Please recommend nice soft tires for my 335i

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

This is the best answer. Changing to a higher profile tire is the best way to improve the ride and may do more than just changing to non-RFT's. If you get another set of 18" tires they will still have short stiff sidewalls which are not conducive to a smooth ride.

Thanks, Mike.

Using standard 17" (i.e. 225/45 R17 and 255/40 R17) gives exactly the same sidewall height as what I suggested with 225/45 R18 and 255/40 R18. This was indeed inspired by the larger sizes of the current M3 and Alpina B3, which were often described as being softer than the 335i, but their sizes (245/40 and 265/40 R18) won't fit on a regular E9x without massive works. Also, they will give ABS/DSC problems since wheel diameters front/rear differs more than 1%.

By using my suggested sizes, you can have the cake (a soft ride like with 17" rims) and eat it (large 18" rims), too. And yes, they fit on standard 8x18 and 8,5x18 BMW rims, so you only have to buy the tires if you already have 18" rims. Look at my pictures, I use them on the 193M. Here in Germany, you need an official acknowledgement by an expert to use non-standard tire sizes for safety regulations. I even got that, so no problem there.

Originally Posted by zampag

Cool, thanks. I'm going with Bridgestone RE960s. Seems to be the best for what I want - bias towards dry and wet, good tread, good ride, and snow traction a little better than the crape stock - Bridgestone EL42s. Probably a good pick for OPs original 'softer ride'.

I've got the RE960's on 17's. The ride with these is actually as stiff, if not a little stiffer than the 18" runflats. Hard to believe, I know, but it's a fact. That said, they are much quieter, smoother, and handle amazingly well. They also get you through light snow.

Originally Posted by meyergru

Using standard 17" (i.e. 225/45 R17 and 255/40 R17) gives exactly the same sidewall height as what I suggested with 225/45 R18 and 255/40 R18. This was indeed inspired by the larger sizes of the current M3 and Alpina B3, which were often described as being softer than the 335i, but their sizes (245/40 and 265/40 R18) won't fit on a regular E9x without massive works. Also, they will give ABS/DSC problems since wheel diameters front/rear differs more than 1%.

By using my suggested sizes, you can have the cake (a soft ride like with 17" rims) and eat it (large 18" rims), too. And yes, they fit on standard 8x18 and 8,5x18 BMW rims, so you only have to buy the tires if you already have 18" rims. Look at my pictures, I use them on the 193M. Here in Germany, you need an official acknowledgement by an expert to use non-standard tire sizes for safety regulations. I even got that, so no problem there.

I'm probably missing something but if you put the same width and aspect ratio tires on 17" and 18" rims, won't the overall diameter of the tire be different thus throwing off the speedometer? I thought that when you go to an 18" wheel from a 17", you need a lower aspect ratio (thus a lower sidewall) to maintain the same overall diameter.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

I'm probably missing something but if you put the same width and aspect ratio tires on 17" and 18" rims, won't the overall diameter of the tire be different thus throwing off the speedometer? I thought that when you go to an 18" wheel from a 17", you need a lower aspect ratio (thus a lower sidewall) to maintain the same overall diameter.

You're not alone. I don't get it either.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

I'm probably missing something but if you put the same width and aspect ratio tires on 17" and 18" rims, won't the overall diameter of the tire be different thus throwing off the speedometer? I thought that when you go to an 18" wheel from a 17", you need a lower aspect ratio (thus a lower sidewall) to maintain the same overall diameter.

You are not missing anything, in fact that is the whole point. The suggested sizes are non-standard and deliberately cause a 4% larger diameter. I wrote in my original post that the normal speedo advance of ~5% (which is required by EU regulations) is almost exactly compensated by that measure. Although the diameter is higher, the suggested sizes still fit and fill the wheel wells better. And they give the same sidewall height as you'd get with 17" standard sizes.

Before anyone asks (I think I have heard all objections already):

Yes, effective final gear ratio is changed. This gives a higher effective max speed. And no, it does not influence acceleration figures that much since the longer ratio is balanced by longer gear reach. I'd rather say that it increases mileage per gallon because of the lower RPMs.

The car sits ~1/2" inch higher which you don't notice much since the 335i has a sports suspension which is 1" lower than the normal one. Also, the OP explicitely asked for a softer ride.

Why get the 18" sport package and then change to 17" wheels? You are paying for the 18" wheels with the rest of the sport package, and the sport package ride height, and the sport package stiffer suspension. Why not get non-sport and get the soft ride of the 17" regular suspension.

Am I missing something here? If you put A/S tires on 18's you might as well have 17" wheels with A/S that come stock, If you really want a soft Lincoln/Lexus ride....you know they still make those cars, right?

I know this sounds prickish, but there are a lot of buyers of these cars with 18" wheels that don't seem to understand, they have 18" wheels because of the better transient response, not because the look cool, not because they are lighter (they aren't) not because they clear the brakes, but because they handle better. The stiff sidewalls are what makes the car track in a cross wind, what allows precision steering inputs at high cornering loads, what communicates the contact patch to your fingertips, and what makes a sport package car better than non-sport. These cars are tough, the wheels are strong, the tires are great, not stellar, but great.

I keep reading posts about other non-run flats that are softer riding, I don't think any of those tires have the handling of the RE050's that come stock. The Michelin Pilot Sports have higher traction levels, and when new likely feel a little softer, but when they are worn down a little and mounted on my wifes 911 they are HARD riding but sticky bastards. I remember my grandmother saying that my BMW rode like a truck....she owned a Caddy that never went around a corner fast enough to spill a coffee cup.

A BMW is like many finely designed machines, a system of functioning components all designed to work together. A friend of mine put cheap Goodyear A/S on his 325is, that same day his wife swerved for a deer, she was unable to correct for the slide, hit 7 mailboxes, a deer, and a huge tree. Car was totalled. She swerved at 55 MPH. Those flaccid sidewalls and low traction levels of the A/S tires were not to blame, but the deck was stacked against her regaining control when the wheels turned, the suspension loaded up, and sidewalls started to play havoc with the cars balance. No way was a 325is supposed to have tread surfaces that moved around that much under her wheels. No way were the bushings, shocks, stabilizer bars, steering rack, and front to rear balance made for that much sidewall distortion. Maybe in an Impala, maybe in a Taurus, but no way in a sport package BMW.

Rant over, flame away.

Originally Posted by From the Helm

...

You are missing a few points here:

RFTs have stiffer sidewalls per se. In order to supress the harder shock transients, this has to be compensated for with a softer (normal) suspension.

Thus, it is correct that fitting non-RFTs makes a suspension that is on the soft side in theory. However, since the sports package suspension on the 335i is stiffer than normal, the result of putting on Non-RFTs is much like an E46 with standard suspension and Non-RFT tires.

Using this combination of stiff suspension and softer non-RFT tires is the way BMW goes with the M3 and Alpina does with the Alpina B3 - in the latter case with an otherwise unmodified suspension, BTW.

I can understand people that get the sports suspension on the E9x and then find out that this is rather uncomfortable - especially when compared to the previous E46 with sports suspension. However, with respect to cost and looks I would keep the 18" rims and just change the tires to non-RFT and larger, non-standard sizes. The side-effect of correct speedo reading and higher top speed is welcome, too.

Last thing to notice is that I don't believe that the lose of control over your friend's wife's car was induced by the softer sidewalls in combination with a stiff suspension as you imply. I cannot see where this would be more dangerous than a combination of an even softer suspension and soft tires as found on an Impala or a Taurus. In a critical situation those cars would lose grip much earlier than an E9x on almost any kind of tires.

I'm one of those that didn't really want the 18" rims of the stiffer suspension..... so WHY did I get the sports package - you ask?? Well, the answer is simple.... it's the ONLY WAY of getting the better seats! If BMW would talk / listen to their customers a little more, they would certainly be asked for an option to get the sports seats as a SEPARATE option.

So, now I am also in that boat of having to buy A/S tires... I haven't decided yet whether I'm going to stay with the staggered 18" or switch to 225/45R-17s all around.

The good and the bad...

Good : Potenza RE960s are GREAT, what a difference than the stock Turenza EL42s.
Bad : Each wheel had a dent. Not too bad, dont notice it in the steering wheel. Damn Taconic State Parkway! 6000 miles....

Originally Posted by From the Helm

Why get the 18" sport package and then change to 17" wheels? You are paying for the 18" wheels with the rest of the sport package, and the sport package ride height, and the sport package stiffer suspension. Why not get non-sport and get the soft ride of the 17" regular suspension.

Am I missing something here? If you put A/S tires on 18's you might as well have 17" wheels with A/S that come stock, If you really want a soft Lincoln/Lexus ride....you know they still make those cars, right?

I know this sounds prickish, but there are a lot of buyers of these cars with 18" wheels that don't seem to understand, they have 18" wheels because of the better transient response, not because the look cool, not because they are lighter (they aren't) not because they clear the brakes, but because they handle better. The stiff sidewalls are what makes the car track in a cross wind, what allows precision steering inputs at high cornering loads, what communicates the contact patch to your fingertips, and what makes a sport package car better than non-sport. These cars are tough, the wheels are strong, the tires are great, not stellar, but great.

I keep reading posts about other non-run flats that are softer riding, I don't think any of those tires have the handling of the RE050's that come stock. The Michelin Pilot Sports have higher traction levels, and when new likely feel a little softer, but when they are worn down a little and mounted on my wifes 911 they are HARD riding but sticky bastards. I remember my grandmother saying that my BMW rode like a truck....she owned a Caddy that never went around a corner fast enough to spill a coffee cup.

A BMW is like many finely designed machines, a system of functioning components all designed to work together. A friend of mine put cheap Goodyear A/S on his 325is, that same day his wife swerved for a deer, she was unable to correct for the slide, hit 7 mailboxes, a deer, and a huge tree. Car was totalled. She swerved at 55 MPH. Those flaccid sidewalls and low traction levels of the A/S tires were not to blame, but the deck was stacked against her regaining control when the wheels turned, the suspension loaded up, and sidewalls started to play havoc with the cars balance. No way was a 325is supposed to have tread surfaces that moved around that much under her wheels. No way were the bushings, shocks, stabilizer bars, steering rack, and front to rear balance made for that much sidewall distortion. Maybe in an Impala, maybe in a Taurus, but no way in a sport package BMW.

Rant over, flame away.

My car has actually become much more bearable with the recent warm temps. Either that or I finally got used to it?

Your initial question of why didn't I get the non-sport package to begin with? Several reasons (in no particular order).

- The 18" rims look better and I like the hunkered down look, tight wheel well gaps, etc
- After reading car mags, they didn't mention the word "harsh" one time. Some of their reporting regarding ride quality was flat-out inaccurate
- My test drive loop did not include any rough pavement, and that's the only place I have an issue. The highway ride and smooth pavement is great
- I didn't do enough research on forums like this

That said, I don't regret my purchase. I love the seats and other pros of the sport package. I really have gotten used to the firm ride and I'm hoping that switching to non-RFTs will just damper the harshness a bit.

I'm dumping my Bridgestone Potenza RFTs this week and replacing them with the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus. I'm also increasing the tire size a little to 235/40/18 in front (stock is 225/40/18) and 265/35/18 in back (stock is 255/35/18).

I plan to use this setup for daily driving, and purchasing a separate set of UHP summer tires for use during driving schools at the track.

All the tire salesmen I've talked to tell me I won't be sacrificing traction and handling on the street, and will improve ride softness and noise.

I'll post my impressions this weekend after the swap.

Originally Posted by twowinns

I'll post my impressions this weekend after the swap.

Please do. I'm guessing the larger tires might be a bit sluggish feeling in comparison to stock. Please take pics too - I'm curious to see how they look on the rims.

Originally Posted by Spagolli94

Please do. I'm guessing the larger tires might be a bit sluggish feeling in comparison to stock. Please take pics too - I'm curious to see how they look on the rims.

I'm pretty sure the non-RFTs are lighter than the stock RFTs. My tire salesman said the slight increase in tire width shouldn't be a big issue, but we'll see.

I'll try to post pictures, too.

RFT's and OEM tyres are very heavy. Switching to a light alloy wheel along with the non RFT tyres will save somewhere between 14-20lbs per wheel of unsprung weight. BBS, TSW, HRE ect. all manufacture lighter wheels than the standard ones and they all take the pressure monitoring apparatus.

I got the new tires installed yesterday and love them so far. They are noticeably quieter and I don't feel road bumps nearly as much as with the old RFTs. They grip really well on dry and wet pavement (Surprise, it rained in the Seattle area yesterday).

My car seems to handle as good, if not better, than the RFT summer tires on the street. I wouldn't think of taking them to the track for driving schools. I'm going to buy a separate set of wheels and Dunlop Direzza Z1 Star Specs for that.

Overall, I am very pleased and wish I had switched to non-RFTs a long time ago. Here are some photos:

What kind did you end up buying? Did you stick with the Pilot A/S as planned? Also, did you do the +1 sizing as well? Does +1 sizing help with compensate for the speedo error?

I stayed with the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus in a slightly larger size than stock with 235/40/18 in front and 265/35/18 in the rear. I'm sorry, but I'm not sure how the larger sizes affect the speedometer.

I was just doing some math on +1 sizing for our 18" rims. The aspect ratio is a percentage of the tire's width right? And the numbers are in mm.

Thus in the front a stock 225/40 tire is 90mm high and moving up to 235/40 is 94mm high. And in the back a stock 255/35 tire is 89mm high and a 265/35 tire is 93mm high. (I've rounded to the nearest mm). So overall, you are increasing your width by 1 cm and your height (and rolling diameter) by .4cm.

Am I understanding this right? I tried doing something like this on my old Integra but I felt the new tires were too bulky looking. However, if anything I think the stock tires look a bit puny on my rims. Like they aren't wide enough to fit and the profile is just too damn low. So maybe +1 will look just right. I can't tell much of a difference in your pics. They certainly don't appear oversized or bulky.

Here's a shot of my car at a similar angle to yours. I think I definitely like the look of your tires better. My tires are so thin, they look like rubber bands wrapped around my rims. No wonder my ride is so harsh.

Did the tire shop have any difficulty mounting the larger tires? Did they give you any grief for deviating from the stock size?

Originally Posted by From the Helm

Why get the 18" sport package and then change to 17" wheels? You are paying for the 18" wheels with the rest of the sport package, and the sport package ride height, and the sport package stiffer suspension. Why not get non-sport and get the soft ride of the 17" regular suspension.

Am I missing something here? If you put A/S tires on 18's you might as well have 17" wheels with A/S that come stock, If you really want a soft Lincoln/Lexus ride....you know they still make those cars, right?

I know this sounds prickish, but there are a lot of buyers of these cars with 18" wheels that don't seem to understand, they have 18" wheels because of the better transient response, not because the look cool, not because they are lighter (they aren't) not because they clear the brakes, but because they handle better. The stiff sidewalls are what makes the car track in a cross wind, what allows precision steering inputs at high cornering loads, what communicates the contact patch to your fingertips, and what makes a sport package car better than non-sport. These cars are tough, the wheels are strong, the tires are great, not stellar, but great.

I keep reading posts about other non-run flats that are softer riding, I don't think any of those tires have the handling of the RE050's that come stock. The Michelin Pilot Sports have higher traction levels, and when new likely feel a little softer, but when they are worn down a little and mounted on my wifes 911 they are HARD riding but sticky bastards. I remember my grandmother saying that my BMW rode like a truck....she owned a Caddy that never went around a corner fast enough to spill a coffee cup.

A BMW is like many finely designed machines, a system of functioning components all designed to work together. A friend of mine put cheap Goodyear A/S on his 325is, that same day his wife swerved for a deer, she was unable to correct for the slide, hit 7 mailboxes, a deer, and a huge tree. Car was totalled. She swerved at 55 MPH. Those flaccid sidewalls and low traction levels of the A/S tires were not to blame, but the deck was stacked against her regaining control when the wheels turned, the suspension loaded up, and sidewalls started to play havoc with the cars balance. No way was a 325is supposed to have tread surfaces that moved around that much under her wheels. No way were the bushings, shocks, stabilizer bars, steering rack, and front to rear balance made for that much sidewall distortion. Maybe in an Impala, maybe in a Taurus, but no way in a sport package BMW.

Rant over, flame away.

I certainly hope that your friends wife was not injured.

CA

Originally Posted by Spagolli94

Did the tire shop have any difficulty mounting the larger tires? Did they give you any grief for deviating from the stock size?

No problems at all. My sales rep at Discount Tire mentioned these slightly larger sizes, and I decided to go for it.

I saw them against my old tires and they are definitely taller and wider than the stock Bridgestone Potenza's I had. It is not a huge difference, but they do fill out the wheel well a little more.

The ride is a definite improvement. I'd recommend them.

BTW...I like your car.

Originally Posted by daranco

I've been researching this very question as well (for the past year!) -
and I don't even have my car yet!! (I'm picking it up next month in
South Carolina). Anyway... after reading through tons of stuff here
on bimmerfest, and also doing hundreds of hours of comparisons
via TireRack (using many of their surveys, etc), here are my
opinions: (note... I'm getting a 335i convertible, with the sport
package which has 18" wheels, 225/40 in front and 255/35 in rear)

(1) Going to NON RFTs will be the biggest factor for softening the
ride and better survival over those potholes;

(2) Since I don't run my car on a performance track, nor do I expect
to run at speeds over 100 mph (this will be a car that I use for my daily
commute), I am willing to give up some of that instantaneous road-gripping
steering performance. My preference is to maximize ride comfort AND
thread life AND good performance on wet roads. Due to all these factors,
I am strongly leaning towards getting all-season tires, instead of
separate summer and winter tires. SInce I live in Maryland, we don't
get much snow - but enough winter weather that summer tires just won't
do.

(3) Since my previous cars have been large sedans (Buick LeSabre,
Lincoln Town car, etc), I become very spoiled with that "big car ride"
and also getting 60K miles on a set of tires. So, my plan for the
new BMW will likely include doing a -1 down-sizing (like TireRack
recommends for better winter performance). That is, I will likely
buy new wheels (rims and tires) which are 225/45-17 - and use that
SAME SIZE on all four wheels. From everything I have read, this should
(a) help soften the ride
(b) better survive potholes
(c) better tread life (especially since all 4 wheels are the
same size means you'll be able to rotate every 5K miles)
(d) There are a WHOLE LOT MORE choice for 225/45-17 size tires
than there are for the 18" staggered set-up which can't be rotated.
And this smaller size is also cheaper than the 18" versions, and a
WHOLE lot cheaper than the typical RFTs (and RFTS wear out
a lot sooner in almost all cases);
(e) This down-size technique will get better performance in
a typical snow environment (like 6" or less). If you usually have
much bigger snow storms, you might need to go with real winter tires.
(f) You have to remember, how-ever, that by doing this minus
size trick and having a slightly higher aspect ratio (45 verses 40 in front
and 45 versus 35 in rear), the sidewalls WILL be slightly softer, and
so if you are doing extreme cornering - the limits as to what the
car (and tire) can do will be lower than with the RFT's with a lower
aspect ratio.

(4)So, given all those assumptions above, I've researched this to death
as far as tires brands, and here are my top choices for tires in the
all-season Ultra High Performance category (in priority order):
(a) Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus
(b) Yokohama ADVAN S.4
(c) Bridgestone Potenza RE 960 A/S Pole Positions
** The Michelins have a 45K tread life warranty, Yokos have no warranty,
and Bridgestones have a 40K warranty.
Go and read TireRack's surveys on these tires (for the Michelins, make sure
you read about the Pilot Sport A/S PLUS, as there used to be a previous
version - without the "Plus" - which wasn't as good).

(5) One more thing to think about.... one more option...
you could consider going with a "Grand Touring Tire" instead of the
Ultra High Performance tire. In this Grand Touring class, here
are my choices for an All-Season tire:
(a) Michelin Primacy MXV4
(b) Bridgestone Turanza Serenity
(c) GoodYear EAGLE Response Edge
** This category will obviously not be nearly as good with respect
to steering response as you would get in a UHP class category, but you
are likely to get closer to that "big car ride" . The Primacy has a 60K
tread life warranty, and the Serenity has 45K. The EAGLE has no warranty.
CLearly, since something like the Primacy - with a 60K tread life - you are
apt to be riding with that "floating" feeling of a big sedan... so it all depends
on what you are looking for.

So.. there are lots of factors: non RFT, minus sizing the wheels down to 17",
and deciding whether you want pure summer and pure winter tire sets, or
compromise and get all seasons. Those 3 major decision points will be the
biggest factors that affect your ride. (There are certain physical properties
that come with the sport suspension - like stiffer ride- that you just can't
change). Once you decide on these 3 najor factors, then (in my opinion)
the tire Brand and specific choice of tire will determine tread life,
performance in rain (resistance to hydroplaning), performance in
light/moderate snow, etc.

Good luck. Hopefully, some of this will save you some time.

The Goodyear Eagle ResponseEdge has a treadlife warranty to 50K miles provided it is V or H speed rated. For higher speed ratings there is still a manuacturers defect warranty good to 2/32" of an inch of tread depth. It's what I put on my G35 coupe and it is a fine tire. It has gotten me through three severe Chicago winters w no trouble. With 30K miles on these tires I still have 8/32" out of 10/32" original tread depth.

I had put Michelin Primacy MXV4s on my Volvo S40 and it too was a good touring tire but the ResponseEdge is of assymetrical tread design and offers more precise handling.

BTW neither of these tires give the respective cars a "big car FLOATY ride".

After reading these posts, I'm giving some serious thought to going +1. With my stock setup, my sidewalls are approx 90mm high. With +1, they would be 94mm high.

I was just looking at the specs from Car and Driver's recent TL/A4/G37s/328i comparo:

A4: 245/40/18 = 98mm sidewall

TL: 245/40/19 = 98mm sidewall

G37s front: 225/50/18 = 112mm sidewall
G37s rear: 255/45/18 - 110mm sidewall

Thus even at +1, my 330i sport pkg would still have the lowest sidewall out of this group. I was also checking out the M3 on bmwusa.com - it has a taller sidewall too. Maybe I'll even fix my speedometer while I'm at it. Can anybody think of any good reasons not to go +1??

Originally Posted by Spagolli94

After reading these posts, I'm giving some serious thought to going +1. With my stock setup, my sidewalls are approx 90mm high. With +1, they would be 94mm high.

I was just looking at the specs from Car and Driver's recent TL/A4/G37s/328i comparo:

A4: 245/40/18 = 98mm sidewall

TL: 245/40/19 = 98mm sidewall

G37s front: 225/50/18 = 112mm sidewall
G37s rear: 255/45/18 - 110mm sidewall

Thus even at +1, my 330i sport pkg would still have the lowest sidewall out of this group. I was also checking out the M3 on bmwusa.com - it has a taller sidewall too. Maybe I'll even fix my speedometer while I'm at it. Can anybody think of any good reasons not to go +1??

The fact that BMW uses higher profile non RFT tires on the M3 should tell us something about the "performance advantage" of low profile RFTs.

CA