Tyre mystery
Our Mercedes-benz C63 AMG (W204) weighs 1810kg and delivers 493bhp through its rear wheels. We get 2228mpg, so take that as not driving ridiculously hard, and those tyres last 6000 miles at the rear and 12,000 at the front. Non-factory-approved Yokohamas last 15% longer (and are quieter and work better in the wet).
Our Polestar 2 weighs nearer 2300kg and has 408bhp and 4WD. I don’t stint in using its performance. At 15,000 miles, its Polestar-specific Michelin Primacy 5 tyres are only 45% worn. I predict 30,000 miles at the rear and 32,000 at the front.
It really hasn’t been the outcome expected – that the heaviest of the many cars we’ve owned should be almost the best ever for tyre life.
Are the Pirellis too soft for their own good? Are the Michelins exceptionally good? Does 4WD make the difference? Are Polestar engineers at the top of their game on suspension design?
Neil Osborn
Via email
The C63 probably has P Zeros, which are performance tyres. Primacys are everyday tyres so are likely to have lesser grip. The 4WD of the Polestar and EV torque delivery will mask that under acceleration. 4WD is generally better than RWD for the rear tyres but worse for the fronts. The Polestar’s tyres will be harder, because rolling resistance is absolutely key to the efficiency of EVS. All this means the soft Pirellis (or Yokohamas) will wear more quickly. I also imagine sidewall stiffness and recommended inflation pressures give the C63 bigger contact patches, a minor factor. But also, yes, probably Michelin is the world’s best tyre maker – MP