335D Xdrive front tyre wear

[Neil-y0jlk]

My 2016 335d X drive touring has done just 20,000 miles however the front tyres are both worn through on the outside, the inner threequarters of the tyre are at a guess less than half worn. Both front tyres are equally worn, car tracks straight, doesn't pull to one side or anything..

Is this normal? or indicative of a wheel alignment problem? New fronts every 20k miles gets a bit expensive

Tyres are the original Bridgestone runflats

[nickfrog]

Normal, sadly. Providing the wear is symmetrical across the axle.

Those cars don't have enough front camber, so that they understeer (even under power). I think they are on zero when they could do with 1 deg or so.

Your only recourse is to slightly over-inflate, which is not ideal on a RFT...

X-drive probably compounds the problem a bit too. Tbf, 20K doesn't sound too shocking although it's frustrating to have so much rubber left on the inside and having to bin them!

Edited by nickfrog on Saturday 7th October 22:27

[Neil-y0jlk]

Thanks, interesting about the camber.
Has anyone experience of the AC Snitzer (I know that's not spelt correctly) springs and whether these alter the tyre wear characteristics?

[335d]

Neil-y0jlk said:

Thanks, interesting about the camber.
Has anyone experience of the AC Snitzer (I know that's not spelt correctly) springs and whether these alter the tyre wear characteristics?

I added AC Schnitzer springs to my 335d saloon (F30) at around 20k miles while still on 19" Bridgestone runflats. I changed the full set of tyres soon afterwards as the rears had worn to the limit on the inside edges. However, the fronts were pretty evenly worn with about 5mm left at 22k miles.

Since then I have been on Michelin PSS non-runflats which appear to still be wearing evenly some 12k miles later.

I also use an 18" winter set which wear evenly, but I have not counted the miles done with them.

I haven't heard of this uneven front tyre wear with the 335d. If you fit ACS springs they will check and adjust the alignment accordingly, so you could kill 2 birds with one stone...

[rayyan171]

Stick to run flats on xDrive models otherwise you will have issues with transfer boxes. If anything, xDrive should only see star marked tyres, especially for staggered set ups.

[Neil-y0jlk]

Thanks, I intend to replace them like for like at the moment, no intention of going non runflat, 3 punctures in 8 years without having to get my hands dirty on the side of a motorway sells it for me.

[gareth h]

rayyan171 said:

Stick to run flats on xDrive models otherwise you will have issues with transfer boxes. If anything, xDrive should only see star marked tyres, especially for staggered set ups.

That's interesting, why? I would have thought that provided the fronts and rears have the same rolling radius there wouldn't be any issues.

[bad company]

I would have thought that 20K from tyres is pretty good. I had a 335xdrive saloon and never saw 20K between tyre changes.

[rayyan171]

gareth h said:

That's interesting, why? I would have thought that provided the fronts and rears have the same rolling radius there wouldn't be any issues.

The star marked tyres ensure that rolling radius is the same for all the tyres on the car, especially as the star marked ones are designed specifically for the 3 series, or 5 series, or whichever. Going non star marked does not guarantee this, and there can be 30mm differences in rolling radius, even on good quality non star marked tyres. Also, there are rumours that the warranty for gearboxes is void if BMW find there aren't star marked tyres on the car.

The 335d is a fast car. If there is one thing to not skimp on, its the tyres. It's just not worth paying a little bit less if it means that it doesn't guarantee safety and reliability of the car. Skimp on services, consumables but not tyres.

Our X5 has the same engine in the 335d, so has a good turn of pace, and is a genuine 145mph car. I would not want to have tyres that aren't star marked, especially when you consider it is 2.2+ tonnes of SAV barreling down the M60, with 5 up in the back. The X5 especially hates not having the proper tyres, the diff and transfer box would groan and grind, make bad noises etc.

Just my two pence.

Edit: The tyres lasted a long time on your car. The rears on ours went after 16K miles, but that was partly down to not watching tyre pressures. The fronts are still on 20k and going strong, after 1 year.

[JNW1]

bad company said:

I would have thought that 20K from tyres is pretty good. I had a 335xdrive saloon and never saw 20K between tyre changes.

Had a puncture on one of my Bridgestone run-flats at around 23k miles; still a reasonable amount of tread left on the other three but decided to bite the bullet and move to conventional tyres (a set of Goodyear AS2's). Roll forward 20 months and a few weeks ago the car went in for its end of warranty check; mileage now 45k but after 22k miles those same Goodyears still have over 5mm of tread remaining (with all four being almost identical in terms of wear). Assuming I replace at 3mm - and assuming the wear rate is roughly linear - that means I should get 40k miles from the set which I'm very happy with (especially given the tyres also perform well in all conditions).

I admit I don't drive like I stole it all the time but equally my driving is far from being motorways only; therefore, seems the X-Drive 335d is pretty kind to its tyres....

[bad company]

JNW1 said:

Had a puncture on one of my Bridgestone run-flats at around 23k miles; still a reasonable amount of tread left on the other three but decided to bite the bullet and move to conventional tyres (a set of Goodyear AS2's). Roll forward 20 months and a few weeks ago the car went in for its end of warranty check; mileage now 45k but after 22k miles those same Goodyears still have over 5mm of tread remaining (with all four being almost identical in terms of wear). Assuming I replace at 3mm - and assuming the wear rate is roughly linear - that means I should get 40k miles from the set which I'm very happy with (especially given the tyres also perform well in all conditions).

I admit I don't drive like I stole it all the time but equally my driving is far from being motorways only; therefore, seems the X-Drive 335d is pretty kind to its tyres....

Yep, I couldn’t fault my 335d, a great mixture of performances, comfort and economy. I reached the end of my PCP earlier this year and didn’t think it the right time to be buying a new diesel so went for a 540.

[Ranger 6]

rayyan171 said:

Stick to run flats on xDrive models otherwise you will have issues with transfer boxes. If anything, xDrive should only see star marked tyres, especially for staggered set ups.

Yup

[nickfrog]

rayyan171 said:

The star marked tyres ensure that rolling radius is the same for all the tyres on the car, especially as the star marked ones are designed specifically for the 3 series, or 5 series, or whichever. Going non star marked does not guarantee this

What happens when an axle wears quicker than the other (not sure if they do) ? This is bound to create a rolling radius differential.

[335d]

rayyan171 said:

The 335d is a fast car. If there is one thing to not skimp on, its the tyres. It's just not worth paying a little bit less if it means that it doesn't guarantee safety and reliability of the car. Skimp on services, consumables but not tyres.

I think you have misunderstood the reason that some of us have gone for non-runflat. This is not skimping - it has nothing to do with cost. In fact I think the Michelin PSS I went for were slightly more expensive than the Bridgestone runflats. It is about performance. The Bridgestone Potenzas are a rather compromised tyre IMO. The tyres I went for are used on several of the M cars, and were recommended by AC Schnitzer, whose springs I have.

There is a newer and better Michelin, the MPS4S which I may well switch to next time. There must be about 30-40 people running MPSS or MPS4S with their 335d / 330xd on the Bimmerpost forum, some for high mileages, and while I may have missed one, I don't recall a transfer box issue.

[JNW1]

335d said:

rayyan171 said:

The 335d is a fast car. If there is one thing to not skimp on, its the tyres. It's just not worth paying a little bit less if it means that it doesn't guarantee safety and reliability of the car. Skimp on services, consumables but not tyres.

I think you have misunderstood the reason that some of us have gone for non-runflat. This is not skimping - it has nothing to do with cost. In fact I think the Michelin PSS I went for were slightly more expensive than the Bridgestone runflats. It is about performance. The Bridgestone Potenzas are a rather compromised tyre IMO. The tyres I went for are used on several of the M cars, and were recommended by AC Schnitzer, whose springs I have.

There is a newer and better Michelin, the MPS4S which I may well switch to next time. There must be about 30-40 people running MPSS or MPS4S with their 335d / 330xd on the Bimmerpost forum, some for high mileages, and while I may have missed one, I don't recall a transfer box issue.

Absolutely right, the reason for moving away from run-flats is to improve the way the car drives, not to save money; the fact a premium conventional tyre is cheaper than a run-flat is a bonus but not the primary motive for making the change!

I also don't get this idea that fitting conventional tyres will somehow damage the transfer boxes; if you stick to the same size tyres - with the same rolling circumference - why should it make any difference? I don't think run-flats are a standard fit on BMW X-Drives in all markets so this notion of conventional tyres damaging transfer boxes sounds like pub talk to me (probably after at least one pint too many!).

[rayyan171]

JNW1 said:

335d said:

rayyan171 said:

The 335d is a fast car. If there is one thing to not skimp on, its the tyres. It's just not worth paying a little bit less if it means that it doesn't guarantee safety and reliability of the car. Skimp on services, consumables but not tyres.

I think you have misunderstood the reason that some of us have gone for non-runflat. This is not skimping - it has nothing to do with cost. In fact I think the Michelin PSS I went for were slightly more expensive than the Bridgestone runflats. It is about performance. The Bridgestone Potenzas are a rather compromised tyre IMO. The tyres I went for are used on several of the M cars, and were recommended by AC Schnitzer, whose springs I have.

There is a newer and better Michelin, the MPS4S which I may well switch to next time. There must be about 30-40 people running MPSS or MPS4S with their 335d / 330xd on the Bimmerpost forum, some for high mileages, and while I may have missed one, I don't recall a transfer box issue.

Absolutely right, the reason for moving away from run-flats is to improve the way the car drives, not to save money; the fact a premium conventional tyre is cheaper than a run-flat is a bonus but not the primary motive for making the change!

I also don't get this idea that fitting conventional tyres will somehow damage the transfer boxes; if you stick to the same size tyres - with the same rolling circumference - why should it make any difference? I don't think run-flats are a standard fit on BMW X-Drives in all markets so this notion of conventional tyres damaging transfer boxes sounds like pub talk to me (probably after at least one pint too many!).

Common in the X5 community at least. Maybe it’s less of an issue for the 3 series due to weight differences etc. The previous owner of ours said that the car did not like having normal tyres on, the transfer box made noises and the gearbox did as well. Putting star marked back on made it all go away. One year after buying and it’s been completely fine with them.

It could be ok for the 3 series but I’m just trying to say the xDrive system is complex and therefore it could be more wise to stick to recommended tyres. There is no doubt however that the Michelins are very good, but the Bridgestone dueler h/s on ours performs great too.

[JNW1]

rayyan171 said:

JNW1 said:

335d said:

rayyan171 said:

The 335d is a fast car. If there is one thing to not skimp on, its the tyres. It's just not worth paying a little bit less if it means that it doesn't guarantee safety and reliability of the car. Skimp on services, consumables but not tyres.

I think you have misunderstood the reason that some of us have gone for non-runflat. This is not skimping - it has nothing to do with cost. In fact I think the Michelin PSS I went for were slightly more expensive than the Bridgestone runflats. It is about performance. The Bridgestone Potenzas are a rather compromised tyre IMO. The tyres I went for are used on several of the M cars, and were recommended by AC Schnitzer, whose springs I have.

There is a newer and better Michelin, the MPS4S which I may well switch to next time. There must be about 30-40 people running MPSS or MPS4S with their 335d / 330xd on the Bimmerpost forum, some for high mileages, and while I may have missed one, I don't recall a transfer box issue.

Absolutely right, the reason for moving away from run-flats is to improve the way the car drives, not to save money; the fact a premium conventional tyre is cheaper than a run-flat is a bonus but not the primary motive for making the change!

I also don't get this idea that fitting conventional tyres will somehow damage the transfer boxes; if you stick to the same size tyres - with the same rolling circumference - why should it make any difference? I don't think run-flats are a standard fit on BMW X-Drives in all markets so this notion of conventional tyres damaging transfer boxes sounds like pub talk to me (probably after at least one pint too many!).

Common in the X5 community at least. Maybe it’s less of an issue for the 3 series due to weight differences etc. The previous owner of ours said that the car did not like having normal tyres on, the transfer box made noises and the gearbox did as well. Putting star marked back on made it all go away. One year after buying and it’s been completely fine with them.

It could be ok for the 3 series but I’m just trying to say the xDrive system is complex and therefore it could be more wise to stick to recommended tyres. There is no doubt however that the Michelins are very good, but the Bridgestone dueler h/s on ours performs great too.

My 335d has been on conventional tyres for over 20k miles and there have been no noises from transfer box or gearbox; as has already been said, there are also plenty of owners with cars that have done higher mileages than mine on non run-flats with no issues.

I don't really follow what's happening with X5's but a quick Google search seems to suggest the problems are most acute when new and part-worn tyres are mixed? That I can understand but I fitted a brand new set of conventional tyres all round and to judge by the wear rate all four will need replacing at the same time (and hence mixing new and part-worn will never become an issue). Suppose the only problem will be if I have a puncture as potentially I might then have to replace all four if the damaged tyre isn't repairable!

[Ranger 6]

JNW1 said:

....I also don't get this idea that fitting conventional tyres will somehow damage the transfer boxes; if you stick to the same size tyres - with the same rolling circumference - why should it make any difference?

If you stick to the same circumference then, no they don't have a significant affect on the transfer box. Try finding staggered tyres with the same circumference - that's where you'll get a problem.

JNW1 said:

....I don't think run-flats are a standard fit on BMW X-Drives in all markets so this notion of conventional tyres damaging transfer boxes sounds like pub talk to me (probably after at least one pint too many!).

I think you're right about the non-RFTs, however those fitments are on all-square wheels.

I've had problems with staggered tyres - when I bought my last 30d it had three different makes of tyres and the gearbox and transfer boxes really didn't like it. Shunting and grunting noises which all went away when some star marked tyres were fitted. Fortunately the supplying dealer paid for those.....

[gareth h]

Years ago I had a four wheel drive cavalier (I know but it was a company car!), I fitted a pair of new tyres and it developed a knock when braking, turned out the transmission was winding itself up due to the different rolling radius front and rear, when the brake was applied it reverted to front wheel drive and the clunk was the transmission unwinding.
I'm sure that there must be a tolerance built into the BMW transmission to account for differential tyre wear, and surely as it isn't permanent four wheel drive it only becomes an issue for the short periods that the rears lose grip and drive is shifted to the front?

[Ranger 6]

It is permanent four wheel drive though. Discounting the new M5.