At Discount Tire/America's Tire, the safety of our customers is our first consideration. If a spacer/adaptor meets our safety guidelines, we would be happy to service the vehicle.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Hankook new iON tire, an "EV" tire (not the same as Kinergy GT)
- Thread starter 3sr+buyer
- Start date
At Discount Tire/America's Tire, the safety of our customers is our first consideration. If a spacer/adaptor meets our safety guidelines, we would be happy to service the vehicle.
Sellout
Member
Are those guidelines published anywhere?
When it's been explained to me by the busy folks in the stores I've been to, it sounds like any spacer that uses the car's OEM lugs to hold it to the hub and has its own lugs for holding the wheel on would be acceptable (which is obviously going to wear the bearings out faster) but small spacers that correct the wheel offset back to factory specs would be unacceptable.
These guidelines are internal best practices and are not published publicly. In that specific case, the spacer has to be hub centric and cannot limit the thread engagement to less than 7 full turns.
agree 100%. For me, improving efficiency is a game. It does help a little when I take a long road trip every so often...but it is really just a game. I no longer race or even autocross, so other "performance" upgrades are no longer that interesting.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I do get a kick out of seeing the wh/mi numbers go down, while still driving "normal" (which often means in a hurry for me). I've played with air pressure, installed the UPF front lip and rear spoiler, tried different aero wheel covers, and of course now the Hankook ION's. Maybe one day I'll bite the bullet and lower the car in the name of improved efficiency. Given I have enough solar/battery for 100% offset, none of these efficiency improvements will ever save me a dime. But they are fun and might save me a few minutes on a long road trip.
In the efficiency game nothing really matters quite like just simply slowing down. It is the ultimate cheat code. Go slow to get there in first.
Also, accelerating quickly is actually more efficient than accelerating slowly as long as your average speeds are the same which they have to be for a valid comparison.
Sellout
Member
Did you see any real improvements in efficiency from the front lip?
I’ve also been more interested in the efficiency game lately with my P3D than in the actual performance.
Slowing down and using cruise control. If you are not using cruise control on the highway you will be going through constant cycles of speeding up and slowing down, even if it is just somewhat minor variations (it is difficult to manually maintain the same speed). The acceleration side of those cycles can waste a lot of energy.
Zcd1
Active Member
This is a somewhat misleading statement. It's often quicker overall to drive faster and add a charging stop (or 2).
As an example, according to ABRP a 400-mile trip I do regularly would take 6:59 overall at 65 mph with 28 minutes of charging, but 6:19 overall at 115% of the speed limit (65-75 mph speed limits) with 38 minutes of charging.
Personally, I'd rather save the 40 minutes of overall trip time.
That is why I said “The efficiency game”. If you are trying to optimize efficiency then vehicle speed is pretty much the only factor that matters.
If you are trying to optimize time then yes, by all means, go as fast as you possibly can and then optimize the charging stops.
Efficiency is in direct conflict with optimizing time. You have to pick one or the other. You can’t do both.
It is isn’t the acceleration that actually affects the efficiency. It is actually the variation from the average that affects efficiency. Like you said, cruise control is a very reliable way to maintain a constant speed.
Zcd1
Active Member
Right and if you hadn’t said “Go slow to get there in first” (sic), I wouldn’t have commented….
In the efficiency game that statement is correct. You go slow to get there “IN” first. Not to get there first but to get there IN first place in the efficiency game.
Zcd1
Active Member
Trying to "win" at that game is SO FAR from my consciousness that I literally thought that was a typo.
Of course, there is a point where higher speed increases the risk of a traffic citation and associated delay. Obviously, this varies from one place to another.
But having more efficient tires helps you regardless of how fast you drive.
Yes, but only at high speed. A while back I drove cross country, (let's just say traffic was traveling over PSL, I was passing traffic, and it was all extremely remote areas) and saw 272 Wh/mi over the entire trip (no local driving....just 3,600+ miles of freeway). I only had the front lip installed at the time, not the rear spoiler.
Around town I average around 210-214 of mixed (mostly freeway), and I drive PSL or less on local streets, but I'm usually slightly faster than most traffic on the freeway.
The aero mods (front lip and extended rear spoiler) do make a difference in areas where PSL is 75mph and traffic is often 80-85mph. Going 40mph in traffic on US 101, not so much.
Playing with ABRP, it appears 90-95mph is the theoretical sweet spot with my vehicle. Faster than this and you are just trading drive time for charge time, not getting there any faster. Obviously this number will change depending on the vehicle, and the speed you can safely travel is usually less than that, so the "max safe speed" is most likely your real limit for getting there faster.
But the less juice you burn, the less time you spend charging, and that will get you there quicker on a long trip, hence the efficiency push.
Preface - I have never in my life upgraded 4 new tires at the same time. My lack of experience in tire upgrades should be taken with a grain.
Ok further analysis - Hankook Ion Evo are way better than the Kinergy GT's.
They are quieter.
It now feels like a tank driving my Model 3. The grip on rainy weather is a significant upgrade.
The tires are new so they are absorbing the bumps and grinds of the road ways much better. I can zoom around corners if I wanted too and feel confidant doing so. Everything that you want in a tire.
There is a minor tradeoff
There is a slight energy increase in W/H over the 94V Kinergy GT's. 98W are obviously heavier with tougher side walls,
10-25 w/h higher in similar conditions. But the upgrades across the board are significantly better.
Model 3 2023 Long Range - No acceleration booster. FSD Software rented.
Like I said a grain of salt but they feel quite awesome to me.
xilex
Model P3D
I got these new tires in October 2023. These are efficiency numbers as determined by Teslamate. Only 500-700mi per month, 60/40 street/highway. Road trip in October so too much fast highway driving. But otherwise it is as good as or better than the OEM tires in terms of efficiency.
Those are the Ion Evo's? What did you have before if so? I was just out driving today and, My model 3 feels like a tank. What an upgrade.
Are you comparing brand new Hankook Kinergy GT vs Hankook Ion EVO especially for the road noise?
I ask because I have tested brand new both of them and the Kinergy GT were the quieter ones, thanks to Hankook offer of 30 days trial that I availed of at the Discount Tire.
xilex
Model P3D
Yep, the iON EVO AS. I had the OEM MXM4 before. Also forgot to mention it is 18" tires. I like these new tires, too. I was going to get the same old MXM4 to replace, but decided to go with more modern tire.
Similar threads
- Article
