Sponsored by The Tire Rack

[b311lee]

ok i see lots of u saying that rfts have a horrible ride (which i cant compare) and that they arent worth it (which i agree!)...

the thing is the e90 is made for rfts. hell they made the car to not have a spare! this makes me really reluctant to go with aftermarket wheels with non-rft.

tommorow i have to go in cause my front left rft is leaking...i have to refill this everother day...it sucks cause its gonna prolly cost me 400 to get a new one

bottom line..should i just say F it and go with a new set of tires (maybe new wheels too) to go with the oem setup since i wanna either sell or trade in in about 2-3 yrs.

[Robin_NL]

RFT is the future. The whole E90 and E87(1 series) suspension is based on RFT. My inbetween 120d had 17" 205 series RFTs with the sportssuspension a harsh ride. The E90 is different. More smoothe even with the sportssuspension and the 162s 18" alloys.

RFT has another benefit: The sidewalls are like concrete thus making the pointing in of the car more direct and faster. Ralph Schumacher tested the cars with and without RFT a while ago. On a slalom course the RFT's were faster and more precise/direct.

If you want to have a comfy ride, buy a boat or a Lincoln Continental

[Nolan]

I agree that RFT are the future and provide more safety on the road. But the 16" I have on my car now are just as uncomfortable as the 18" non-RFT I had on my previous car which also was lovered 35 mm. I´m looking forward to my new set of 18" non-RFT.
Another issue is the price. I talked to my dealer her in Denmark a few month ago about a new set of RFT for 18" 8+9" OEM. US $ 3.000 !!!

[Ghunger]

Funny enough, I just watched the Fifth Gear episode last night where they tested RFT. After watching, the safety benefits are obvious. Watching a normal tire completely come off the rim after a blowout and seeing Tif completely lose control of the car was pretty much what I expected. Then, seeing a 5 series with RFT do a lap of a race course with normally inflated tires and then again with hole drilled in the side wall only 15s slower, was proof enough for me.

Personally, the ride doesn't bother me but I know it does bother others, my only issue is the price. I just look at it as the price of a safety feature, like paying more for a car cause it has airbags.

[noflash]

Ride, handling, price.

Bimmers are safe with or without them.

They were "Marketed" for runflats.

[zamboni]

I'm not sure if you all have seen the demo on BMW website RFT clearly beat out regular tires on test track, I'm still convince RFT is a safer tire the only bad thing is not may choices when it comes to replacement.

[Pazzuzzu]

I hated the Bridgestone RE050 RFT on my 330 (zsp). They sounded terrible, I though the suspension was coming appart and seriously had the dealer look at the front tie rods and knuckles thinking they were defective. There was also the issue of heat, when run hot (and I'm talking high speeds at 70 degrees F ambiant...not that hot) the tires would loose a lot of their firmness and were scary in opposit curves. Then there is the issue of the Bridgestone's treadwear specs...140!!! and in the rain, I found the grip very average.

To say the E90 is "made" for RFTs is fuzzy, except for the obvious lack of hardware (jack, bar etc..)

I put Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 on and the sound changed from a slam to a thud. These tires stay composed when run hot and the treadwear specs are 220. Grip in the rain is about the same...

So I bought a jack, two cans of sealant, three of those wax string kits for biggers holes and a + to take wheels off. The whole kit (including a few shop rags) fits in the bottom compartment of the trunk.

I hope BMW gets together with a tire manufacturer to come up with a better RFT.

[zamboni]

The only concern I have is the tread wear 140 that is way too soon for the tire to be replace, I cnn't wait until Michelin release PS2 RFT for E90. I'm currently running PS2 on my other E46.

[noflash]

My PZero Neros have 440 treadwear.

[ward]

Originally Posted by noflash

My PZero Neros have 440 treadwear.

you're going to be stuck with those bad boys for quite some time then!!

I'm always worried with tires like that (high treadwear number) that if I don't like them, they'll still be on the car for years!!

if you do like them though, it's a great deal!!

[bavarian19]

Originally Posted by ward

you're going to be stuck with those bad boys for quite some time then!!

I'm always worried with tires like that (high treadwear number) that if I don't like them, they'll still be on the car for years!!

if you do like them though, it's a great deal!!

I have the Pirelli Pzero Nero M+S tires on. Treadwear is the rated 440, and I do not notice a difference in handling from the old bridgestone summer RF's...

My ordeal was that I needed an all season performance tire... I have been more than pleased with it so far...

That being said, if it was offered as a RF tire, then I would buy it in a heartbeat...

[noflash]

Originally Posted by ward

you're going to be stuck with those bad boys for quite some time then!!

I'm always worried with tires like that (high treadwear number) that if I don't like them, they'll still be on the car for years!!

if you do like them though, it's a great deal!!

[wheeler]

Runflats are definitely safer. If my wife was driving it I would have kept them on. If that's your focus, read no further.

As far as the car being 'set up for it' in a way that makes non-runflats inferior to them, I don't buy it in total. I agree that BMW dialed in the handling for these tires very accurately. Even when I first got the car I coud put 'er into a 4-wheel drift as if I was Mario Andretti. The tire's traction potential was perfectly matched to the designed-in understeer. All I had to do was increase speed in a corner 'til the front tires started to drift out, then steer just a little tighter into the curve while continuing to accelerate and voila, a nice drift.

Skidpad numbers published in mags show that it cut loose sooner than other cars, though at, I think, .88g.

After 7000 miles I took off the runflats and went 19", +2 oversize. Now I can go through the same corners much quicker with these tires than with runflats. How much is the +2 oversize, and how much is the runflat versus nonrunflat, I do not know. Obviously I cannot measure skidpad numbers, but if you take the same curve faster, lateral g's are necessarily increased, so I am certain my skidpad numbers would be higher now.

There is, however a drawback. The car is now nowhere as drop-dead easy to drift. Oversteer has been reduced, and it takes more skill and driver input to take it right up to the edge. No matter how much I practice, I still can't get it to cut loose so smoothly, and hold the drift so effortlessly as the stock setup--but I'm still getting thru the curves faster, if less gracefully.

I guess my point is that BMW did a great job of setting the car up with runflats to make neophite drivers feel like pros, but not to reach the car's full potential. For that you gotta take off the runflats and go oversize.

Handling improvement aside, the best thing about taking off the runflats is that you can reduce the unsprung weight by 50 lb, even if you go to 19" and +2. You could probably shave off another 10-15 pounds if you went 17". I have not been able to do a before and after 0-60, but at the risk of being flamed for trying to use a butt dyno, I guarantee the car is appreciably quicker with the lighter wheels and tires. (I get a kick out of people taking out the charcoal filter in the airbox, but then buying 28 lb wheels).

Anyway, there are advantages and disadvantates to both. Just go with your priorities.

[fkhanod]

I would love to hear from someone who has driven both. I have and the non runflats are great!!!For safety look at all the cars out there without them!

[Nikki]

Besides the fact that they are expensive, the REO50A RFT that came on my car and incredible. I got the tire insurance though in case something happened but either way I'd definitely keep mine.

[climkt]

well having used the RFT 16inch stock and dumping them for Goodyear F1 18
inch tyres. i can say that the non RFTs work just as well/ to be a fair comparison , i should have tried 16 inch non rfts but no way i will be doing that as cosmesis and bigger rims were a priority for me. one big piss off of the RFTs were their 100% price increase over standard tyres. sure, u need to pay for research and technology, but non RFTs will do for me now. even made my own m mobility kit.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by wheeler

Runflats are definitely safer. If my wife was driving it I would have kept them on. If that's your focus, read no further.

As far as the car being 'set up for it' in a way that makes non-runflats inferior to them, I don't buy it in total. I agree that BMW dialed in the handling for these tires very accurately. Even when I first got the car I coud put 'er into a 4-wheel drift as if I was Mario Andretti. The tire's traction potential was perfectly matched to the designed-in understeer. All I had to do was increase speed in a corner 'til the front tires started to drift out, then steer just a little tighter into the curve while continuing to accelerate and voila, a nice drift.

Skidpad numbers published in mags show that it cut loose sooner than other cars, though at, I think, .88g.

After 7000 miles I took off the runflats and went 19", +2 oversize. Now I can go through the same corners much quicker with these tires than with runflats. How much is the +2 oversize, and how much is the runflat versus nonrunflat, I do not know. Obviously I cannot measure skidpad numbers, but if you take the same curve faster, lateral g's are necessarily increased, so I am certain my skidpad numbers would be higher now.

There is, however a drawback. The car is now nowhere as drop-dead easy to drift. Oversteer has been reduced, and it takes more skill and driver input to take it right up to the edge. No matter how much I practice, I still can't get it to cut loose so smoothly, and hold the drift so effortlessly as the stock setup--but I'm still getting thru the curves faster, if less gracefully.

I guess my point is that BMW did a great job of setting the car up with runflats to make neophite drivers feel like pros, but not to reach the car's full potential. For that you gotta take off the runflats and go oversize.

Handling improvement aside, the best thing about taking off the runflats is that you can reduce the unsprung weight by 50 lb, even if you go to 19" and +2. You could probably shave off another 10-15 pounds if you went 17". I have not been able to do a before and after 0-60, but at the risk of being flamed for trying to use a butt dyno, I guarantee the car is appreciably quicker with the lighter wheels and tires. (I get a kick out of people taking out the charcoal filter in the airbox, but then buying 28 lb wheels).

Anyway, there are advantages and disadvantates to both. Just go with your priorities.

wheeler, drifting an E90 depends on a lot of things:roadsurface, tyre-brand, (rear)tyresize and how much worn the tyres are in let's say wet circumstances +drifting skills. And one thing depends on the other. Understeer is the basis for a modern safe car, also a rwd.

PLUS IT NEEDS A LIMITED SLIP DIFFERENTIAL.

RFT or non RFT: Doesn't matter. Been doing a lot of drifting with my current an former BMW's on drifting/trackdays.

[Bimmer4Life]

I am biased towards the regular tyres.
I love the ride comfort, better handling and definetely a smoother ride quality; not to mention cost.
I had the stock 16 inch and I just upgraded to BMW 162s (18 inch) with Hankook Ventus Tyres. Let me tell you I have no regrets. I love the car twice as much now.
I have created my own spare setup. I built a partial enclosure for my spare and jack kit.
I am very happy to get rid of those tough RFTs.

[noflash]

Originally Posted by Bimmer4Life

I am biased towards the regular tyres.
I love the ride comfort, better handling and definetely a smoother ride quality; not to mention cost.
I had the stock 16 inch and I just upgraded to BMW 162s (18 inch) with Hankook Ventus Tyres. Let me tell you I have no regrets. I love the car twice as much now.
I have created my own spare setup. I built a partial enclosure for my spare and jack kit.
I am very happy to get rid of those tough RFTs.

That looks like a space-saver spare -- where did you get it? To date, we have not found a space-saver to fit the e90.

[CnoteMD]

Price, weight, and poor ride quality are the most common reasons I hear regarding RFT inferiority to regular tires. However, I think that its just a matter of time before these issues are improved, if not elimiminated.

There was a time when simply using low profile tires resulted in a harsh ride. In the early days of low profile tires, a few cars I rode in felt much rougher than my 330i with 18 inch RFT's. Those low profile tires also carried a huge price premium compared to the "normal profile" tires.

Compared to the price I paid for this car, the difference in price compared to a regular tire doesn't seem so bad anymore. Also, the convenience of not being stuck in the middle of nowhere also is worth it to me. However, I must admit that the poor availability of RFT's upsets me. I think that more planning should have been done considering that EVERY 3 series BMW is equipped with RFT's.

[e90fanatic]

rft tires are just too expensive. You can get tire repair tools and decent non-rft tires for less.

[zamboni]

The RFT is about $25 more than regular version that is not a bad price.