I would think that people keen on Tesla and EVs would be more open to sound rational theories that persuasively question conventional wisdom and old dogma, but apparently not.
First of all, stop mischaracterizing my posts. I am perfectly open to any theory but I won't subscribe to it until I see concrete evidence. So far, I have seen none.
Second, I have concrete evidence to the contrary. I have 4 Michelin Primacy MXM4 235/40R18 tires on 4 18" Aero wheels on a RWD LR Model 3. When I picked it up, all 4 tires were at 7.9 mm tread depth. 5,000 miles later, the tread depths decreased as expected, with the rear tires decreasing
over 1mm more than the front tires. That puts them at nearly
twice the wear rate. Extrapolating that wear rate results in the rear tires getting to 2.5mm (wear limit) in nearly half the miles that the front tires will.
Why is this? Simple -- regen. A RWD Tesla applies 100% of the acceleration force from the rear tires, and nearly 100% of the deceleration force
also from the rear tires. This differs from other vehicles (for example, BMWs and Volvos) that apply over 2/3rds of their deceleration force (braking) from the front tires which could result in far more even front/rear wear.
The theory that BMW and Volvo are promulgating is debatable whether it is sound or rational. While it may have some applicability to their particular vehicle models, it doesn't make any sense to attempt to apply it globally for all tires and vehicles. Plus I have contrary evidence on my own personal RWD Model 3, with hard data.
You should be more careful of using words like "dogma", as it seems you have elevated BMW & Volvos advice to exactly that, and are blindly following it without so much as looking at a tread depth gauge.