Michelin run flat tires

[relgel]

I have 38K on my Cmax and am starting to research new tires.  can anyone comment on buying Michelin run flat tires and impact on ride comfort? I had a blow out at 20K from road debris,  and not being able to move the car was pretty unsettling. 

thanks in advance,

Jim AKA relgel

[obob]

Have you considered getting a spare tire and/or a tire repair kit ?

 

http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/1116-spare-tire-solution-for-c-max-hybrid/

 

 

Lots of info on the web

 

http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/run-flat-tires-a-primer.html

Edited April 24, 2016 by obob

[ptjones]

I have 38K on my Cmax and am starting to research new tires.  can anyone comment on buying Michelin run flat tires and impact on ride comfort? I had a blow out at 20K from road debris,  and not being able to move the car was pretty unsettling. 

thanks in advance,

Jim AKA relgel

If you are concerned about getting a flat, getting one of the small spares maybe the answer. Keep in mind you are going to take a pretty bad hit in MPG's if you go from the Michelin Energy Savers. ;)

 

Paul

[relgel]

Thanks Paul....i don't see my wife doing either and we have the energi....zero room for  a spare.    i am hoping someone with real world experience with the run flat tires and their impact on MPG will respond.   It seems to me that the run flat technology of thicker/stronger side walls would actually help MPG.  

[ptjones]

Thanks Paul....i don't see my wife doing either and we have the energi....zero room for  a spare.    i am hoping someone with real world experience with the run flat tires and their impact on MPG will respond.   It seems to me that the run flat technology of thicker/stronger side walls would actually help MPG.  

Interesting idea and it would be helpful if someone would commented on this.  I would think a full size spare would sit on top of battery,  might have to put the larger section rear seat down. ;) With 131k mi. with no flats and only two slow leaks from nails or screws so I guess I've been lucky. I think it has been atleast 10 yrs since I've had a blowout . :)

 

Paul 

Edited April 24, 2016 by ptjones

[ptjones]

I found this in FFH Forum: 

"run flat bridgestone driveguard tires.The tires are quieter and handle much better than the michelin energy savers. they are very quiet too.  i was worried the gas mileage would go down alot with a run flat w speed rated tire.  to my surprise the mileage is about the same and thats with the oem recommended 35 psi.  im wondering if i boost the pressure alittle if i can do even better.  

overall, a highly recommended tire and im generally a die hard michelin guy.  No worries if anyone wants the security of run flats since we do not have a spare. go for it"

 

I wonder how accurately they're measuring their gas mileage, but I thought I'd pass this on.FWIW :) 

 

Paul

[rjam]

Seems to me run flat tires would be a great benefit. Most of us don't want to loose space carrying a tire and jack along with Ford not having a predetermined location to place the jack under the car. Would like to hear from others using run flat rather than getting off topic with spare. I have wondered why Foed didn't put them on at the factory unless it is a mileage issue.

[jestevens]

Run-flat tires would be a great idea for this car but I think they are stiffer and I was afraid there would be too much of a hit to MPGs because I made the mistake of buying "regular" tires for a hybrid one time instead of low rolling resistance tires.  I guess it's a good trade off if you want peace of mind. 

 

The MPG gauge is "stuck" at 40MPG ever since I bought my Pirellis..it only ever varies a few tenths.  I keep the pressures at 42PSI.  I do have the slime, and a plug kit, and I've used the air compressor before when the air tower at the local convenience store gets abused too much.  I am good at coasting but the acceleration is just too tempting..

 

I kept one of the old OEM tires when I got this set thinking I would mount it on a wheel but the tire place I was using around here didn't want to bother, I should have just recycled the old tire.

 

I guess the only way to know for sure about run-flats is to get first hand accounts from folks..

Edited April 25, 2016 by jestevens

[Marc Smith]

I have heard that you will be totally disgusted with the quality of ride...

[HotPotato]

Run-flats ride notoriously hard; it's consistently reviewers' chief complaint about BMWs.

[scottwood2]

Run-flats ride notoriously hard; it's consistently reviewers' chief complaint about BMWs.

I wonder how bad they are?   I don't like the corning in this car very much.   My Scion xB was fun to throw into turns.  Not so much with the C-max.

 

Maybe these tires would help that?  I don't mind a stiffer ride. 

Edited April 26, 2016 by scottwood2

[toecutter3]

I wonder how bad they are?   I don't like the corning in this car very much.   My Scion xB was fun to throw into turns.  Not so much with the C-max

You just need to learn the "Scandinavian Flick"

[bemyax]

I put the Bridgestone Driveguard tires on last summer. Two to three miles per gallon hit right off the bat. Check out my Fuelly graph.  I'm running fifty PSI on them after an initial try at forty-five. The ride at fifty seems better. I was running the OEM Michelins at fifty as well. The Driveguards don't seem to quite as responsive in cornering in town, but on the highway there is some improvement. At fifty pounds, the Michelins danced more in heavy crosswind situations. Also, we have some stretches of highway in Iowa that are grooved in such a way that a lightweight car with trailing link suspension experiences severe "wiggle" with overinflated tires. With the original tires, I would have to find a different route to avoid mass hysteria in the vehicle occupants. The two different tires seem to do about the same in snow and on ice.

 

I can't make a general recommendation based on my own experience. The safety/convenience factor was more important than miles per gallon to me. I call these my "heavy tires" and have become accustomed to a thumpier ride on the city streets. I wouldn't recommend them to anyone experiencing skeletal, or other, pain where a jarring ride would be prohibitive. 

 

I have my original tires in the garage. Maybe someday I'll go nuts and put them back on. That would give me a true comparison.

[scottwood2]

I put the Bridgestone Driveguard tires on last summer. Two to three miles per gallon hit right off the bat. Check out my Fuelly graph.  I'm running fifty PSI on them after an initial try at forty-five. The ride at fifty seems better. I was running the OEM Michelins at fifty as well. The Driveguards don't seem to quite as responsive in cornering in town, but on the highway there is some improvement. At fifty pounds, the Michelins danced more in heavy crosswind situations. Also, we have some stretches of highway in Iowa that are grooved in such a way that a lightweight car with trailing link suspension experiences severe "wiggle" with overinflated tires. With the original tires, I would have to find a different route to avoid mass hysteria in the vehicle occupants. The two different tires seem to do about the same in snow and on ice.

 

I can't make a general recommendation based on my own experience. The safety/convenience factor was more important than miles per gallon to me. I call these my "heavy tires" and have become accustomed to a thumpier ride on the city streets. I wouldn't recommend them to anyone experiencing skeletal, or other, pain where a jarring ride would be prohibitive. 

 

I have my original tires in the garage. Maybe someday I'll go nuts and put them back on. That would give me a true comparison.

Did the FE improve any when you when to 50 PSI (Assuming the 2 to 3 MPG hit was at 45 PSI)?

 

You said the ride in the city seemed thumpier but you thought the handling was not as good in the city as the OEM tires?   I would have thought that thumpier would be stiffer and better in the city? 

 

Thx for the reply.  I like the run flat idea too.   On trips away from everything would be nice to have in case of a flat. 

[kostby]

Probably wiser to just buy a used Focus RS for fun, and keep the Hybrid for mpgs.

 

But if you have 50,000 miles to experiment, and don't care about the impact on ride or MPG's ignore the 'Touring' tire category entirely and look for 'high-performance' or 'ultra high performance' tires. TireRack.com is an easy place to find lots of options in stock rim sizes as well as packages with larger wheels & tires.

 

Conventional wisdom suggests going +1 or +2 on wheel size to 18" or 19" wheels and matching tires MIGHT also improve handling, but only the portion that is dependent upon achieving better grip and less sidewall flex.

 

You've been around the forum quite a while, so you already know you're unlikely to find much on performance mods here. (Us old retired guys just don't take our C-MAX Hybrids to Track Day that often, though I HAVE driven our C-MAX around the Indy 500 track, but only at 20-30mph on Community Day.)

 

High performance tires usually do have a stiffer sidewall and more aggressive cord angle, so they definitely provide a stiffer (some would say harsher) ride, but also improve handling characteristics a little, maybe closer to the design limits of the stock Focus-based suspension. Adding 1000 pounds and 12 inches above the beltline to a Focus chassis to arrive at a C-MAX Hybrid means you'll never get close to the handling of a Focus RS though, unless you go for lowering, springs, struts, and so on.

[stevedebi]

Probably wiser to just buy a used Focus RS for fun, and keep the Hybrid for mpgs.

 

But if you have 50,000 miles to experiment, and don't care about the impact on ride or MPG's ignore the 'Touring' tire category entirely and look for 'high-performance' or 'ultra high performance' tires. TireRack.com is an easy place to find lots of options in stock rim sizes as well as packages with larger wheels & tires.

 

Conventional wisdom suggests going +1 or +2 on wheel size to 18" or 19" wheels and matching tires MIGHT also improve handling, but only the portion that is dependent upon achieving better grip and less sidewall flex.

 

You've been around the forum quite a while, so you already know you're unlikely to find much on performance mods here. (Us old retired guys just don't take our C-MAX Hybrids to Track Day that often, though I HAVE driven our C-MAX around the Indy 500 track, but only at 20-30mph on Community Day.)

 

High performance tires usually do have a stiffer sidewall and more aggressive cord angle, so they definitely provide a stiffer (some would say harsher) ride, but also improve handling characteristics a little, maybe closer to the design limits of the stock Focus-based suspension. Adding 1000 pounds and 12 inches above the beltline to a Focus chassis to arrive at a C-MAX Hybrid means you'll never get close to the handling of a Focus RS though, unless you go for lowering, springs, struts, and so on.

I think the C-Max could do pretty well, with mods. Or at least the Energi would; it has 300 lbs extra weight over the back wheels. I've always noticed how balanced the car is on twisty roads.

[ptjones]

I would think the center of gravity would be lower in Hybrid, plus 260 lbs lighter.  I really don't notice the front end being that much heavier than the back. :)

 

Paul

Edited April 28, 2016 by ptjones

[stevedebi]

I would think the center of gravity would be lower in Hybrid, plus 260 lbs lighter.  I really don't notice the front end being that much heavier than the back. :)

 

Paul

Yes, but the extra weight over the rear wheels helps when pulling out of a turn.

[ptjones]

Yes, but the extra weight over the rear wheels helps when pulling out of a turn.

With front wheel drive don't you want the weight up front on the driving wheels? In acceleration weight transfers to the back, making the front end lighter and back heavier. Yet you need the weight on front for traction for FWD.   ;)

 

Paul

[stevedebi]

With front wheel drive don't you want the weight up front on the driving wheels? In acceleration weight transfers to the back, making the front end lighter and back heavier. Yet you need the weight on front for traction for FWD.   ;)

 

Paul

Paul,

No, coming out of a turn, the more weight on the rear tires, the less likely to start slipping.  It is on the second part of the turn. This is why a RWD drive (or AWD these days) is considered better for performance - the balance between the engine up front and more weight over the rear wheels.

The hybrid has some weight back there, but the Energi has and extra 200 or more lbs. It handles better coming out of a turn.

[ptjones]

Do you think that makes up for the extra 260lbs (7% extra weight)and higher CG?  We've checked and the suspensions are the same. I did find weight distribution of 57.7% Front and 42.3% Rear from Edmund's. Doing the math NRG is 54/46%. :)

 

Paul

[stevedebi]

Do you think that makes up for the extra 260lbs (7% extra weight)and higher CG?  We've checked and the suspensions are the same. I did find weight distribution of 57.7% Front and 42.3% Rear from Edmund's. Doing the math NRG is 54/46%. :)

 

Paul

I've not driven the hybrid on twisty roads. But the CG is not a factor with the C-Max. I used to drive an Escape hybrid - now THAT was high CG. The C-Max barely leans at all. It isn't really a matter of the weight, it is the rear wheels coming out of turns. Not talking about acceleration here.

Edited April 30, 2016 by stevedebi

[ptjones]

I've not driven the hybrid on twisty roads. But the CG is not a factor with the C-Max. I used to drive an Escape hybrid - now THAT was high CG. The C-Max barely leans at all. It isn't really a matter of the weight, it is the rear wheels coming out of turns. Not talking about acceleration here.

I was thinking racing, but I hate to lose to much energy in the corners so I will take corners faster If the wife isn't in the car and sometimes when she is.  She doesn't appreciate it, Ouch!  Then I try to use EV coming out of the corner.  The less charging you do getting into the corner, the more efficient you are. :) 

 

Paul