ELFMAN'S TYRE CHOICE...

[ELFMAN]

Cheers folks - all good food for thought. I'm still undecided - my handling's always been pretty good as the RF16's seem to be more 'pliable' than the RF 17's, probably due to the taller sidewalls which soak up the crap roads a bit better. Because mine are worn down now, I'm probably noticing a lessening of grip - especially in the wet/salty/mucky season (also 210bhp and a greasy road doesn't help...). So maybe a new set of RF 16's would do the trick. I pretty sure non-RF's would ride and grip a bit better - but I also think there's a bigger difference between the 17" RF's and their non-RF counterparts. In 2003, I test-drove an S on 17" RF's (on a damp day) before I bought my S, and found it pretty 'wooden' with less grip compared to my COOPER on 16's - so I stuck with 16's which were noticably better. Appreciate all your views though.

[duncan]

Just to add to your comments Euan, I have never had an issue with 16s with Runflats and grip - except when they get down to 2mm.
I'm not driving my MINI to the edge of its limits, so don't need to change to high performance non-runflats.
I have a set of the "new" Runflats on my MINI, and don't really notice a great difference between them and the original ones, however, i've always run Dunlops prior, and are on Goodyear now.

The safety of Runflats are a major selling point for me. I've had a tyre come off its rim on a work vehicle before, and its no fun changing it in a very small layby on the A90 with 70MPH traffic a few feet away, in the pouring rain.

[ELFMAN]

Good points Duncan. The wear on my tyres is a factor - but keep the comments coming folks!

[james f]

why not speak to GTT or lohen as they are best to give advice on a sutible tyre for you application as the tyre debate is one that will rage for all of time and tbh i dont think many of us can match the experience of Roland as he is the one person i trust when it come to my car

[duncan]

Just to add, I also specced the emergency spare tyre on the Cooper, so if all else fails, I have that.
And, I'd rather put my trust in metal reinforcment, than goo.

James, fair point, however, the "experts" who designed and built the car suggest Runflats.
Good enough for an every day driver like me.

[james f]

quote:Originally posted by duncan

James, fair point, however, the "experts" who designed and built the car suggest Runflats.
Good enough for an every day driver like me.

actualy they didnt, they designed the mini to run on normal tryes all the suspesion is tuned and set to run on normal tyres.

runflats were a last minute add on form the top brass at bmw in panic as thats wat all the bmws use minis were never supposed to have runflats.

[duncan]

I'd be very surprised at that - the design of the spare tyre carrier, and its availability on the early R50s seems to confirm this, IMHO only.

[james f]

they were ment to run on mini moblity system part of the reaosn was the fact the cooper s couldt have a spare tyre but this was only after the car had been set to run on normal tyres the descion was purley on the grounds of saftey in a panic form bmw

its why the ride is soo bad

[duncan]

Cooper S didnt come out till a year after the One and the Cooper though.
Yes the design would have been around for a while before, however, the fact that my early One came with neither the spare nor the mobility kit, seems to me to indicate it was an early desicion.

And as for the ride being so bad, hmm, thats opinion, not fact.

[ELFMAN]

Euan's Lunchtime Ramblings....
I remember the ride on my '01 COOPER was VERY stiff - it had the 1st Generation 'Sport Plus/Viagra' suspension & 16" Runflats. It was brilliant on smooth roads, but could get upset on lumpy/broken surfaces - sometimes skipping rather than gripping - but I still loved it as overall it was light years ahead of the opposition. The 2nd Gen. 'Sport Plus' fitted to my current 2003 S was quite acceptable and noticably more 'forgiving' as BMW had changed settings from the older one. However, IMHO it was still a bit jiggly and less controlled on some roads. My present JCW Suspension is an improvement again and the debatable 'faults' of the O.E. suspension have been more or less eradicaticated. It's still stiff (Missus!), but that's fine - it's meant to be, and now it doesn't 'skip' over the rough bits. That's why the Runflat isn't too much of a problem for me these days. I've also always stuck to 16's, as I think they're better for 'real world' driving than 17's and 18's. Less flash, more dash! By the way, the John Cooper Garage told me the JCW setup works with both runflats AND 'normal' tyres.

I reckon I'm with James on the Chicken/Egg, Suspension/Runflat 'what came first' debate. With the runflats/Sport Plus (especially early on) the ride WAS far too harsh - I don't think the design engineers would have set it up for British roads like that, but I reckon it wasn't so much of an issue on smooth German tarmac! This leads me to believe that the decision to fit Runflats came from BMW in Germany AFTER the suspension settings were decided, rather than the other way round, as these MINIS DO seem to handle/ride/grip better with non Runflats on our roads at least - and BMW have been playing 'suspension catch-up' ever since. The provision of the space-saver tyre on early versions and the Mobility Kit would indicate that someone was (initially at least) addressing the potential problem of O.E. normal tyres/punctures and having no room for a full-size spare. If the car was designed for Runflats, why have 15" non-runflats as standard on the first ONE and COOPER and provide the 'get you home' gear? Early-ish COOPERS like mine came with Runflats and Sports Plus as OPTIONS, which I believe (see above) compromised the car somewhat. I heard years ago that the best handling COOPER was one with Sports Plus and 15" non-Run Flats... but I could be dreaming. Still - try following the other Duncan, (Duncan Stewart), at speed in his standard 'wee-wheeled' COOPER on a bumpy B-road and you'll see what I mean. (Nuff Respec' Big Man!).

The MINI was designed from the outset to be a great Driver's car, which compromised the packaging/practicality - eg incorporating the rear 'Z' axle instead of the usual space/money-saving Trailing Arm setup and room for a proper spare... and a boot. In this performance-focussed way of thinking, Runflats don't add up as, as IMHO they pushed what would have been a stiff, but acceptable setup on normal tyres into the area where it was only truly happy on fairly smooth roads - especially later on 17" and 18" wheels. The fact that BMW have changed the suspension YET AGAIN for the R65 makes me think that they are still trying to address the runflats' peculiarities - especially since many newer MINI buyers seem less willing to put up with harsher suspension (soft s*ds), whereas true petrolheads/eejits like us WILL put up with a bit of discomfort as a tradeoff for a (mostly) great overall handling package.

I reckon as time goes on, suspension and tyre development will allow MINIS on runflats to give as good ride/handling as makes very little difference 95% of the time compared to non-runflats. It's getting better with every year/version. They'll never be quite as good in feel/grip/ride, but when you factor in the safety/convenience aspect, and strong sidewalls for the odd pothole, they're quite hard to beat as an 'everyday' package.

I'll have to have a look in my MINI books to see if I can shed any light on the Runflat/Design question - maybe it was 'Sport Plus' which did the damage?