Range differences with Pilot Sport All Season 4 or CrossClimate2 vs Primacy MXM4

[elmos_world]

i got my 50k miles out of the mxm4, and its time for replacement. is it worth getting the pilot sport as4 now or wait for mxm4 to get back in stock?

 

[dfwatt]

i got my 50k miles out of the mxm4, and its time for replacement. is it worth getting the pilot sport as4 now or wait for mxm4 to get back in stock?

Are you a range junkie or do you want better traction? PS4 all season for sure are a better handling and better braking Tire. But you will give up some range with a bump up of something like 15 to 20 watt hours per mile on the same wheel. You can get that back by lowering the car however with one of the MPP coilover kits.

 

[indianinjapan]

Greetings.

I have a Red Tesla Model 3 LR on order. (yes, i also placed order for Model S LR but not sure which year it would be delivered here).
The stock wheels are 19" Sports Wheel only with Hankook Evo S3 tyres.
Red Car doesnt look well on silver Sports Wheel and also I am not sure of longevity of Hankook Tyres and their road noise.

So I decided to backorder T-Sportline TSV 19" Satin Black Wheels with Michelin Pilot A/S 4 All Season tyres.
Here in Tokyo we see all four seasons with tempartures dropping to 0-5 Celcius in Winter and 35-38 Celcius in Summer.
So decided to go for the all season wheels.

Anyone has any experience with the 19" TSV or Hankook tyres?
What could be the upside and downside of this change from 19" stock Sports wheel w/t Hankook Evo S3 tyres to 19" T-Sportline TSV with Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 4 ?

One change i already have noticed after placing the order is that 19" TSV are about 4.4 Pounds heavier than the stock 19" Sports wheel.
I am hoping they are more aerodynamic and could help compensate the added weight.

Thanks for your help here.

 

[Legacystar]

i got my 50k miles out of the mxm4, and its time for replacement. is it worth getting the pilot sport as4 now or wait for mxm4 to get back in stock?

Get the the AS4 I just did, and can't love them enough. Less noise, better ride, better traction, more confident feeling. You'll lose range for sure, but running them daily on my commute at 38psi is sublime compared to the continental's

 

[dfwatt]

Get the the AS4 I just did, and can't love them enough. Less noise, better ride, better traction, more confident feeling. You'll lose range for sure, but running them daily on my commute at 38psi is sublime compared to the continental's

Yes we have the All Season Pilot Sport 3 which is not as good as the Pilot Sport All Season 4 and it's really an amazing tire. Has essentially dry performance summer Tire levels of traction on good pavement and it's pretty decent in snow too, maybe not a world-beater but pretty decent. It's amazing that they can get a tire to work that well under that many different environments. We find it is a little noisier than the summer PS4s, but about the same rolling resistance. All around pretty damn good.

 

[CellarRat]

Just got the Crossclimate2 tires installed on the M3P- back in December. It's been quite cold out so I can't say for certain how they affect range, but I will say that the new tires saved my bacon on Wednesday when we got more snow than expected. Daughter was at Gymnastics, and they said they were going to end practice early due to snow, so we hopped in the Subaru Outback (stock tires, Bridgestone Dueler HP Sport AS... terrible) and immediately started sliding around. Couldn't accelerate on a flat surface without slipping... So we worked our way back home and got in the Tesla with its new tires. Very little slipping, no sliding, and it had no issues going up a snowy hill. Got to the gym safely and returned home safely. Very thankful for those tires, so we're getting them installed on the Subaru next week

No clue about range impact, but for the snow, the Crossclimate2 tires are fantastic.

 

[rasputinj]

Pilot Sport All Season 4 - 15-20% range hit in all driving conditions. 6000 miles on them.

I had the same range hit, ended selling my 2019 M3 and buying a 2022, when Shift offered me $46,500. I am happy with more range w with the 2022.

 

[Toysla]

After 13 months on the Michelin PS4 tires, and about 17k miles, I will say these tires are stickier & slightly more responsive than my MXM4 OEM tires. Road noise level is still high and looking at my Tesla trip screen info, I averaged 249kWh on my old tires and 254 kWh on the Pilot Sport 4s, commute driving in the California Bay Area freeways.. so it’s moderate temperature driving and my batteries hav accumulated about 58000 miles on them.
We will see how the tread life is shortened since these PS4s are slightly softer & grippier tires than my OEM Michelin tires.
Worth it!!

 

[jaqueh]

After 13 months on the Michelin PS4 tires, and about 17k miles, I will say these tires are stickier & slightly more responsive than my MXM4 OEM tires. Road noise level is still high and looking at my Tesla trip screen info, I averaged 249kWh on my old tires and 254 kWh on the Pilot Sport 4s, commute driving in the California Bay Area freeways.. so it’s moderate temperature driving and my batteries hav accumulated about 58000 miles on them.
We will see how the tread life is shortened since these PS4s are slightly softer & grippier tires than my OEM Michelin tires.
Worth it!!

Appreciate the update. I will not be going for upgraded tires as the tradeoffs don't outweigh the benefits IMO.

 

[Dave EV]

I put on a set of 18" CrossClimate 2 tires on my LR RWD before heading out on a road trip to replace some pretty worn OEM MXM4s mainly for the wet traction but also because there was a very good chance of encountering snow and ice. Tire pressures set to about 42 PSI cold. If I were comparing to new MXM4s some of my perceived differences may be different.

Comfort: They seem to be a bit more comfortable and take the edge off sharp bumps/cracks than the MXM4s. Somewhat related, but they also provide better rim protection as the tread width is wider than the MXM4s.

Noise: At low speeds they definitely are a bit louder with a bit of a hum. On road imperfections, they "ring" a bit more than the MXM4s, so the foam on the MXM4s seem to help reduce noise. At higher speeds, they seem to be overall quieter than the MXM4s - on some road surfaces where the MXM4s could be very loud, the CC2s didn't not seem to run into that issue.

Dry handling: Hard to compare due to the big difference in tread depth, but I would say that the CC2s are not a tire I would pick for sharp and precise handling in the dry. This may change as the tread depth wears down some. At the limit, breakaway seems to be progressive, but I did not explore this much.

Wet handling: They are very stable on wet roads, especially with any standing water. You barely notice that any significant water is there. On damp roads in cool weather (40-50F) without standing water, grip levels were very good again with stable breakaway characteristics.

Snow handling: Unfortunately, did not encounter snow/ice to enough to be able to report, but the patches I did hit, they seemed to perform very well and better than I'd expect the MXM4s to do.

Efficiency: Very noticeable hit in efficiency. For this trip over 2500 miles the average was 329 Wh/mi - for reference the lifetime of the car is around 265 Wh/mi and most road trips are in a similar range to that +- 10%. It's unusual to see efficiency numbers above 300 Wh/mi even on high speed (75-80 mph) highway trips. Even trying to drive efficiently (~65 mph) on some shorter segments in mild weather (~50F) I struggled to get the car down to 250 Wh/mi when normally it's trivial. Now the weather was pretty cold (35-45F) and wet for a significant portion of it, so that probably played a part as well, but I'd estimate that the efficiency is down at least 10% and possibly more right now.

Given the large reduction in efficiency at freeway speeds - in theory rolling resistance is pretty constant regardless of speed, so any effect of rolling resistance should be less at higher speeds - I believe that these tires are significantly less aerodynamic due to the large blocks on the tire compared to the MXM4s. Also, the tread width is noticeably wider than the MXM4s - I measured them to be about 1/2" wider despite the tires being the same size (235/45/R18). They definitely look a lot "meatier" than the MXM4s in comparison.

Conclusion: If you're looking for a snow-rated tire that also works in the summer and efficiency is not that important - I would recommend them. If maximizing range on road trips is important, I would pass on these.

A tire similar in efficiency to the MXM4s but at a similar price to the CC2s (~$210 vs ~$280 at least at Discount Tire) would be nice if you're not worried about snow - really hard to justify the cost of the MXM4s...

 

[dfwatt]

I put on a set of 18" CrossClimate 2 tires on my LR RWD before heading out on a road trip to replace some pretty worn OEM MXM4s mainly for the wet traction but also because there was a very good chance of encountering snow and ice. Tire pressures set to about 42 PSI cold. If I were comparing to new MXM4s some of my perceived differences may be different.

Comfort: They seem to be a bit more comfortable and take the edge off sharp bumps/cracks than the MXM4s. Somewhat related, but they also provide better rim protection as the tread width is wider than the MXM4s.

Noise: At low speeds they definitely are a bit louder with a bit of a hum. On road imperfections, they "ring" a bit more than the MXM4s, so the foam on the MXM4s seem to help reduce noise. At higher speeds, they seem to be overall quieter than the MXM4s - on some road surfaces where the MXM4s could be very loud, the CC2s didn't not seem to run into that issue.

Dry handling: Hard to compare due to the big difference in tread depth, but I would say that the CC2s are not a tire I would pick for sharp and precise handling in the dry. This may change as the tread depth wears down some. At the limit, breakaway seems to be progressive, but I did not explore this much.

Wet handling: They are very stable on wet roads, especially with any standing water. You barely notice that any significant water is there. On damp roads in cool weather (40-50F) without standing water, grip levels were very good again with stable breakaway characteristics.

Snow handling: Unfortunately, did not encounter snow/ice to enough to be able to report, but the patches I did hit, they seemed to perform very well and better than I'd expect the MXM4s to do.

Efficiency: Very noticeable hit in efficiency. For this trip over 2500 miles the average was 329 Wh/mi - for reference the lifetime of the car is around 265 Wh/mi and most road trips are in a similar range to that +- 10%. It's unusual to see efficiency numbers above 300 Wh/mi even on high speed (75-80 mph) highway trips. Even trying to drive efficiently (~65 mph) on some shorter segments in mild weather (~50F) I struggled to get the car down to 250 Wh/mi when normally it's trivial. Now the weather was pretty cold (35-45F) and wet for a significant portion of it, so that probably played a part as well, but I'd estimate that the efficiency is down at least 10% and possibly more right now.

Given the large reduction in efficiency at freeway speeds - in theory rolling resistance is pretty constant regardless of speed, so any effect of rolling resistance should be less at higher speeds - I believe that these tires are significantly less aerodynamic due to the large blocks on the tire compared to the MXM4s. Also, the tread width is noticeably wider than the MXM4s - I measured them to be about 1/2" wider despite the tires being the same size (235/45/R18). They definitely look a lot "meatier" than the MXM4s in comparison.

Conclusion: If you're looking for a snow-rated tire that also works in the summer and efficiency is not that important - I would recommend them. If maximizing range on road trips is important, I would pass on these.

A tire similar in efficiency to the MXM4s but at a similar price to the CC2s (~$210 vs ~$280 at least at Discount Tire) would be nice if you're not worried about snow - really hard to justify the cost of the MXM4s...

You need at least a thousand miles on the tire to get them loosened up to get best possible efficiency. Have you compared efficiency recently with efficiency when you first had them?

 

[Dave EV]

You need at least a thousand miles on the tire to get them loosened up to get best possible efficiency. Have you compared efficiency recently with efficiency when you first had them?

Yes, I have 2500 miles on them through the trip - the last 500 miles have been better than the first 500 miles, but still appears to be at least 10% worse than the MXM4. Still need a bit more time on them under more familiar conditions to be certain...

 

[gotoma8]

FWIW I'm just shy of 3k miles on my PS A/S 4 now.... the big (known) difference to your data is I run 40 psi (in both sets- nearer to what Elon suggested).

Both on aero wheels without the covers- on LR AWD.... (didn't see you say what wheels or trim of 3 you have)

~265 wh/mi for about 22k miles on the MXM4s

~290 wh/mi for almost 3k on the PS A/S4s

So about a 10% range hit.

Hi, I wonder why so many owners run on such low PSI. I run at 45psi, so in the summer, when it is warm here in the PNW, at times the tires can reach to 48 or 49 PSI, almost at the limits of the MXM4. I get that a lower PSI will be more comfortable, but don't you lose out on handling, performance and efficiency? Am I silly to run such high PSI? I know that here in the PNW, in the winter, my PSI, while at 45 in the summer will dip to like 40 until I reinflate it.

 

[Knightshade]

Overinflated as you run will be more efficient, but generally worse for handling and performance.

This is part of why Elon recommended inflation nearer my numbers than yours (he cares more about those things) but Teslas door jamb originally suggested a higher # (for being able to claim better efficiency)

Everything's a trade-off. Since I rarely take LONG road trips I'd rather have the better handling, stopping, ride, etc than a little better wh/mi... (also why I went to stickier than MXM4 tires in the first place)

 

[gotoma8]

True, less inflated tires will give more grip, but around corners, it could feel like a boat at first, no?

 

[tm1v2]

There should be a sweet spot where you get the greatest contact patch without making the tires detrimentally soft. Of course it depends what you're driving on, for very loose surfaces (not pavement) it can help to underinflate.

Overinflating is only helpful if you just care about efficiency, at the cost of handling and wear and ride quality. Seems like a poor tradeoff to me unless you're in a situation where you'll be desperate for just a little extra range. If you want the extra efficiency all the time, get narrower wheels and tires, and run them at an appropriate pressure without uneven tire wear or unnecessarily harsh ride quality.

 

[gotoma8]

tm1v2, I run at 45psi...I think that is a good balance for me on the stock MXM4. We'll see when I get new tires.

 

[SteelClouds]

I was reading through all this and was interested in the Pilot Sport 4S and found this note about them:

Note: Tires exposed to temperatures of 20 degrees F (-7 degrees C) or lower must be permitted to gradually return to temperatures of at least 40 degrees F (5 degrees C) for at least 24 hours before they are flexed in any manner, such as by adjusting inflation pressures, mounting them on wheels or using them to support, roll or drive a vehicle.

Flexing of the specialized rubber compounds used in Max Performance Summer tires during cold-weather use can result in irreversible compound cracking. Compound cracking is not a warrantable condition because it occurs as the result of improper use or storage, tires exhibiting compound cracking must be replaced

 

[rxlawdude]

Hi, I wonder why so many owners run on such low PSI. I run at 45psi, so in the summer, when it is warm here in the PNW, at times the tires can reach to 48 or 49 PSI, almost at the limits of the MXM4. I get that a lower PSI will be more comfortable, but don't you lose out on handling, performance and efficiency? Am I silly to run such high PSI? I know that here in the PNW, in the winter, my PSI, while at 45 in the summer will dip to like 40 until I reinflate it.

I'm almost certain that recommended maximum pressures are COLD (i.e., the vehicle sitting in the shade for several hours and always performed before driving more than a mile or two) pressure, so ambient changes when driving that push HOT pressure up to the low or mid 50s should not be a major risk.

See, for example, https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=196

 

[rxlawdude]

There should be a sweet spot where you get the greatest contact patch without making the tires detrimentally soft. Of course it depends what you're driving on, for very loose surfaces (not pavement) it can help to underinflate.

Overinflating is only helpful if you just care about efficiency, at the cost of handling and wear and ride quality. Seems like a poor tradeoff to me unless you're in a situation where you'll be desperate for just a little extra range. If you want the extra efficiency all the time, get narrower wheels and tires, and run them at an appropriate pressure without uneven tire wear or unnecessarily harsh ride quality.

The most common cause of tire failure is UNDER inflation. You'll see more wear on the tread near the sidewalls, whereas with proper or slightly higher inflation, you'll tend to see more wear in the center of the tread.

Given that choice, and with the additional better efficiency of proper/slightly over inflation, I tend to favor more pressure rather than a softer, less efficient ride. Even though I live in SoCal, where temperatures rarely reach freezing or below, all-weather tires seem to be the best compromise. I would hate to have to worry about changing wheels/tires seasonally to avoid rubber decomposition or a serious slippy accident.