JPWhite
Well-known member
mwalsh said:dgpcolorado said:
Can you go down the mountains backwards to even them out?
Yep, throw it in neutral and it will go downhill backwards very quickly!! :ugeek:
Ecopia EP422 tires suck
- Thread starter kballs
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
Yep, throw it in neutral and it will go downhill backwards very quickly!! :ugeek:
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
That would be a thrilling ride! In theory going back up the mountain should even the wear but the fact is that my speed and G forces are higher going downhill for that first hairpin and I think that's where some of the extra wear is coming from. (I do wish I had better regen to keep speed under control without having to ride the brakes; that first hairpin is a 14% grade.) Also, the right side of the road tends to be rougher and have more sand/gravel on it, so that likely causes extra wear on that side.mwalsh said:Can you go down the mountains backwards to even them out?
It seems obvious now, but a cross rotation probably would have helped. Live and learn.
DarkStar
Well-known member
I ended up squeeking out just over 54k miles on my Ecopia tires. I credit rotating the tires every 6k miles and doing bi-weekly air pressure checks to maintain 44 PSI. At the time they were replaced, they had warn extremely evenly. I had thought the outside edges were wearing more than the main tread, however with the tires off you could tell that it was consistent across the whole tread.
I was debating replacing these with the Yokohama AVID or the Yokohama YK580 tires and decided on the YK580 as they are supposed to have a lower rolling resistance than the AVID. So far my Carwings reports indicate these are performing just as well as the Ecopia tires were.
Continuing with my policy of inflating to the maximum sidewall pressure, the last 6k miles I've ran these with 51 PSI without any issues and just had them rotated and the tires still continue to show even wear. I've had zero braking issues and when we had our mini-snow storm in February, they performed excellent!
I was debating replacing these with the Yokohama AVID or the Yokohama YK580 tires and decided on the YK580 as they are supposed to have a lower rolling resistance than the AVID. So far my Carwings reports indicate these are performing just as well as the Ecopia tires were.
Continuing with my policy of inflating to the maximum sidewall pressure, the last 6k miles I've ran these with 51 PSI without any issues and just had them rotated and the tires still continue to show even wear. I've had zero braking issues and when we had our mini-snow storm in February, they performed excellent!
I rotated my Ecopias at 7.5k miles. And now I look back on it, I think that was stretching rotations a bit too far. So I'm going with 5k miles for all my tires from herein, and I think I'll get better longevity for it. My Ecopias still went 34k miles, and probably could have gone 40k without being dangerous. I just like to have pretty meaty tires come winter.
91040
Well-known member
Good decision considering the amount of snow and wet weather we had in Southern CA this winter! :lol:
mwalsh said:
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
mwalsh said:
i do every 5,000 miles based on my brother's recommendation and he was a tire store manager and no he was not trying to sell me since free rotations were part of any tire sale there and i always got my tires done at cost
OakLeaf
Well-known member
Have now lost two of the original stock Ecopias on our 2012 Leaf due to sidewall damage from potholes within the past 6 weeks.
I'm not sure if this isn't just bad luck or an actual weakness of the tire.
There is about 16k miles on the tires, and they don't appear to be suffering from undue wear. Tire pressure is maintained between 42 to 45 psi.
Had the first tire replaced with another Ecopia, but now that we have to replace a second one, I am wondering if it wouldn't be a better idea to go with a sturdier tire?
Would prefer not to replace all four tires at the same time, but don't want to keep replacing tires the hard way either.
I'm not sure if this isn't just bad luck or an actual weakness of the tire.
There is about 16k miles on the tires, and they don't appear to be suffering from undue wear. Tire pressure is maintained between 42 to 45 psi.
Had the first tire replaced with another Ecopia, but now that we have to replace a second one, I am wondering if it wouldn't be a better idea to go with a sturdier tire?
Would prefer not to replace all four tires at the same time, but don't want to keep replacing tires the hard way either.
Since my snows will be coming off soon, and since I don't like the handling with the Ecopias, and since I need to turn the car in with good tires (or make it easier to sell the right to buy it off-lease), I'm going to just keep the Ecrapias, with about 4k miles on them, in the garage until the lease ends. I'm looking for good used all-season or Summer tires. Even with my spare installed it just isn't worth having them on.
Stanton
Well-known member
OakLeaf said:
This was/is a common problem with the stock Ecopias. Even though I had some uneven wear between front/back, I "bit the bullet" and replaced all 4 tires around 20k miles with Michelins and have never regretted it (I own the car, so longevity was almost a bigger factor than m/kWh).
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
OakLeaf said:
what was the load rating on your tires? if you can still check that. I am beginning to realize not all Ecopias are created equally. on my '11, my OEMs were load rated 89H (last 3 digits on description)
i ran over a cut off piece of pipe that barely caught the sidewall and punctured it. I went to Goodyear and got a replacement and it was load rated at 91H. according to counter person, that is all they had in that size so Nissan had these OEMs custom made? or something. at first I thought it was difference between the JP and US market but my '13 also has 89H tires.
dont really know the meaning of the numbers other than my sneaking suspicion that 91H is 2 pts hardier than 89H...
TomT
Well-known member
It's the load rating. The higher rating almost invariably means a stronger sidewall and likely slightly poorer rolling resistance...
DaveinOlyWA said:
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
TomT said:
probably means lighter tire as well. just another micro adjustment in the quest for that "100 miles"
OakLeaf
Well-known member
DaveinOlyWA said:
Dave,
That's an interesting observation!
Decided to simply replace the tire with another EP422 and hope the potholes will be kinder to us from now on.
The first tire we had replaced at the dealer and has the same "89H" sidewall rating that the original tires came with.
The second tire we had replaced (coincidentally) at a Goodyear dealer, and it has a "91H" sidewall rating.
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
OakLeaf said:
as mentioned before, Goodyear does not sell an "89H" tire. in fact, they basically inferred that I had no clue as to what I was talking about. that tune changed dramatically when they actually went out to the car. (keep in mind, there were probably less than 100 LEAFs in the entire state at the time...)
they figured this was OEM specific tire and also mentioned it was common way to save a few pennies by under manufacturing tires. I am guessing it was done to shave a few lbs off the tire weight. As far as quantifying the difference. a lot of websites talk about the H rating but not a lot of info as to how much of a compromise it really is.
I'm looking to get better used tires; now I'll be doing it just for better handling, as opposed to increased safety as well? Damn, I hate to put the Ecrapias back on - the car handles much better with the (noisy) snow tires!
jfsquires
Active member
Has anyone with 16" rims gone to a tire larger than 205/55 R16 that came with the car?
KillaWhat
Well-known member
jfsquires said:
Not sure what you mean by "Larger".
The Cardinal Rule in playing with tires, is do the math, and keep the circumference correct.
Don't change the circumference, and if what you put on doesn't "Rub", life is good.
I HATED my Ecrapias.
Didn't trust them.
Love my JUKE 17" Wheel Upgrade w/225-45-17 Michelin MXM4 Tires.
They probably mean "taller." I actually considered going to 205/60/R16, because it seemed like it would actually make the speedometer accurate at 55MPH, and only read about 1MPH low at 30. That's better than the OEM size.
jfsquires
Active member
LeftieBiker said:
That's what I have in mind. I've been looking at Yokohama's YK580.
http://www.yokohamatire.com/tires/detail/yk580" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The 205/60 is almost a pound lighter than the 205/55, the load factor is 92H instead of 91H, and it's
809 revs per mile instead of 833. The loss of speedometer/odometer accuracy isn't an issue for me.
A set of 4 would cost about $50 more than the Ecopias. Costco tells me that the 89H Bridgestone
tire is being replaced by a 91H tire, so maybe the newer model is more dependable than the original.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
The battery replacement/buyback thread.
- Latest: ElectricToolbox
-
-
