Not loving the Ecopias; Considering Continentals

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

BuckMkII

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2017
Messages
258
Location
Seattle
I put new Ecopia Plus tires on my car a year ago. Wet road traction isn't very reassuring, and now that rain is returning, my wife wants to scrap them for being "too dangerous."

I am considering these:
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=PureContact+with+EcoPlus+Technology&autoMake=Nissan&autoYear=2013&autoModel=Leaf&autoModClar=SV&partnum=055VR6PUREC
User ratings are excellent, which I might almost believe. The weird thing is that the tread width is listed as being much wider than the Ecopias (if I read that right) for the same rated tire width.

I assume I'll take some mileage hit with these, although they do allow more pressure, which might help some? Anyone actually tried them?
 
I did the same (Ecopia Plus tires almost a year ago) and I've come to the same conclusion. I would not recommend them to someone else.
 
Also, I was considering going up to 205/60r15 to reduce speedometer error. Radar speed warning signs indicate that my car is reading 2 or 3 MPH low at 35 MPH. Will that size fit without rubbing on anything?
 
Michelin MXV4s are a very nice tire. Tons of traction when new but they did give it up after a few years, when the tires were old and worn. And, yes, you'll take a range hit on them too.

I don't really care for my new Ecopias either.
 
The Continentals I put on the 2015 caused about 15% range hit in highway driving, less in stop/go city driving (compared to OEM Michelin Energy Saver A/S (which were worst passenger car radials I have ever owned). The MXM4s I put on the 2011 were good tires with probably about 8% range hit compared to the OEM Ecopias. One problem with Michelins in my hot, dry climate is premature sidewall cracking--they are only OK if you drive enough miles to wear them out in less than 2 years. I found that the 16-inch OEM Ecopias on the 2011 and the 17-inch Ecopia 422+ tires I recently put on the 2015 are fine for wet braking if inflated to 44 psi, but terrible at Nissan-recommended 36 psi. It is relatively easy to spin them on wet pavement when inflated that hard, but I can manage that as long as they don't hydroplane and they stop well. In my opinion, wet traction of the new Ecopias for acceleration is almost as good as the Continentals and MXM4s; they are at least as good as those tires for wet braking when properly inflated. The Continentals and MXM4s are better under dry conditions when pushed to the limits.

Regarding sizes, I got 215/55R-17 Ecopias instead of the original size of 215/50R-17 because they were readily available vs. ordering. There is adequate fender clearance for my climate, but I would not recommend that size if you ever need to use snow chains. For your 16-inch wheels, I think you would be fine to go larger as long as you don't exceed height and width of the OEM 17-inch tires for the same model year.
 
I put Ecopia 422+ tires and some new 17" wheels on my Leaf about a month ago. I replaced the OEM wheels and 16" Westlake tires (put on by the guy I bought the car from 3.5 years ago) with the 205/50-R17 size recommended by Discount Tire. I haven't driven in the rain, yet, but they seem great so far. I fill them up until I get the three beeps out of the horn (around 42 psi).
 
I have had many cars in my life, and I cannot understand how people say they are so dissatisfied with the Ecopias that they are willing to throw them away and spend a lot more on another tire....

The Ecopias that came on the car were fine for what they were... Free tires that came on the car which gave the car OK performance.... They were not that bad that you had to dump them right away.

If you paid to have some new Ecopias put on the car, they are good, cheap tires (under $100 each). They are CERTAINLY not that bad that you need to sacrifice them and lose out on them...

I don't know why, but I think too many people seem to want to throw money out the window by prematurely replacing the car's tires, light bulbs, battery, and wiper blades with things that cost so much more than what is needed... MO.. wait until they wear out, and replace the old parts with good quality.. Its that easy.
 
This topic came up the other day when a few of us leaf owners were talking tires.

So what is the best ECO tire out there for EV’s in terms of max range etc. I actually thought the Ecopias were pretty good. Are the original ecopias better than the replacements or vice versa.

Thanks.
 
he OEM Ecopias are lower quality than the replacement Ecopias. Also the range loss can be very significant on other tires not to mention the weight of other tires. I took at least a 6% hit on the MXs.
 
I ordered the Contis and they have shipped, so I should get them on the car in a week, at most. Unfortunately, it is drying out today and is currently forecast to be sunny for the next week, so I probably won't have a chance to go time a few 0-40 runs with the Ecopias in the wet before they come off, or otherwise do any quantitative slip testing (repeatedly starting from the same uphill stop sign and looking at the power bubbles when the tires slip would probably be a pretty good test...if I could consistently get two more bubbles, that would be awesome; one would be acceptable).

Of course, I will store the Ecopias somewhere and either switch them on for summer (or get a spare set of wheels) if the range hit is bad enough, which I hope isn't the case, or more likely just save them until the Contis wear down and then return to the Ecopias. Maybe my wife will be less hostile to them then, since our kid won't be in the car as much in a couple of years. Some of the reviewers for the Contis are angry about how few miles they got relative to the rated mileage (which is not something I'm upset about, if they perform better as a result of a softer compound), so I may need the Ecopias! OTOH, we only drive about 9000 miles per year, so they'd have to wear REALLY badly to need them any time soon.

I will try to remember to report on them now and then. Lately, I have been averaging about 4.5 mi/kWh, and I expect to take about 0.5 just due to newness, since that was at least what my new Ecopias seemed to do. They seemed to be doing not much worse than the originals now; maybe 0.3 less by the long-term averages I see on the dashboard between resets. I will take that as a good reason to soften up the Contis by flinging the car around corners as much as possible (which isn't much, in Seattle, since the SDOT is working continually and vigorously to make the roads less fun, with the crazy idea that dead pedestrians and bicyclists are a bad thing (wink: I biked to work today, so cool your jets)).
 
I had less than 40,000 miles on the Continentals which had 70,000-mile warranty so Discount Tire gave me prorated credit when I bought the new Ecopias. I took at least 15% range hit going from OEM Michelins to the Continentals so I hope that doesn't impact you too much. I would be more concerned about wet braking and handling than acceleration from a stop. The Leaf has equal front/rear weight distribution and more torque than many front wheel drive cars so it is easy to spin the wheels on wet pavement when accelerating from a stop.
 
I am more concerned about braking, but wheelspin off the line seems like a less dramatic thing to try to test than piling into the ABS from some speed repeatedly. I expect (maybe incorrectly) that the tires will have similar relative performances in each of those tests, since it's just straight forward vs. straight backward force.
 
BuckMkII said:
I am more concerned about braking, but wheelspin off the line seems like a less dramatic thing to try to test than piling into the ABS from some speed repeatedly. I expect (maybe incorrectly) that the tires will have similar relative performances in each of those tests, since it's just straight forward vs. straight backward force.

My experience is that the sport performance Continentals and Michelin MXM4s do a bit better under wet acceleration than the Ecopias, but the Ecopias are as good under wet braking if the Ecopias are inflated to 44 psi. Weight transfer is away from the front wheels during acceleration, but toward the front when braking so the tire loading is completely different.
 
So, I have had the Contis on for a couple of weeks. My wife thinks they are better in wet acceleration. I'm actually not certain, myself. She'll be gone at a conference for a few days in early December. I'm tempted to try to do a couple of informal traction tests the first day, then have the shop swap the tires the second day and repeat the tests, if it is raining almost every day that week, which is likely. Rather a waste of money having the tires remounted twice in one week, but inquiring minds want to know!

The Firestone shop initially inflated the Continentals with a 3 PSI differential across the four wheels! :evil: I guess they were going for an average of 36, and were close to that, but :roll:

Dashboard average mileage on the Ecopias was consistently 4.7 mi/kWh, including a reset period covering just the beginning of this month. The Continetals are give 4.1 at 42 PSI cold. The weather here is degrading gradually, but difference in water on the road or climate control and headlight use hasn't been significant yet, particularly the first week or so they were on, so I would say that 13% loss is a pretty valid number.
 
Replaced Michelin's with Cooper Zeon RS3-G1 and after several hundred miles I can't see any difference in miles/kwh .. Handling is great, and they were 4 for 3 ...
 
tesleaf said:
If I go with non eco tires and save $160 for set of 4 tires and lose 6% efficiency it will take 8 years to start losing money.

Unless you need maximum range, then cost of public charging could make up the difference rather quickly (DCQC here in Phoenix ranges from $6.99 for Blink members to $9.99 for non members with EVgo costs falling between those extremes, depending upon host location).
 
Back
Top