Just Ditched My RFT 20' OEM Tires!!!

My 2013 BMW X5 5.0 is my dream machine... love everything about it... however after one hundred miles I knew the OEM RFT tires were going to be history and fast. My friend who owns a tire shop ordered me Continental Extreme Contact DWS for my 20' staggered set up and I could not be happier... what a difference. Immediately the car runs very smooth and silky... the complete opposite of the RFT and im told these will last a lot longer and could possibly handle some light snow too. Why on earth does BMW still use these tires... it boggles the mind... i got a great deal... he swapped the tires for me... but others may have to pay a pretty penny for new tires that the company should put on all new cars to begin with. Any of you ditch your OEM RFT's?

Originally Posted by TopNotchWatch

My 2013 BMW X5 5.0 is my dream machine... love everything about it... however after one hundred miles I knew the OEM RFT tires were going to be history and fast. My friend who owns a tire shop ordered me Continental Extreme Contact DWS for my 20' staggered set up and I could not be happier... what a difference. Immediately the car runs very smooth and silky... the complete opposite of the RFT and im told these will last a lot longer and could possibly handle some light snow too. Why on earth does BMW still use these tires... it boggles the mind... i got a great deal... he swapped the tires for me... but others may have to pay a pretty penny for new tires that the company should put on all new cars to begin with. Any of you ditch your OEM RFT's?

Not sure what I will do when it is time, do you have the spare tire or will you be using something similiar to the mobility kit, I do know I have to return the car with the RFT but since I am driving 30k per year, I have the opportunity for a set of non RFT, I only have the 18in Michelin RFT but in all honesty I am satisfied with them.

Will do the same this fall on my 2012 X5 50i Sport Activity. I plan to save the OEM RFTs to turn back in my lease matures.

By changing to the Conti DWS you just gained almost 40 lbs of rotating weight !
Besides handling that should improve your mileage and acceleration !

Originally Posted by OneFastX5

By changing to the Conti DWS you just gained almost 40 lbs of rotating weight !
Besides handling that should improve your mileage and acceleration !

he gained or reduced?
i always though RFT's were heavier compared to conventional tires

Just put a set of Conti DWS on x5 50i this morning. I agree, completely different vehicle. BMW needs to scrap the entire RFT tire strategy or at least allow you to order either Non-RFT or RFT technology. I despised the noise, ride, and horrible tread life of the RFT. It was only thing I disliked about my X5. The Conti DWS non-RFT is the only way to go IMO.

On a side note. The dealer told me this morning that June 2013 is the latest possible month they could order me another E70. They said the 2014 X5 will be in their showroom by Sept 2013.

Interesting. I had a 2010 4.8i with 20s and Dunlap RFT. Changed to Conti DWS and was quite pleased. Much better than Dunlaps. Just swapped the 4.8i for a 5.0 M Sport with Bridgestone RFT. I kept the 2nd set of Contis with about 10K on them with the intention to swap them. But so far I am satisfied with the Bridgestones. The Bridgestones are not directional like the Dunlaps so they can be rotated side to side. Also the M Sport has rear air suspension which might affect the ride with RFT.

People use the term 'OEM RFT' as if it is a specific tire!!

Originally Posted by sunny_j

he gained or reduced?
i always though RFT's were heavier compared to conventional tires

Gained = Reduced the weight. Just a matter of interpretation.

RFTs are indeed heavier.

I just installed Pirelli Scorpion Winters (the non-runflat version) on #298M wheels for winter use - and bought a BMW Mobility kit - for the '13 X5M.

I also just ditched the 20" Dunlop runflats on the 650 vert for Michi non-runflat performance tires and am enjoying a much nicer ride, and hopefully better tread life.

^^ Tread life driven by ALIGNMENT. just FYI. (if we've already discussed this, just chalk it up to jetlag...)

Originally Posted by ard

^^ Tread life driven by ALIGNMENT. just FYI. (if we've already discussed this, just chalk it up to jetlag...)

I've got a post surgery Vicodin/Lagavulin buzz going so my comments may not be lucid either...

question: my 19" winter set-up has ~ the same rolling diameter as my 20" stock wheels, but the snows are a 255 square and the summers are a 275/315 staggered arrangement. Are any alignment parameters affected by tire width?

Whats the deal with people having dedicated winter tires? I never did this.

Originally Posted by RockChips

Whats the deal with people having dedicated winter tires? I never did this.

Montana winters are rugged, and I'm lazy. I don't think the 315/35x20's (not M+S) that came stock on the rear of the X5M would be very good for snow and ice, and the stock rear wheels are 11" wide precluding narrow width snow tires.

555HP and 500 ft-lbs of torque need to get to the ground somehow

Originally Posted by RockChips

Whats the deal with people having dedicated winter tires? I never did this.

From a tire rack test on ice:

"We evaluated stopping traction by measuring how many feet it took to come to a complete stop from 10 mph. The limited ice traction of the summer tires caused the car's Antilock Braking System (ABS) to work overtime and they took about 47' to stop. While the all-season tires relied less on the car's ABS to control lockup, it took them about 39' 10" to stop the vehicle. The studless winter / snow tires provided the most grip on the ice, taking only about 21' 2" to stop."

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=116


47 ft vs. 40 ft vs. 21 ft.

Now, imagine a car stopped at a traffic light 30 ft in front of you on an ice-covered road in the Winter...


P.S. Here's a different comparison on snow, rather than ice, from 30 mph:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=109

61 ft vs. 102 ft

Originally Posted by Penguin

From a tire rack test on ice:

"We evaluated stopping traction by measuring how many feet it took to come to a complete stop from 10 mph. The limited ice traction of the summer tires caused the car's Antilock Braking System (ABS) to work overtime and they took about 47' to stop. While the all-season tires relied less on the car's ABS to control lockup, it took them about 39' 10" to stop the vehicle. The studless winter / snow tires provided the most grip on the ice, taking only about 21' 2" to stop."

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=116


47 ft vs. 40 ft vs. 21 ft.

Now, imagine a car stopped at a traffic light 30 ft in front of you on an ice-covered road in the Winter...


P.S. Here's a different comparison on snow, rather than ice, from 30 mph:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=109

61 ft vs. 102 ft

Although the test procedures are valid, any generalizations based on TireRack's test are completely bogus. The stopping distance between a highly capable snow/ice all-season tire like the Conti DWS and the absolutely horrible snow/ice performing Bridgestone Turanza may 19ft or more!

A balanced and informative test would include similar quality tires from each class and report test results under all Winter conditions, such as dry, rain, snow, and ice. Maybe the testing could even be conducted by someone who isn't trying to sell you an extra set of snow tires and wheels.

Here's an example from Automobile: Rubber Matters: Tires Test

Winter Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V1 235/55RR-18
Packed snow @ 30 mph 74 ft
Dry road @ 70 mph (still going 37 mph) 205 ft

Summer Pirelli PZero 245/45YR-20
Packed snow @ 30 mph (still going 26 mph) 332 ft
Dry road @ 70 mph 149 ft

All-season Continental ExtremeContact DWS 245/45WR-20
Packed snow @ 30 mph (still going 20 mph) 135 ft
Dry road @ 70 mph (still going 22 mph) 167 ft


Now, imagine a car stopped on the highway 175 ft in front of you on a nice sunny day...

I have not quite 700 miles on my new 50i M Sport/M Performance with 20s. I bought the spare, knowing full well that, just as soon as my RFTs are done, I'm switching to the Contis. Have used DWS on a number of other cars, including a 911 Carrera S, and they're great.

Originally Posted by RockChips

Whats the deal with people having dedicated winter tires? I never did this.

well... if you drive in icy condition 6 months of the year then you will know the difference...

BTW I drive 120km everyday to work with my 2012 F150 with all season tires and even running on 4WD High all the time during winter I noticed a huge difference in traction & stopping distance compared with my Blizzak LM60 set up...

Originally Posted by dunderhi

Maybe the testing could even be conducted by someone who isn't trying to sell you an extra set of snow tires and wheels.

OK.

http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/f...vs-summer.html

Edmunds conclusion?

"But in delivering this capability, all-season tires sacrifice a noticeable bit of dry and wet performance. Meanwhile, snow and summer tires provide clear benefits to those who can use them. In this particular test, at least, all-season tires live up to the old figure of speech our old dad used to trot out on occasion: "jack of all trades, master of none." "


In regards to your question of "Now, imagine a car stopped on the highway 175 ft in front of you on a nice sunny day," go back and re-read the Automobile article.

The dry road test was done several months after the snow tests, almost certainly with higher temperatures. Since Winter tire rubber compounds are made to be effective at low temperatures, Summer Tire compounds at high temperatures, and All-season tires somewhere in-between, there is no surprise that Winter tires on dry pavement in warm temperatures would not work as well as all-season or summer tires in warm temperatures. But that is a rather moot point, as why would anyone be using Winter tires when it's not Winter?


But, back to your original question. You asked, "Whats the deal with people having dedicated winter tires?"

I assume you now know what the deal is. Whether you you agree with it or not.

Glad i came upon this thread
i go faster now so i can ditch these hash riders even sooner!
I thought i was doomed because i did not Adaptive Drive....
But now ur telling me theres hope for a nice ride after all!

Originally Posted by Penguin

I assume you now know what the deal is. Whether you you agree with it or not.

I agree with Edmunds - jack of all trades is a good way to describe all-season tires. It is the way the SUV is often described. It's not the best vehicle for any particular job, but it does each job well enough. Of course, one can have a dedicated truck for towing the RV/boat, a van to haul the family and luggage, and car to provide a sporting driving experience - or one can just drive an SUV. Just like the all season tire, the SUV doesn't have the quickest acceleration or the shortest braking distance under any condition, but we choose to drive it anyway.

Originally Posted by NOVA99

Just put a set of Conti DWS on x5 50i this morning. I agree, completely different vehicle. BMW needs to scrap the entire RFT tire strategy or at least allow you to order either Non-RFT or RFT technology. I despised the noise, ride, and horrible tread life of the RFT. It was only thing I disliked about my X5. The Conti DWS non-RFT is the only way to go IMO.

On a side note. The dealer told me this morning that June 2013 is the latest possible month they could order me another E70. They said the 2014 X5 will be in their showroom by Sept 2013.

Think I'm the unlucky one.
Changed my 12xd 9kmiles 20" Dunlop to Conti DWS a month ago from a local American tire shop in Bay Area.
Started steering vibration and pulling to right immediately . Went back for a rebalancing which did not help either. After reading some posts here, forced them do road force balancing. this seems to be ok at low speed, but anything above 65mph felt the vibration.
Thought of doing alignment to first rectify the pull, and ended up with east bay BMW dealer who did the alignment with min toe as per my request- but could never let the car go straight- even after 5 trips and equal# of redoing alignments, 3 weeks in their possession two OEM tire change to identify the issue led to replacing control arm to change the camber, counter balancing and a whole lot of other things which i did not understand like negative left numbers to compensate right pull....

May be because I started bugging about the status of the car every day,
they finally concluded(talked me into )new tires are the culprit and asked to swap for a different set. American tire shop did swap for a different DWS set. Even after that nothing changed to pull nor the vibration.
All the numbers from the road force bal shows numbers below the allowable difference i.e less than ~026 inc- so no defect with tires as per tire shop and BMW blaming on tires. I don't understand any of those numbers either and just want to enjoy this 70k beast.
Do you guys see a pattern? Or just plain unlucky with these tires? simply swap for another set or go Mich lat HP's ?

I can feel most tires if the GSP road force >15lbs; I make my installer fidget with new tires until they are <10 lbs - often resulting in them moving the tire around on the wheel to find its happy place.

Someone more knowledgeable than me will need to comment on the alignment.

Originally Posted by dkreidel

I can feel most tires if the GSP road force >15lbs; I make my installer fidget with new tires until they are <10 lbs - often resulting in them moving the tire around on the wheel to find its happy place.

Someone more knowledgeable than me will need to comment on the alignment.

I had the staggered setup limiting the moment of tires just side to side- with out any help!