The pilot sport 4 A/S is far superior to the MXM4 primacy tires for sure. I've only had them for a short while in 18s, roughly 750 miles, @ 261 wh/mi, compared to 19,000 miles on the MXM4 @ 247 wh/mi, so roughly about 5-6% less efficient so far, may go up to 8-9% in the long run, we'll see. It's slightly noisier compared to the MXM4, but the model 3 has such bad wind noise at a decent speed, it doesn't even matter to me. The grip is amazing all around and I just drove it up to big bear with light snow and it handled it like a champ. Best balanced tire you can buy in my opinion and it has a 45k tire warranty.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
200 miles review: Michelin Pilot Sport All Season 4
- Thread starter Ciditad
- Start date
The pilot sport 4 A/S is far superior to the MXM4 primacy tires for sure. I've only had them for a short while in 18s, roughly 750 miles, @ 261 wh/mi, compared to 19,000 miles on the MXM4 @ 247 wh/mi, so roughly about 5-6% less efficient so far, may go up to 8-9% in the long run, we'll see. It's slightly noisier compared to the MXM4, but the model 3 has such bad wind noise at a decent speed, it doesn't even matter to me. The grip is amazing all around and I just drove it up to big bear with light snow and it handled it like a champ. Best balanced tire you can buy in my opinion and it has a 45k tire warranty.
Earthurb
Member
Hey OutofThyme. Off subject here, but when you drive to Big Bear, where do you usually charge? I’ve used the destination chargers in the village, but no superchargers. I think Elon needs to add some up there.
I've never needed to, I top off in San Bernadino before I head up to BB, and on the way back I have plenty of charge. I also think Tesla needs to add some, its a heavily traveled areas for socal people.
Also 2000 mile update, A/S 4 @45 psi is currently at 257 wh/mi so 3.9% worse than the MXM4 (40-42 psi).
JCtx
Member
How big is the difference in tread life and handling between those 2 options? Does anybody know? A 4% decreased efficiency is not insignificant, but it's not that bad either... if handling differences are a lot better than MXM4s. The other 2 aspects I'd definitely consider as well are tread life, and cabin noise.
I'm at 4500 on these tires. Overall, all usages but lots of freeway at 77 mph gives 291 wh/mile as compared to the 26,000 miles on the MXM4's giving 251. So about a 16% hit. Worse than I expected and thought initially. But the handling is great. Debating what to put on my wife's 3 when she needs tires soon.
A standard conundrum in these cases is that when people start to experience the greater Grip and Performance of a Performance Tire they drive faster, more aggressively at cetera which of course hurts your mileage. The only way to really know about range to do essentially some kind of controlled test at fixed speeds.
Finally crossed 2000 miles on my PS4 A/S thought I'd post an update. Efficiency is pretty much back to what it was with the stock MXM4. It took a while to get there. Extremely pleased with the smoothness and quietness, and the car is definitely more responsive with its handling. I can definitely recommend these tires.
One thing though, I do have these tires at 45psi, compared to 42 on the MXM4.
One thing though, I do have these tires at 45psi, compared to 42 on the MXM4.
I'm looking to swap my 20's on my M3P to your exact same setup - 18's with the Michelin All Season 4's. Do you have any updates on efficiency?
Mahamilto
Member
1500 miles in... swapped flat prone disaster PZeros for PS AS4s and went 245/40/19 vs stock 235/35/20s.
The as4 in 245 is 8.6" contact vs the Pzero meger 7.9"
efficiency is a push. As4 294 vs Pzero 301... negligible tbh.
handling the Pzero had a tad more to offer, but barely. Turn in is outstanding on AS4s, but can’t quite compete with the summer compound Pzero in 35 aspect. Given I went summer to all season and only lost a touch, color me impressed.
wet handling, the AS4 is a bit more sturdy tbh. More confident in It when in rains.
ride? AS4 is better, but on lighter wheels with 40 aspect I expected this.
snow... no data, but the Pzero is a no go here So it’s moot. Had the a/s3+ and it was acceptable the as4 is allegedly better.
Reliability. Ha. Pzero had a blow out flat and bubbled 2 other tires in 750mi. 1500 miles into the AS4s... nothing. Rock solid all tires look perfect. Yes, the 40 aspect is a game change, but the boxy sideway I suspect is better for preventing flats.
overall... amazing results. Got everything I wanted.
The as4 in 245 is 8.6" contact vs the Pzero meger 7.9"
efficiency is a push. As4 294 vs Pzero 301... negligible tbh.
handling the Pzero had a tad more to offer, but barely. Turn in is outstanding on AS4s, but can’t quite compete with the summer compound Pzero in 35 aspect. Given I went summer to all season and only lost a touch, color me impressed.
wet handling, the AS4 is a bit more sturdy tbh. More confident in It when in rains.
ride? AS4 is better, but on lighter wheels with 40 aspect I expected this.
snow... no data, but the Pzero is a no go here So it’s moot. Had the a/s3+ and it was acceptable the as4 is allegedly better.
Reliability. Ha. Pzero had a blow out flat and bubbled 2 other tires in 750mi. 1500 miles into the AS4s... nothing. Rock solid all tires look perfect. Yes, the 40 aspect is a game change, but the boxy sideway I suspect is better for preventing flats.
overall... amazing results. Got everything I wanted.
That's great to hear, I'm getting my 18's with AS4's installed on tuesday and hearing this, I can't wait!
Definitely noticed a big improvement after 3k miles on the tires. i'm able to get under 240 wh/mi driving normally in Spring weather.
Mahamilto
Member
On a P or LR?
I’ve had a few warm days that when I’m driving in some traffic and not able to get deep in the accelerator that I’m getting 220-250, but with my P when I drive how I typically drive it I’m more in 290-310 range (but admittedly that’s with a ton of highway driving I do)
Either way... I got these for them to be as close to summers as possible in an allseason. By going up in contact patch to 245s I’ve gotten exactly what I hoped for
SucreTease
Teslarian
Why Does Gas Mileage Drop With New Tires?
In short, the full tread on a new tire is softer than a worn tire, creating more rolling resistance on a new tire.
Another reason why efficiency appears to drop with new tires is because the new tires have a larger circumference than worn tires. Worn tires fool the car into thinking it has gone farther for a given energy expenditure than it actually has. Here are the computations to demonstrate this. According to Michelin, the tire in the title takes 743 revolutions to go one mile, leading to an effective circumference of 5280 ft / 743 = 7.106 ft, or a radius of 7.106 / 2π = 1.131 ft. When new, the tire has a tread depth of 10/32". A tire is considered fully worn tire when its tread depth reaches 3/32". Therefore, a fully worn tire has a radius of 1.131 ft - 7/32" = 1.131 - 0.018" = 1.113 ft, which is 1.6% smaller, meaning that the car is actually traveling 1.6% less than a mile when the car thinks it has traveled a mile (by counting tire revolutions). Therefore, the car thinks the energy use per mile is lower than it actually is (car has actually gone less than a mile).
In short, the full tread on a new tire is softer than a worn tire, creating more rolling resistance on a new tire.
Another reason why efficiency appears to drop with new tires is because the new tires have a larger circumference than worn tires. Worn tires fool the car into thinking it has gone farther for a given energy expenditure than it actually has. Here are the computations to demonstrate this. According to Michelin, the tire in the title takes 743 revolutions to go one mile, leading to an effective circumference of 5280 ft / 743 = 7.106 ft, or a radius of 7.106 / 2π = 1.131 ft. When new, the tire has a tread depth of 10/32". A tire is considered fully worn tire when its tread depth reaches 3/32". Therefore, a fully worn tire has a radius of 1.131 ft - 7/32" = 1.131 - 0.018" = 1.113 ft, which is 1.6% smaller, meaning that the car is actually traveling 1.6% less than a mile when the car thinks it has traveled a mile (by counting tire revolutions). Therefore, the car thinks the energy use per mile is lower than it actually is (car has actually gone less than a mile).
Similar threads
- Marketplace listing
- Marketplace listing
- Locked
- Marketplace listing