[Jon D]

OK, I realise this isn't, strictly speaking, 3 series pertinent, but I'm here as an ex E92 owner and because I'm looking for UK road specific information.
I want to switch to 20" non-runflats on my F10 and the above tyre gets a good review here: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Vr...c-Sessanta.htm
Any thoughts on experience with these or any other recommendations appreciated - many thanks.

[RagingKileak]

I have two sets of tyres for my Golf.... Sessantas and Toyo R1R's.

The Toyo tires grip much better, but the Sessantas are on at the moment (R1Rs crack in freezing weather) and are doing a great job. Considering the Golf is 350+ bhp that is not a bad thing.

Matt

[Sandwich_Dan]

The Sessantas used to get a lot of good reviews on my old RX-8 forum. Considering the RX-8 ran Bridgestone RE040 or RE050 as standard depending on the age (but not run flat) it's a reasonable comparison.

Originally Posted by RagingKileak

The Toyo tires grip much better

When I ran Toyo T1Rs on my MX-5 a couple of years ago I was really impressed with the grip they gave but they felt horrible. It felt like the sidewalls were too soft, at the correct pressures there was a noticable rebound when changing direction quickly. Raising the pressures helped a bit but ruined the car's composure over poor surfaces.

[willhollin]

Very, very soft side walls. I'd try and get Continental Sport Contact 3s or 5s if possible, especially on a big old 5 series.

[Jon D]

Thanks for the replies - the Conti SC5p certainly get a good review, only problem is that I can't find anyone doing them in 275/30/20. Any suggestions?

[ALF_E90]

Sessantas came second in the Evo tyre test a few years back, beating all but the Eagle Assymetrics, a good result considering they are much cheaper.

Wouldn't ordering a higher load rating help the soft sidewalls? I can't see a 94 or 95 load version being that soft... Though this does vary a lot between makes.

[willhollin]

Originally Posted by Jon D

Thanks for the replies - the Conti SC5p certainly get a good review, only problem is that I can't find anyone doing them in 275/30/20. Any suggestions?

What front size do you require?

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by willhollin

What front size do you require?

245/35/20

[YvesD]

Originally Posted by ALF_E90

Wouldn't ordering a higher load rating help the soft sidewalls? I can't see a 94 or 95 load version being that soft... Though this does vary a lot between makes.

From personal experience I can tell you the Vreds do not have 'soft sidewalls' they are not much less stiff than RFT's actually....

Yves

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by YvesD

From personal experience I can tell you the Vreds do not have 'soft sidewalls' they are not much less stiff than RFT's actually....

Yves

Did you notice any significant difference in steering feel/road feedback when you switched to the Vreds and are you happy with them?

[willhollin]

Originally Posted by YvesD

From personal experience I can tell you the Vreds do not have 'soft sidewalls' they are not much less stiff than RFT's actually....

Yves

Really, I thought they were soft.

Didn't Vredestein tell you to inflate them to very high pressures?

[giotecno]

I have vreds and I can assure you they are not soft, but no way near as harsh as the rft tyres. The vreds have great road handling and no tramlining, that was evident on the bridgestone and pirelli run flats. But trust me good rubber makes a big difference as the michelin sports I tried were just awesome in all areas. I recommend the vreds for the price and performance against the run flats I mentioned, but newer rft tyres are improving I heard, but the next set I buy after the vreds will be Michelin no doubt. Hope this helps.

[225_AB]

auto express 2010 tyre test
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/product...8/verdict.html

[willhollin]

Originally Posted by doc_ab

auto express 2010 tyre test
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/product...8/verdict.html

That's the Ultrac Cento not Sessanta.

[HighlandPete]

I know Jon D is thinking of putting the Vred's on his new 535d, to improve the steering dynamics.

Have anyone come across the characteristic some users have reported, the tyres (due to the 'non mirrored' design) can feel different on a left compared to a right hand bend, when near the limits?

If so, I wonder if they are the wrong tyres for Jon D to put on a car with sensitive steering.

HighlandPete

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

I know Jon D is thinking of putting the Vred's on his new 535d, to improve the steering dynamics.

Have anyone come across the characteristic some users have reported, the tyres (due to the 'non mirrored' design) can feel different on a left compared to a right hand bend, when near the limits?

If so, I wonder if they are the wrong tyres for Jon D to put on a car with sensitive steering.

HighlandPete

Pete, going by reviews I'd really like to fit the Conti SC 5p but, as I mentioned earlier, I can't find any in my size.
There was another development yesterday - my dealer paid for a nitrogen fill (a bit off-the-wall maybe, but worth a try) and whilst having the job done I asked the tyre dealer manager to quote me for a set of 20" non-runflats. Instead of taking my money, he reckoned the handling would end up being worse because the chassis is designed around RFT technology. Now I'm even more confused!
No immediate difference noticed with the N, but I wasn't really expecting miracles .

[rsmallwo]

Nitrogen in tyres will stop them loosing pressure more than a tyre filled with just normal "air". The Nitrogen doesn't seep through your tyre walls as quick as normal "air" does.

M cars are all fitted with non-runflats as standard.....i wonder why.

EVERYONE on this forum will pretty much vouche for non-runflats giving a better ride and less skipping across uneven surfaces than RFT's. This forum does have alot of car geeks that know abit more than your BMW saleman, all he knows is how to con Grannies out of their life savings......

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Jon D

Pete, going by reviews I'd really like to fit the Conti SC 5p but, as I mentioned earlier, I can't find any in my size.
There was another development yesterday - my dealer paid for a nitrogen fill (a bit off-the-wall maybe, but worth a try) and whilst having the job done I asked the tyre dealer manager to quote me for a set of 20" non-runflats. Instead of taking my money, he reckoned the handling would end up being worse because the chassis is designed around RFT technology. Now I'm even more confused!
No immediate difference noticed with the N, but I wasn't really expecting miracles .

Not sure what the nitrogen was supposed to do for your issues? Looks like desperate measures. Or hinting at the cars being very very sensitive to tyre pressures. (Which is probably true). At least it's been tried.

"Designed around RFTs", that is often the expected reply. My 3-series was designed/tuned for RFTs, but strange how the handling and steering precision both improved on normal tyres. Obviously there will be differences, but what those are, can only be quantified once on a different wheel set. Similar to changing wheel sizes and tyres anyway. You only know how a chassis changes, by trying them. Even RFT size options are 'different' on the same models. 'Compromises' comes into the equation, but better steering precision can be a massive improvement on a nervous car, even if on the limit turn-in is a layer lower (depends how you judge it anyway) than on a stiffer tyre.

HighlandPete

[ALF_E90]

Originally Posted by doc_ab

auto express 2010 tyre test
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/product...8/verdict.html

Those results seem fairly consistent with other recent tests. Conti SC3's and the Michelin PS3 seem very good, and the Eagle F1 Asymetric is great for the price, with fantastic wet results (arguably the most important).

I imagine our cars are "optimised for runflats" by having a bit more play in the suspension bushes than is typical. This is not going to help anything, experience shows that 99% of us prefer standard tyres.

PS - Nitrogen - pull the other one! It is generally used as air has a high moisture content which means that temperature changes mean a bigger pressure change with air than nitrogen. I didn't even use it when racing, despite being at the sharp end of the grid and with very few car changes allowed so tyre pressures were quite critical. It was the "hot" pressures that mattered and this required slightly different cold pressures on each corner depending on which way around the track went. I can't see Nitrogen in a road car suddenly overcoming the deficiencies of a RFT.

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by rsmallwo

This forum does have alot of car geeks that know abit more than your BMW saleman, all he knows is how to con Grannies out of their life savings......

If you re-read my post you'll see that it wasn't a BMW salesman I was talking to, it was the tyre shop manager who, instead of gladly taking my money, pointed out the possible shortcomings of non-runflats on an F10.
Now I imagine you'll tell me that he also hasn't a clue what he's talking about .

[225_AB]

Originally Posted by willhollin

That's the Ultrac Cento not Sessanta.

true enough but the sessanta's usually fare worse that then the cento's.

[Jon D]

Originally Posted by ALF_E90

PS - Nitrogen - pull the other one! It is generally used as air has a high moisture content which means that temperature changes mean a bigger pressure change with air than nitrogen.

I don't actually recall trying to pull either one. As I said, it was a bit-off-the-wall, but seeing as BMW were paying and I don't dismiss anything until I've tried it, I didn't see the harm in giving it a go.
As Highland Pete correctly assumes and as I've discovered, the F10 is extremely pressure sensitive and that's the main reason why I considered it worth taking up BMW on their offer. The other aspect to consider is that, were I to refuse any of their suggestions, they could quite justifiably assume that I no longer had a problem - common sense really .
Longish trip coming up tomorrow and, whilst I'm not expecting a dramatic improvement, I don't automatically close my mind to the possibility.