plus II's were low rolling resistance EcoImpact tires as well... thought it was odd they couldn't confirm but I bit the bullet and went with the II's anyway knowing I had 30 days to decide on them.

Can definitely confirm that if you're looking for improved rolling resistance, the Plus's II's are not a good option. They are certainly not LRR tires, infact they have a 0.9 inch larger contact patch (5% bigger) than the Plus and are also 2 pounds heavier per tire, both of which eat into efficiency. I knew this going into buying them, but I thought maybe the new tread compound would be even lower rolling resistance to offset the efficiency decrease caused by the increased weight/larger contact patch. That theory I had has now been proven incorrect - the tread does not make up for it, it simply is a less efficient than the Plus was and by a significant margin it seems.

Thanks for the information. You no doubt saved me some grief.

 

[swift17]

Thanks for the information. You no doubt saved me some grief.

Glad I was able to help!

In case you're wondering, I took the Pirelli's off and got PureContact LS tires put on last Wednesday to replace them. Early impressions are great! They feel a bit softer (less firm sidewall maybe?) than the Pirelli's did, so cornering at higher speeds isn't great, but that's to be expected with non-performance tires like these are.

One thing that was immediately noticeable right off the bat, however was how much quieter the PureContact LS are. I swear I can barely hear any tire noise at all with these on... even my boyfriend noticed it when he drove the car the next day and he never notices little details like this (he's not a car person and doesn't pay attention to any of the changes I make to the car, so for him to notice this says a lot). Early efficiency numbers are showing a noticeable improvement from the Pirelli's as well, but I'll need to put more miles on these before I can really get an idea for how much better these are in that regard.

 

[Tchris]

Glad I was able to help!

In case you're wondering, I took the Pirelli's off and got PureContact LS tires put on last Wednesday to replace them. Early impressions are great! They feel a bit softer (less firm sidewall maybe?) than the Pirelli's did, so cornering at higher speeds isn't great, but that's to be expected with non-performance tires like these are.

One thing that was immediately noticeable right off the bat, however was how much quieter the PureContact LS are. I swear I can barely hear any tire noise at all with these on... even my boyfriend noticed it when he drove the car the next day and he never notices little details like this (he's not a car person and doesn't pay attention to any of the changes I make to the car, so for him to notice this says a lot). Early efficiency numbers are showing a noticeable improvement from the Pirelli's as well, but I'll need to put more miles on these before I can really get an idea for how much better these are in that regard.

I believe I will go with the PureContact LS as well. Thanks.

 

[sandange]

One thing that was immediately noticeable right off the bat, however was how much quieter the PureContact LS are. I swear I can barely hear any tire noise at all with these on... even my boyfriend noticed it when he drove the car the next day and he never notices little details like this (he's not a car person and doesn't pay attention to any of the changes I make to the car, so for him to notice this says a lot). Early efficiency numbers are showing a noticeable improvement from the Pirelli's as well, but I'll need to put more miles on these before I can really get an idea for how much better these are in that regard.

Thanks for the up date, and taking the time to share this information.
Very much appreciated.
looking forward to hearing the energy consumption numbers to compare.

 

[vinnie97]

So do you get a prorated discount if you dare to go with the Michelin Primacies on a 2nd attempt, with mileage at <15k and tread marker down to 4? I'm not sure what the warranty period is, but this seems hideous (they've been rotated twice in this time).

 

[sandange]

Early efficiency numbers are showing a noticeable improvement from the Pirelli's as well, but I'll need to put more miles on these before I can really get an idea for how much better these are in that regard.

I was hoping you might have an update on the efficiency of the PureContact LS compared to the Pirelli Plus II's. Thanks

 

[PiperPaul]

I've been scanning this thread because my original Michelin Primacy MXM4 tires are shot after 20,000 Km. / 12,500 miles. I've used primarily Michelin tires all my driving career, including some high performance / sticky compound tires, and have never seen such poor life. If I drove my M3 like I used to drive when younger, commuting, trying to get home from work when late, etc. I'd accept perhaps 40-50 K Km. from tires that are advertised with a 70,000 Km life. But I'm a pretty sedate senior now, drive with the Chill setting, don't push the car even though I'd like to see what it can do. And I've kept the tire pressures monitored carefully to spec.
So I've been attempting to shake the Tesla tree to see if I can find someone who will talk to me about these tires.

Backstory:
Since the Manual recommended tire rotation between 16-20K Km I had a close look at my tires which superficially looked fine, BUT

• I discovered the problem noted in the thread on inner tire wear on the front tires - https://teslaownersonline.com/threads/model-3-front-tire-inside-wear.15894/#post-279219. There is no tread left on the inside 2" and in at least one spot tire cord showing. The rest of the tire looks reasonable.
• The back tires look reasonable also until I measured tread depth and found the centre areas of both rear tires worn excessively
• generally, the tire wear on each tire is uneven across various sections of the tire

I have an excellent Mobile Service Rep (I'm 1200 Km / 1.5 days from my Service Centre in Quebec City) and he has seen my tire pictures and written up a Service Report.
He includes in the Report "Customer Education" comments that toe-in for the front wheels causes extra wear, that the car is heavy, that the car wheel base is wide, etc. But so far no response from anyone higher up the organization.

Warning:
Here's my learning so far (including what is noted in the tire discussions on this forum):

• never mind what you thought you knew about tire wear - this car is hard on tires
• never mind the Manual - check your tires with a depth gauge often and rotate much sooner than later
• tire manufacturers won't stand behind OEM tires (at least according to the Canadian Michelin website) which probably means that the tires supplied to the manufacturer are not the same quality or specs as what is advertised for retail.
• the toe-in specs for this tire wear the inside edge of the front tires excessively, and while there might be some wiggle room in the toe-in setup, that's the way the car is designed (this was the biggest surprise/gotcha so far for me)
• if your original tires have red dots on them like mine do then maybe that means they are REJECTS!
• if you don't have a Service Manager available in a nearby Service Centre find someone in Tesla management who will deal with quality issues

Most of you know much more about tires than I do. But if you haven't taken a really close look at your tires, please do so ASAP.
Any other thoughts / recommendations welcome.

UPDATE:
After getting CrossClimate+ tires installed I had the a wheel alignment done as all sensible drivers should. (I'm learning )
It turns out that the alignment on my car (received Nov. 2018) was out of whack both front and rear!
Given our roads this is possibly from driving locally (only one long road trip of 3500 Km) but since I've been pretty careful not to lose my kidneys on our roads I'm thinking they might have been like this from the factory.
While the toe-in for the front wheels didn't match - one with no toe-in, the other toed out - the bigger surprise was that the rear wheels were off the thrust line - one toed in, the other out. Small wonder all four tires were worn after them fighting with each other every trip.

Warning:
While I was concerned with some trim issues when I received the car, which Mobile Service fixed, I should have had the alignment checked right after delivery.
I've never had alignment / tire wear issues over my driving life, and got wrapped up in the excitement of this magic machine that didn't seem to need any servicing.
Since the car had never been on a hoist, and the early wear was hiding and invisible except with a thorough check with a depth gauge I was fooled into being complacent.
If you haven't had your car's alignment checked I recommend you do. The cost for me was only 8% of the cost of the new tires. The benefit was learning about alignments and not ruining another set of tires.

UPDATE 2:
Still happy with the CrossClimate + tires: efficiency is just as good as with the original MXM4s, and no increase in road noise - a slightly more "bass" tone - which is even better.
Bonus: Even though no one at Tesla helped out, I called Michelin Customer Support to register a complaint and was treated very well. [NOTE: This is contrary to my comment above based on what I had read on Michelin's web site.] In spite of a string of phone calls due to mix-ups at my local garage with my original tires being lost to their recycler, a Michelin Specialist arranged a rebate cheque for me against my cost of the new tires. Given the headaches so far this is very welcome news and very well played by Michelin.

 

[swift17]

I was hoping you might have an update on the efficiency of the PureContact LS compared to the Pirelli Plus II's. Thanks

Sorry, a bit late... just seeing this now. Loving them so far though, they're significantly more efficient than the Pirelli Cinturato P7 A/S Plus II's were. Recently took them on a 166 mile drive that was almost entirely highway with speeds between 75-80mph (~less than 10 miles on back roads at 30-50mph) and AC at 70 degrees since it was sunny and 75 outside. I averaged 268 Wh/mi at the end of my drive which I thought was really impressive.

 

[sandange]

Thanks for the feed back

 

[fizxtchr]

2018 LR RWD Model 3. Still running OEM Michelin MXM4's with 41,000 miles down to 2/32-3/32. Live in Philadelphia, PA area. Need replacement to pass safety inspection. Looking at both Michelin CrossClimate+ and Nokian WR G4. Nokian's are over $30 less per tire. Are the CrossClimate+'s work the extra $30/tire?

 

[PiperPaul]

2018 LR RWD Model 3. Still running OEM Michelin MXM4's with 41,000 miles down to 2/32-3/32. Live in Philadelphia, PA area. Need replacement to pass safety inspection. Looking at both Michelin CrossClimate+ and Nokian WR G4. Nokian's are over $30 less per tire. Are the CrossClimate+'s work the extra $30/tire?

I'm getting the CrossClimate + tires installed tomorrow based on the research results shown in this thread.
Can't say more unless you can wait 6 mo. for an update at that point from me.

Can say more: see my update to my June 6, 2020 post.
Get your alignment checked whatever tires you put on.

 

[HvyMtlChaos]

Looking for help in choosing summer tires for my RWD LR Model 3 w/ 18" aero wheels. I already have a set of Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3 tires (paid around $233/tire including shipping) for winter that replaced the stock tires and now need a summer set as well. Here's my importance ranking:

1. Performance / Handling (Want to be able to confidently drive in a spirited fashion and to be able to auto cross the car)
2. Tread wear / Durability (Hoping for ~20k miles or more on them including a little spirited driving same as the original tires)
3. Range / Low rolling resistance (I'm ok with a small hit in range for performance, I removed the aero caps right away and never put them back, but don't want to lose something crazy like 20%)
4. Low noise (mainly low enough to not bother my wife on the highway, we usually play music decently loud.... but still)
5. Ride Comfort (I don't want really thin sidewalls as I want to mitigate rim damage from bumps/holes (PA roads suck!))
6. Cost (Don't want to go over $225/tire ideally, definitely not over $250/tire but could stretch towards it for a very compelling recommendation/reason)

Having looked and and read through reviews and videos on TireRack.com, I so far think these are a good choice:
FIREHAWK INDY 500 - SIZE: 235/45R18

Any help you could give me would be appreciated!