BimmerFest BMW Forum banner

Michelin primacy MXM4 ZP 90V instead of Continental ContiProContact SSR 91H

5K views 10 replies 8 participants last post by  drdocument 
#1 ·
Hi, my 328 came with the OEM Continental Run Flats - ContiProContact SSR 225/45 R17 91H. I'm looking to replace them with Michelin Primacy MXM4 ZP but they are rated 90V.

Has anybody used these tires? The difference that concerns me is the load index 90 vs 91, which would be 33 lbs lower in the new tires -- I don't think it's a big deal, but would appreciate some additional points of view.

Thanks!

LF
 
#2 ·
I have the Michelin Primacy MXM4 ZP; happy with them.
Load rating: How frequently are you going to be filling the car with people and luggage anyway?
 
#4 · (Edited)
Hi, my 328 came with the OEM Continental Run Flats - ContiProContact SSR 225/45 R17 91H. I'm looking to replace them with Michelin Primacy MXM4 ZP but they are rated 90V.

Has anybody used these tires? The difference that concerns me is the load index 90 vs 91, which would be 33 lbs lower in the new tires -- I don't think it's a big deal, but would appreciate some additional points of view.

Thanks!

LF
The load rating isn't an issue. The max permitted load for you car is 1210 lbs, both the 90 and 91 load index is well above at 1323 lbs and 1356 lbs respectively.

I'm a Michelin fan and haven't had issues, whereas I've had plenty with Conti's. When we had runflats, we got rid of conti's and went with the MXM4 ZP on all our cars. We have since gotten rid of RFT's for non-RFT Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3+
 
#8 ·
I had the Michelin run flats on my car and I liked them until I just replaced them with the conti extreme contact dws06 tires, non run flats. That made me realize that the michelins must have been made out of concrete! Run flat tires will never go back on my car, they are awful!


Sent from my iPhone using Bimmerfest
 
#9 ·
I had the Michelin run flats on my car and I liked them until I just replaced them with the conti extreme contact dws06 tires, non run flats. That made me realize that the michelins must have been made out of concrete! Run flat tires will never go back on my car, they are awful!
I suspect the difference is actually run-flat versus non-RFT, rather than Michelin vs. Conti. I had Conti non-RFT on my E39 but they wore quickly. I replaced with Michelin non-RFT and they had better ride and longer wear.

This E90 is my first experience with run-flats (Michelin), and they are not all that bad. But I may switch to non-RFT when the time comes. I cannot recall having had a flat.
 
#10 ·
My Michelin MX run flats are just fine for ride comfort. Much better than the stock Conti's that came with it and not as good as my Michelin Sports. Remember that when they first came out run flats were much heavier and now they are within a pound of the non run flat tires. That unsprung weight makes a huge difference in ride quality...
 
#11 ·
From what I can tell from my car's history, its Michelin run-flats are from late 2014 and have between 5,000 and 8,000 miles on them, and they still have plenty of tread. They feel a bit firmer and have just a teensy bit more rumble than the Michelin non-RFTs on my E39.

Have run-flats improved significantly over 3 years?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top