WoodlandHills said:
There is already a ride and handling impact from the rock-like rim protectors currently installed.
Both of our cars, an i3 BEV and a 2000 Honda Insight, have Bridgestone low rolling resistance (LRR) tires installed. The ride and handling of our i3 are considerably better compared with our Insight, but tires aren't the only factor that affects ride and handling. Unless you were able to compare different tires on your i3, I don't see how you could blame the tires for what you feel are poor ride and handling.
WoodlandHills said:
Perhaps the engineers over at Tesla, Audi, MB, Chevy, Toyota, etc should also read these posts as they seem to have completely missed the boat on Finite Element design. Why, not a single one of them are using these wonderful skinny rim protectors on their EVs! It is almost as if those other companies decided that the drawbacks are not worth the advantages.
Or that it's not possible to fit such tires on their EV's which, except for Tesla, are all derived from ICE models with standard non-LRR tires. The Model S has similar large diameter 19" and 21" tires but because it's so heavy, its tires must be much wider to support the car's weight.
WoodlandHills said:
Seriously, if these were really such great tires why are they not being used on other hybrid BMWs?
Maybe because they're all derived from existing ICE models with standard non-LRR that are considerably heavier than the i3.
WoodlandHills said:
IMHO, BMW found themselves with an EV that was going to have a lot of difficulty reaching a marketable range and they threw these silly wheels on the car in an attempt to wring every last bit of range from a smallish battery. BMW knew how the public would react to a $50k EV with only 60 to 70 mile real-world range and they did whatever it took to bump their numbers on the various gov't tests, including using unique high pressure large diameter tires.
It's no secret that BMW designed the i3 to be as fuel efficient as possible which includes the tire design. The i3 is a clean slate car, so BMW could design it to accommodate tall, narrow tires which have some advantages and disadvantages. Like most engineering decisions, using these tires involve trade-offs. A narrow width reduces aerodynamic drag but results in a smaller contact area and thus poorer traction. A large diameter increases the contact area which offsets the smaller contact area of a narrow tire. Pretty clever!
Narrow tires also impinge on the interior space less which makes the i3 more roomy than if it had wider tires.
But tall tires reduce the wheelbase which makes the ride more choppy while at the same time making a smaller turning circle possible.
Tall tires reduce the distance between the rear edge of the front tire and the front edge of the rear tire resulting in not enough space for normal front-hinged rear doors. Rear-hinged rear doors allow easier rear seat ingress/egress compared with the same width front-hinged door, but rear-hinged doors have other problems that don't exist with front-hinged doors, so this is a trade-off.
The i3 is a radically different car in many respects. I value BMW's design decisions, including the wheel/tire sizes, but BMW's software engineering seems particularly poor.