Wheels, Rims, and Tires

[blownb310]

Looks great! Thanks for the write up with parts list.

 

[GdB]

Second that! I have been wanting to look at the OEM lugs before ordering some, thanks for that picture! I also got a set of GEN 1 14" Insight wheels I my use instead of the mini wheels.

How is the handling? Find a safe place before venturing into new territory.

 

[melloyello]

Added links to the parts list since it looks like there's some interest. It looks like the forum adds tags to the amazon links - I suppose they are a forum sponsor or something?

It's still early to say for sure, but it does feel like understeer is greatly reduced and range has not been significantly affected.

 

[Barbagris]

AIt looks like the forum adds tags to the amazon links - I suppose they are a forum sponsor or something?

I have a strange problem with your Amazon's links: don't know why, but point to my own country Amazon store (Spain) and found a "page not found"

Replacing ".es" with ".com" all works normally.

Perhaps UK members (scottish or no ) , french or deutsch found similar errors pointing to amazon.co.uk, .fr or .de.
Or no. I don't know.

The non-Amazon links works perfectly for me.

BTW, I like how the car looks with that Mini wheels and a slighty bigger tyres.

 

[MLucas]

Added links to the parts list since it looks like there's some interest. It looks like the forum adds tags to the amazon links - I suppose they are a forum sponsor or something?

It's still early to say for sure, but it does feel like understeer is greatly reduced and range has not been significantly affected.

Would be interested in the numbers on range, I wouldn't want to experience what JoeS did when he ventured into different tire territory. But, I would like to be able to purchase more readily available tires.

 

[Don]

Mini cooper wheels have been successfully installed! Here are some preliminary photos as well as a comparison shot of stock studs vs the extended studs I got from amazon.

Sweet!

It looks like the front studs are too long to use closed end lug nuts - Simple enough to cut them off a bit though . . . . or maybe find some 40mm studs instead of the 50mm ones you used

About tires and sizes. The 165/60's you used on the front are 1.7% larger than the 145/65's you replaced - Any clearance issues? How close is 'close' for the tire clearing the strut with the 8mm spacers? I take it you tried 6mm and those did not clear? What was actually interfering . . . . the wheel or the tire? Was it the strut tube itself or the welded bracket? Could the bracket be trimmed a bit to clear with the 6mm spacers? Your thoughts on using 175/55's on the front please - They are just about identical to the overall circumference of the stock 145/65's and would fit a 5.5 inch wheel perfectly . . . . but would they present fender clearance issues? They would also match up perfectly with a pair of 185/55's on the rear

The rear 175/65's are 3% larger than the stock 175/60's that came on the car - Any thought to using 185/60's which would be only 2% too large . . . . and closer to the 1.7% too large fronts you used. I think the 185/60's might look better too?

I have a new set of the 10 spoke Mini wheels in the garage . . . . you've really got me thinking . . . . ;-)

Don

 

[GdB]

165/60R15 Continental ContiProContact front tires (http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=ContiProContact&partnum=66TR5CPC&vehicleSearch=false&fromCompare1=yes)
175/65R15 LRR Continental ContiProContact rear tires (http://www.onlinetires.com/products/vehicle/tires/continental/175%252F65-15+continental+conti+procontact+84h+bsw.html)
...

Assuming the fronts wear much faster than rears, likely the case with the I-MiEV.
This tire combination will for sure cause loss of regen if the fronts are 75% worn and maybe even only 50% worn and the rear are like new still. Maybe the rears will wear enough to use the fronts longer.
For this reason there's likely less issues with regen if a front is increased more than the rear.

The tire being too close is probably not an issue the way the strut is angled away.

The rear tires being smaller track helps aero drag. The Gen 1 Insight had that. But the rear spacers will definitely help the handling. I calculated the rear wants to roll more than the front so rear spacers will balance that out. My estimates show rear spacers being 20mm more than front enough to balance the front and rear roll tendency, but that's a lot of spacers with other issues!

How easy was it to replace the studs on the front?

 

[melloyello]

The wheel is very close to the strut with the 8mm spacer - about 1mm clearance. I’m still a little nervous driving it around right now, but I put some masking tape there so that hopefully if it does rub, I can see signs of it in the tape before it causes more serious problems. As best as I can tell, it’s ok right now, but I’d definitely be less worried with 10mm spacers, that’s probably what I’d go with if I were to do it again. I’m seeing some pretty inexpensive 10mm spacers on amazon that I might try.

I tried the 6mm spacers with bare wheels and the wheel lip would hit the strut tube. It clears that bracket no problem, so trimming that would not help any. For 14in wheels, there might be a problem with the bracket, but at least for the wheels I have, the bracket is not an issue.

As for tire fitment, the tire does stick out past the wheel, but the strut is also angled away from the tire, so tire and wheel clearance are about the same with my current setup – both very tight.

I mainly chose 175/65R15 because it is a LRR size for that tire. 186/60R15 would probably work too and might be even better from a sizing perspective, but I wanted to minimize risk of reduced range, at least for now. I haven’t noticed any traction control or regen braking issues, so I guess the front/rear ratio is acceptable, if not exactly right. My stock tires wore evenly all around, and I’m hoping this set will too, but we’ll just have to see..

To replace the front studs, you need a jack to lift the corner of the car, 21mm socket to remove the wheels, and a 17mm socket to remove the brake caliper. Then remove the brake rotor, and use a big (3+ lb) hammer to knock the stock studs out the back. You can put a sacrificial lug nut on the stud to spread on the impact. To insert the longer studs, I had to un-bolt the dust guard (10mm wrench), and squeeze the stud past that dust guard (tight but doable). Then to seat the studs, I put the rotor and brakes back on so that I could use the brakes to hold the hub still while I torqued a sacrifical lug nut to about 150 ft-lb. I used a 15mm, 1/2in drive socket as a spacer between the rotor and the lug nut for this, and I also used a broomstick between the brake pedal and the driver seat headrest to hold down the brakes. Afterwards, remove the brake caliper and rotor again to check the studs are fully seated, and then put everything back together, and repeat for the other side. With the extended studs sticking out through the lug nuts, I have to use an extended 19mm socket to tighten the lug nuts, so make sure you have one of those also. If you’ve changed disc brakes before, it shouldn’t be anything too difficult. I’ve never touched drum brakes before, so the rears might take more figuring out for me. Hopefully, it can be done without having to remove the wheel hubs, like the fronts can.

 

[Don]

165/60R15 Continental ContiProContact front tires (http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=ContiProContact&partnum=66TR5CPC&vehicleSearch=false&fromCompare1=yes)
175/65R15 LRR Continental ContiProContact rear tires (http://www.onlinetires.com/products/vehicle/tires/continental/175%252F65-15+continental+conti+procontact+84h+bsw.html)
...

Assuming the fronts wear much faster than rears, likely the case with the I-MiEV.
This tire combination will for sure cause loss of regen if the fronts are 75% worn and maybe even only 50% worn and the rear are like new still

No need to make wild assumptions which result in invalid predictions - As we can see from the photos of Joe's car (from earlier in this thread, if you've read it all) all 4 tires wore out at about the same time - No difference front to rear

http://myimiev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1656&start=70

Don

 

[PV1]

I noticed (except for my bad front alignment) that my rear tires actually wore a little faster than the front, and the rear Dunlops are definitely wearing faster than the front Continentals. I'm starting to see my regen cut back again here and there, though nowhere near as bad as with the 175/55R15's I tried.

 

[GdB]

extended studs on the fronts (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009QBRAW0/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

melloyello, Did you check the Knurl pitch? In the picture the OEM looks about 20% finer pitch knurl. Sound like they seated ok, but 150 ft-lbs is a lot of torque to seat them! It's been a while but I think I had to use a lot of torque replacing very similar lugs a while back on my truck.

 

[Don]

The hole on the wheel flange that you pull them into isn't knurled, so either will work OK

I usually use a socket as a spacer and 3 or 4 washers on top of it with a reversed lug nut when I pull the studs in - If you grease the washers and the nut, it takes lots less torque. I just use an air impact gun like you use mounting/dismounting tires. I think it's capable of about 350 ft/lbs of torque. I've never broken a wheel stud doing it this way

Don

 

[RobertC]

Assuming the fronts wear much faster than rears, likely the case with the I-MiEV.

As we can see from the photos of Joe's car all 4 tires wore out at about the same time - No difference front to rear.

My tires also wore out the same, front to rear, at 33,000 miles.

I replaced my original tires with Yokohama AVID ENVigor's, but after performing range tests using two different MiEV's and a total of four sets of tires using CaniOn, I returned the Yokohama's and installed new Dunlop Enasave's. Even though the Yokohama's should last significantly longer than the Dunlop's based on the manufacturer's published tread wear rating, I did not want to lose any range on my MiEV.

I will post my CaniOn results of the tire range tests when I get a chance.

 

[JoeS]

I replaced my original tires with Yokohama AVID ENVigor's, but after performing range tests using two different MiEV's and a total of four sets of tires using CaniOn, I returned the Yokohama's and installed new Dunlop Enasave's. Even though the Yokohama's should last significantly longer than the Dunlop's based on the manufacturer's published tread wear rating, I did not want to lose any range on my MiEV.
I will post my CaniOn results of the tire range tests when I get a chance.

RobertC, I am very interested in your data and analysis. I now have almost 10,000miles on the Yokohama AVID ENVigors, and although the range improved slightly with summer and running 60psi, using the Yokohamas we've only seen RR over 75 once (even with wife's featherfooting), whereas we regularly had RR = mid-80's thru 90's+ before changing the tires. I realize that I now have over 32,000 miles, but if our hypothesis is that battery capacity loss simply takes away from turtle range, then we shouldn't see any active range degradation due to capacity loss... or would we? (different thread topic, not this one)

 

[RobertC]

I replaced my original tires with Yokohama AVID ENVigor's, but after performing range tests using two different MiEV's and a total of four sets of tires using CaniOn, I returned the Yokohama's and installed new Dunlop Enasave's. Even though the Yokohama's should last significantly longer than the Dunlop's based on the manufacturer's published tread wear rating, I did not want to lose any range on my MiEV.
I will post my CaniOn results of the tire range tests when I get a chance.

RobertC, I am very interested in your data and analysis.

I have two Mitsubishi i Electric Vehicles.
I tested four sets of tires by driving the same route at the same speed and recording the remaining State-of-Charge on the battery using CaniOn. Total trip time was one hour, give or take a couple minutes.
At the time of the tire test, one vehicle had approximately 33,000 miles and the other vehicle had approximately 5,000 miles.
My comparative range test using the four sets of tires I had available showed an approximate 12% loss in range with a new set of Yokohama AVID ENVigor tires compared to my original worn Dunlop Enasave tires. The comparative range test showed no loss in range with a set of Dunlop Enasave tires with 5,000 miles and a 2% loss in range with a new set of Dunlop Enasave tires.

Here are my test results.

I also tried one run with the new Yokohama tires on my Mitsubishi i with 5,000 miles and got a loss in range of 9%.

 

[GdB]

I think an important correction was missed. A 100% worn set of front or rear tires will reduce in diameter 2.4 to 2.5%, so will seem to be getting that much extra range. Most likely people are considering them "worn" when at 1.5% to 2% smaller diameter.

If the front and rear are not worn the same, i'm not sure if the odometer reads front, rear or both averaged using ABS sensors, or maybe the engine RPM (rear) is a better sensor to use.

I would also like to see the range difference with the Yokos at higher pressure than the Dunlops, because I think they might still handle better at higher pressure.

I replaced my original tires with Yokohama AVID ENVigor's, but after performing range tests using two different MiEV's and a total of four sets of tires using CaniOn, I returned the Yokohama's and installed new Dunlop Enasave's. Even though the Yokohama's should last significantly longer than the Dunlop's based on the manufacturer's published tread wear rating, I did not want to lose any range on my MiEV.
I will post my CaniOn results of the tire range tests when I get a chance.

RobertC, I am very interested in your data and analysis.

I have two Mitsubishi i Electric Vehicles.
I tested four sets of tires by driving the same route at the same speed and recording the remaining State-of-Charge on the battery using CaniOn. Total trip time was one hour, give or take a couple minutes.
At the time of the tire test, one vehicle had approximately 33,000 miles and the other vehicle had approximately 5,000 miles.
My comparative range test using the four sets of tires I had available showed an approximate 12% loss in range with a new set of Yokohama AVID ENVigor tires compared to my original worn Dunlop Enasave tires. The comparative range test showed no loss in range with a set of Dunlop Enasave tires with 5,000 miles and a 2% loss in range with a new set of Dunlop Enasave tires.

Here are my test results.

I also tried one run with the new Yokohama tires on my Mitsubishi i with 5,000 miles and got a loss in range of 9%.

 

[GdB]

Another better test to avoid all the variables would be coast down test. Since aero drag should be about the same for same size tires, a timed neutral coast down test from 35 MPH to zero would easy to replicate.

 

[RobertC]

I think an important correction was missed. A 100% worn set of front or rear tires will reduce in diameter 2.4 to 2.5%, so will seem to be getting that much extra range. Most likely people are considering them "worn" when at 1.5% to 2% smaller diameter.

If the front and rear are not worn the same, i'm not sure if the odometer reads front, rear or both averaged using ABS sensors, or maybe the engine RPM (rear) is a better sensor to use.

I would also like to see the range difference with the Yokos at higher pressure than the Dunlops, because I think they might still handle better at higher pressure.

Measuring state-of-charge remaining takes tire diameter out of the equation.
My cars odometer measured the trip at 42.5 miles with worn out Dunlops, 42.3 miles with new Yokohamas, and 42.4 miles with new Dunlops. Hardly a difference.
I ran the test at 36 psi and also 50 psi and there was no difference.
Coast down would not replicate the amount of battery charge used in actual driving conditions.
The test was pretty definitive. The Yokohama tires use more battery charge than the Dunlop tires do. That's probably why Mitsubishi used the Dunlop tires even though they cost more.

 

[JoeS]

RobertC, thank you very much for going through the trouble of performing the test and then publishing the results. I guess we could have a separate thread on the 'proper' scientific method(s) of performing these tests, but certainly your testing has corroborated my mostly subjective experience. Can't wait for my Yokos to wear out so I can go back to the Dunlop Enasaves. I found it interesting that you noticed no mileage difference due to tire pressures (that's what Don has been saying all these years) - I've gone back to 60psi primarily because of my perception that the handling is noticeably crisper on my twisty winding road home.

Can't believe how blasé I've become about mileage - today was a 67-mile day and no opportunity to charge, with ~30% at 65+mph and I only started taking it easy when I dropped down to two bars and still had five uphill miles to get home. Went from blinking two bars to the extremely rare (for me) one bar going up my steep driveway. Ah, it was about time to give our Mitsi a full recalibration charge, anyway. Tell an ICE person that I still had a comfortable five miles RR and they freak out … they just don't get it! <sorry for the off-topic ramblings>

 

[HumbleTurtle]

For the newbie to iMiev- I have had a difficult time reading this thread.
What I was hoping to find in here is a good winter tire for my 2012 ES.
It seems like all the experimentation in here has done you all good.
Any advice for the newbie?