Which Snows and Why Poll?

[William13]

At only four days with my new Nokian Hakka R3, I can tell a much better grip on dry and wet than the R2 had at its best. As I don't live in Alaska or the mountains,I don't need studs. I drive aggressively and the prior Winter tires only lasted 25,000 miles each on my S.
I'm still dreaming about a Model 3.

 

[Robert2on]

I installed my R3's on Thursday and immediately noticed reduced grip in the wet (it was raining) from the stock Michelin's as well as a squirm in the car that reduced confidence at speed (never ran R2's on any car). It was about 7C (45F), so the softer compound was really noticeable leaving the tire shop. The trade off for the best snow traction is worth it given I have RWD on my M3 and of course, this is a subjective opinion from just 2 days of driving only, so they might change a little with a few days of driving. I realize that 99% of the time it will be clear roads, but the car needs the very best grip when caught in deep snow in my view, which happens in this area from time to time.

My '16 Outback has had X-ICE 3 on the past few winters and I don't notice the change in the feel of the car due to the tires near as much as I did on the M3, but expect the R3 to be a better snow performer. The Outback also isn't remotely as sporty as the M3 and just a little less weight, but I can say I subjectively feel a difference between the two tires when changeover occurs.

I haven't tested the new R3's in snow, but the tread pattern and softness of the rubber lead me to believe they will be a little better in snow, with the X-ICE being better in normal driving for those where a lot of snow at times isn't a major issue. Both seem to be great tires.

For those in Ontario, I got a quite substantial discount with the TOCO discount at Kal - thanks for all that told me about that on this board! .

 

[jsmay311]

I'm risking it with the Sottozero 3 235/45R18 94V tires.

I personally wouldn't put on a 94V tire. You'd probably void any warranties on the tires and possibly other warranties as well.
Even if it's not the fault of 94V sh$t happens and entities try to find ways out of paying.

Sorry to keep harping on this, but I still don't understand why people are saying a "94" tire load index is insufficient or ill-advised on a Model 3. My understanding is that you simply need the tire's load index to be greater than half of the largest Gross Axle Weight Rating (GAWR).

In the case of my RWD Model 3, the front axle GAWR is 2,447 lbs and the rear axle GAWR is 2,771 lbs. 2771 / 2 = 1386, so any tire with a load index over 1,386 lb should be okay. That equates to a "92" load index or higher. ("92" = 1,389 lbs)

So, again... why would a "94" load index not be perfectly fine for this vehicle?

Photo of the door jamb sticker:

 

[coleAK]

My Hakka 9s are weight rated - 98. I’ll look up the psi on load tables as that may change from the door sticker but going with a higher load rating in general is fine.

 

[intelligator]

jsmay311 said... "Sorry to keep harping on this, but I still don't understand why people are saying a "94" tire load index is insufficient or ill-advised on a Model 3."

I've been curious of the same. Is it the perception that the higher load rating provides for stiffer sidewall? The parameters I was going to use and "take a risk with" are to select a tire with the same outside diameter, same ration of width and aspect, same or less weight preferred, load index close to supporting the axle weight calculation you mentioned, the highest load equivalent being the minimum.

Glad someone else had the same thought.

 

[usofrob]

When I bought my Sottozero 3 94V tires from TireRack, they delayed the order to get my approval to use tires that weren't load rated for my car. Then they said that in order to meet the load requirements I have to run at least 37 psi. Which is lower than I'd ever user on purpose anyway. So, I feel less concerned. I've been running them for a few weeks now without any issues. Finally got the first snow today, but it didn't stick on the roads. So, I'm still waiting for a good test of their snow grip.

 

[Goosby]

Got around to putting R3s on the car earlier this week. All good, so far. No snow yet, just cold, dry pavement. They are certainly louder than the stock tires, but I’d chalk the noise up to the lack of noise-reducing foam (compared to stock tires). Will be exciting to see how they perform on snow/ice. I think they are a bit less floaty feeling in cold/mild weather (~high 30s) than the Xice I had last year, but it could be the difference in car as well.

 

[MikeR2k]

Got around to putting R3s on the car earlier this week. All good, so far. No snow yet, just cold, dry pavement. They are certainly louder than the stock tires, but I’d chalk the noise up to the lack of noise-reducing foam (compared to stock tires). Will be exciting to see how they perform on snow/ice. I think they are a bit less floaty feeling in cold/mild weather (~high 30s) than the Xice I had last year, but it could be the difference in car as well.

I put my R3s on this week too, what pressure are you running them at?

 

[Goosby]

I put my R3s on this week too, what pressure are you running them at?

I think they went off what is listed on the door (42, I think?). Though the PSI shown for each tire on the screen is anywhere from 41-44 (fronts seem to be on the lower end, while rears are usually higher) even after driving around a bit. I might take it back in once the temps average ~20s and have them drop to 40psi cold.

 

[coleAK]

It got above freezing yesterday for the first time in a week and a half. This morning it was in the low 20s so everything was frozen solid and extremely slick. The Hakka 9’s we’re perfect. The only thing that had me concerned was the possibility of getting rear ended.

 

[jsmay311]

When I bought my Sottozero 3 94V tires from TireRack, they delayed the order to get my approval to use tires that weren't load rated for my car.

That's just the thing... I'm fairly certain they ARE load rated for your car.

I think places like TireRack and Discount Tire simply look at the load index of the OEM tire (which for Model 3 18's is "98"), and then to keep things super simple and safe for them (from a liability standpoint), they say that only tires with equal or greater load index are compatible with that vehicle. But that's not actually what determines compatibility -- the GAWR is. But they don't look at the GAWR at all AFAIK. That would be more complicated for them, but (as I understand it) that's the correct way of doing it.

I walked into a Discount Tire today to specifically ask about this, and the guy there confirmed that anything "92" and above is ok with my Model 3 RWD's GAWR.

 

[jsmay311]

Did anyone confirm the load index of the Pirelli Sottozero 2's that Tesla is selling yet??? 94V or 98V?

I think it matters in regards to performance. The euro labels that I found online score the 98V better (C-rating) on fuel economy vs the 94V (E-rating).

(And the Sottozero 3 94V's have "C" fuel and "B" wet traction with the same 72dB noise.)

SottoZero 2, 98V: Pirelli W 240 SottoZero S2. Only 120.30 £

SottoZero2, 94V: Pirelli W 240 SottoZero S2

SottoZero 3, 94V: Pirelli Winter SottoZero 3

 

[UltralightBeam]

What are the operating temps (cold) for the Sunmer Michelin Pilot Sport 4s?

I did see something about 20 degrees (feels like or regular temp?) but also at 40 people have started making their swaps.

Still waiting for my 18” set from T sportline.

 

[mattk926]

What are the operating temps (cold) for the Sunmer Michelin Pilot Sport 4s?

I did see something about 20 degrees (feels like or regular temp?) but also at 40 people have started making their swaps.

Still waiting for my 18” set from T sportline.

DON'T use these below 45 degrees F. Very dangerous as they are formulated for warm/hot temps. they turn into iceskates at temps below 45 degrees. and when they are below a certain temp they say to let them warm up for 24 hours before mounting/balancing etc since it could damage the tires.

"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."

 

[jsmay311]

Did anyone confirm the load index of the Pirelli Sottozero 2's that Tesla is selling yet??? 94V or 98V?

I think it matters in regards to performance. The euro labels that I found online score the 98V better (C-rating) on fuel economy vs the 94V (E-rating).

(And the Sottozero 3 94V's have "C" fuel and "B" wet traction with the same 72dB noise.)

Got confirmation that the Sottozero 2’s sold by Tesla are 94V here: Tesla Winter Tire Package - Lead-time?

Given the relatively poorer euro label ratings of the 94V 2’s, that’s enough to push me to ordering the Sottozero 3’s instead. Hopefully the lead time on a set a aero rims isn’t obscenely long.

 

[UltralightBeam]

DON'T use these below 45 degrees F. Very dangerous as they are formulated for warm/hot temps. they turn into iceskates at temps below 45 degrees. and when they are below a certain temp they say to let them warm up for 24 hours before mounting/balancing etc since it could damage the tires.

"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."

The note you posted is what I saw (which is why I mentioned the 20 degrees item). I have already used two days (one last week for snow) and one next week for temps in the teens) while waiting for these wheels from T Sportline.

But I’m going to have to use them if the temps are in that range otherwise as long as it’s not wet for now. I get it, the rubber gets hard so I know that they’ll be hockey pucks with any precipitation out there. I’m guessing 20 is when it’s just simply too cold for the rubber.

 

[jsmay311]

Got confirmation that the Sottozero 2’s sold by Tesla are 94V here: Tesla Winter Tire Package - Lead-time?

Given the relatively poorer euro label ratings of the 94V 2’s, that’s enough to push me to ordering the Sottozero 3’s instead. Hopefully the lead time on a set a aero rims isn’t obscenely long.

Never mind. Another person posted a photo of their Sottozero 2’s and they’re 98V.

Who has lost regen with winter tires?

 

[jsmay311]

When I bought my Sottozero 3 94V tires from TireRack, they delayed the order to get my approval to use tires that weren't load rated for my car. Then they said that in order to meet the load requirements I have to run at least 37 psi. Which is lower than I'd ever user on purpose anyway.

Tire Rack just called me to say that they are refusing to process my order for the Pirelli Sottozero 3 94V's that I placed last night since they're not rated XL. And the guy who called me also tried to argue that when looking at the tire's load index you have to add a 10% safety factor onto the vehicle's GAWR(???). But I don't think that's right. I can find no mention of anything like that anywhere online.

I tried arguing both points -- that there's no 10% safety factor needed for the load index and that SL would be okay given the Model 3's recommended tire pressure, but he wouldn't budge. I also mentioned that I had previously discussed these same load rating issues with Discount Tire and they were going to sell me the same tire except they were out of stock, but that didn't make a difference either.

Ironically, an article on TireRack.com seems to back me up:

"If your car comes with an XL tire, it is recommended to stick with XL options. However, standard load tires can still be used provided they meet the vehicle's GAWR (Gross Axle Weight Rating) requirements. The vehicle's placard, usually located in the driver's doorjamb, lists the front and rear GAWR. With two tires per axle, the tire load rating must be at least half of the GAWR."

https://blog.tirerack.com/blog/bens-blog/what-does-xl-stand-for

The descriptions of the SL/XL load ranges that I've found online are so damn vague, but the best descriptions I've found again come from TireRack.com. They describe how XL tires use a higher standard pressure when determining their maximum load (41 or 42psi for XL vs 35 or 36psi for SL).
But the implications of this seem counter-intuitive to me. As far as I can tell, if you're over 42 psi, there should be no difference between the load capacity of a SL and XL tire with the same load index number. But if you're between 35 psi and 41 psi, a SL tire would actually have a HIGHER load capacity than an XL tire with the same load index since it will be able to support its maximum rated load above 35psi but an XL tire won't be able to support its max load until it reaches 41psi.

"On standard load tires, once you inflate up to 35 psi, the load carrying capability reaches a peak and stops[...]. With extra load tires, you can inflate the tire up to 41 psi, and carry more weight."

https://blog.tirerack.com/blog/tucker-talks-tires/xl-load-tires-

And here are a couple other pages that talk about load ranges and tire pressures:
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=55
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=195

So what's the truth here???

 

[usofrob]

You may try calling them back. You might get someone different who will allow you to buy them.
The tires have been working well for me at 42 psi.

 

[coleAK]

^^^ all this goes back the the Ford Explorer/firestone fiasco back in the day. Can you just tell tire rack it is for a different car? Or do they even need to know what car you are putting them on?