Alan_P

@xman Load transfer is yet another variable which actually supports having as balanced a set of tyres possible. It’s also not the only thing affecting load, grip or the distribution of traction. If you’re suggesting it’s the only factor or somehow mitigates the use of mixed capability tyres, we will have to agree to differ, again. You posted some info from Michelin so hopefully you accept their findings and not only when it suits. Have a look at the “Can you mix winter and summer tyres” and “Fitting different tyres on the same axle” sections: https://www.michelin.co.uk/auto/advice/choose-tyres/mixing-tyres Here is a little safety video from them with a demo covering traction and inertia (some other variables): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaXXrKFJctU Anyway, I’m complicit in continuing to hijack this thread and this is my last post. In some areas it has degraded into providing anecdotal, singular driving experiences as evidence. Written statements of bizarre “testing” and brake checking people for tailgating is certainly evidence, but not of the type that was intended, I think.

@J.R. and @xman I don’t know how else to explain it, but I’ll give it a try with a simple example: Hopefully everyone agrees that given the same conditions and speed, a car of a fixed mass generates a set amount of lateral force when taking a corner or bend in the road? When tyres with the same amount of grip are fitted, this force is distributed (relatively) evenly and the work is split. In this scenario, when the car starts to lose traction, the mass is distributed anywhere from 60/40 up to 50/50, front to rear for most modern cars. With the outer tyres doing more of the work obviously. When tyres of mixed capabilities are fitted, this same force is distributed unevenly at the point of losing grip. What was previously a relatively even share of the work has changed because the tyre with superior grip is nowhere near losing traction. The tyre(s) with lower (weaker) grip now has to deal with more mass and loses traction faster than it would do previously. A sort of pendulum effect. Bumps, potholes, and spillages on the road can further exacerbate the issue. You guys are obviously experienced, well above average drivers so this only applies to other road users. When I mention mixed capabilities, I’m referring to winter or all-season tyres mixed with summer tyres. Apologies for using industry accepted “summer” terminology. A full set of “summer” tyres is safer than mixing winter or all-season tyres with summer tyres during winter conditions IMO. I’m more than happy for someone to actually explain why they think this is wrong, or I suppose you can just call it “nonsense” and “tosh” again. As I said before, it’s probably best that we just agree to differ, especially as one of you seem to think winter tyres, or their benefits, are a myth.

Yes, as I said, I think it’s safer than running mixed tyre types. Having winter tyres on the front and summers at the rear might get you up an icy driveway easier than a full set of summers, but handling and braking is negatively affected on the road. Not to mention keeping ESC sane, if and when it’s needed. Just to clarify, mass loads up on the weaker tyre(s) and causes it to lose grip even faster than it would do normally. Not only are you unbalancing the car, but you are making a poorly performing tyre even worse than it would be normally. You might get away with it, but increasing braking distance and creating oversteer or understeer where it didn’t exist before is not advisable IMO. I don’t have access to the stats, but maybe people running on a space saver for short periods is safer overall than those who don’t have a spare and sit at the side of the road or even block a lane while they wait for recovery.

It’s probably best that we agree to differ with regards to mixing tyres. I consider having winter/all season tyres at the front and summer tyres at the rear (or vice versa) at temps below 8c to be dangerous. Even worse if it was mixed across an axle. The mismatch in performance and grip is much worse than having summer or winter tyres all round IMO. I appreciate you're an advanced and experienced driver who can dramatically lower your speeds and increase braking distances, but I personally prefer my car to brake and steer as well as possible instead of driving around a safety issue I created. Especially when I can’t moderate how other road users drive around me. This is before we consider ECS/ABS implications or having to convince an insurance assessor that an accident wasn’t due to a mix of 3PMSF and summer tyres. I sometimes borrow a fiends mk2 Capri for a nostalgic Sunday drive. It takes me back to my teens when I had a 3.0s on barely legal 30yo tyre technology. Roundabouts in the rain were hilarious, but I don’t want even 10% of that for a daily driver now.

I think the original CrossClimate are perfectly suited to the UK weather. It depends on your usage, but the CrossClimate 2 swings back a little too much to ice/snow grip with a loss of general handling IMO. It might indicate they going to push the Pilot Sport All Season 4 to the UK, which would be great. In saying all that, I feel CrossClimate 2 is still the best option overall. I often see comparisons people make with the absolute best winter tyres and the very top performance summer tyres, but are these people also swapping back and forth several times a year to enjoy these gains? We’ve had weeks of double figure temps followed by weeks of 4-6c during the day since the start of the year in Scotland. I would prefer to be on a CrossClimate than a Pilot Sport at 5c or a Pilot Alpin at 15c. With the UK temp swings in Winter/Spring/Autumn, you would have to be pretty active to be on the perfect tyre at all times of the year if you swap between winters and summer tyres at every +-8c change. I've seen posts from people slamming all season tyres who still run the older factory Cinturato P7 tyres. Check the stats of your summer tyre before hating on all seasons: https://www.tyrereviews.com/Tyre/Pirelli/Cinturato-P-7-Ecoimpact.htm https://www.tyrereviews.com/Tyre/Michelin/CrossClimate-2.htm Video review including Pilot Sport All Season: https://youtu.be/421HkK4Nqss?si=ChXsGoHBH-nT8VOs Sorry for the hijack and not much use to the OP, but I was following the all season talk. CrossClimate are expensive and you cannot gradually change to all season. I personally wouldn't like to mix tyre brands, let alone a dangerous mix of summer and all season. The Tyre Reviews channel I linked above has good reviews of the best budget tyres though. Hankook always seem to do well with price to performance.

I retrofitted the camera and discovered the issue. I used an OEM camera and it’s supposedly the same connections used when factory fitted. I’m sure my removal and (initial) reconnection contributed in my case, but it took a year after fitting to happen and it’s a really easy thing to try. The glovebox pops out/down very quickly and you can reach up to the quad block at the back of the head unit. I’m not sure about the dealer relevance, but I had a constant fault and it was easy to diagnose/fix. If you have an intermittent issue, the dealer might not be able to do much unless it’s creating a code.

I had this issue a while back and the blue block on the head unit connection just needed reseated (above glovebox). It’s been fine for over a year now:

Mine are still working with no issues

Understandable, but I just wonder if it could also be contributing to premature water pump failure. Maybe blocking the matrix or the abundance of silica damages the seals?

Have you checked if it’s burst/leaking? Unfortunately you can’t check with some double walled tanks, but I just wonder if a leaking bag can do more damage than blocking the matrix.

Can I ask anyone who had a pump failure if you previously removed the silica bag from your expansion tank? If not, did you notice if it had split?

That’s strange, almost the reverse of my situation with lower voltage but good cranking amps. To be fair, I never get the slightest hesitation at turnover even in cold weather or any errors. I also never use start-stop though. An AGM should perform better than a standard battery in cold weather so it might be a good candidate for a charger than has a desulphation cycle or at least a recondition mode. I resurrected an old Clarke 900 jump starter with a Ctek MXS 5.0 about 6 months ago that was refusing a charge from another smart charger and the simple Clarke charger. IIRC the Ctek was in the initial desulphation cycle for about an hour before going on to fully charge it.

I just tested with bonnet open and then closed and there is no difference. Both give a reading of 12.43v after the car hasn’t been running for nearly a week. It made me question the reading on Tuesday (12.3v) so I tried another multimeter and it gave 12.44v so well within tolerances. It’s not a permanent drain given the reading today so I either didn’t lock the car or didn’t give it a full 30min on Tuesday. Anyway, it seems much better than the ~12.2v I was getting prior to the full recharge and battery reset. Thanks for all the info and I will keep an eye on it.

Do you mean with the bonnet open/closed or just in general? I will be able to check the comparison on my car in a few days.

It’s always at least a day after any charging before I take a reading. I leave the bonnet open, lock the car then leave it at least 30 min before testing. It might not be perfect, but I really don’t want to disconnect the battery.

I would be really interested in what resting voltage other owners get and if they use start-stop. I wonder if changing the temp or voltage threshold with VCDS would be better than manually disabling start-stop.

I recently had similar concerns with my battery. I have a LUKAS LK-290 power management device feeding dash cams. It cuts the power at 12.6v so the battery never deep cycles. For years it gave an hour or two of recording after ignition off, but I noticed a few months back that the cams were not running on at all any more. This could have been going on for quite a while to be fair given the last year. It’s a Varta AGM that’s nearly 4 years old so just presumed it was on the way out or just needed a good charge due to lack of use. I threw a multimeter on and the resting voltage was 12.2 which is not great. No warning lights, error codes or even the slightest hesitation at turnover. I had a friend put it on their workshop Bosch tester (see attached) and it came back as good but needing charged. It’s also putting out a very healthy 803 cranking amps (rated at 680) which explains why there is no hesitation and no dead cells. It’s levelling 11.84v on turnover with a minimum drop of 8.9v which is fine for a low charge state. I gave it a two day charge with CTEK MXS 5.0 (recon enabled) and everything seemed fine, it didn’t detect any sulfation and no errors. I checked the resting voltage a day later without having used the car and it was a healthy 12.9v. I tested it again a day after using the car a few times through the week during daytime with no heavy load and the resting voltage was back to 12.4. For whatever reason, battery management is deciding not to fully charge the battery, not even to 80%. I told the system the battery was swapped out by changing the last digit, but it’s still the same. I notice the alternator initially goes to boost for around 30 sec of 14.6-14.8v then drops back to ~13v even after the battery reset. I just went out to test and resting voltage is 12.3v after not using it for 3 days so it's low but there doesn't seem to be a drain. I understand this might be normal, but it didn’t behave like this before. I don't have figures from a few years ago, but I think the lack of dash cam run on indicates something is different. I can’t work out why management has decided to keep it at ~60% instead of 80-90% charged. I have always manually disabled start-stop every time I use the car and now wondering if it actually causes a problem.

From what I read, coolant change is not on the service schedule... in the UK anyway. It’s a lifetime item because of the bag/cartridge. G12evo doesn’t appear to have lifetime silica either so I just wonder if it’s an oversight or the schedule includes a coolant change now.

Are cars coming from the factory with a revised tank... no bag or cartridges? Do they get an altered service schedule to include a coolant change?

So do new models with a revised tank (no bag or cartridges) get an altered service schedule to include a coolant change?

I have the singled walled version (visible bag) and I’m now planning to remove it. Are people going for the new tank revision because they currently have the double walled/inaccessible version or because it has cartridges that don’t leak? Also, if I remove the bag today on a 3.5 year old car (15k miles) will it give 5 years before flush/replace is needed or does the bag silica dissipate faster?

Even the flexible schedule should request at a maximum of around 2 years... regardless of very low miles. It would be best to get it done to simplify any future warranty claims and not give them an easy way out. A good independent garage is an option for servicing though.

Mine were 300mm... the 310mm are vented and supposedly fit too though.

Mine were pretty bad and the nearside had even started to thump, but they would have passed: I went with Pagid (£98) for the zinc coating and general quality, but I could have got cheap Eicher pads and discs for around £50. If I didn’t have a friend with a garage I would have done them myself and you could get Carista for a one month sub... much cheaper than VCDS obviously.

They were the correct discs and pads... thanks again @D402 No specialist tools needed, but even with the parking brake off it needs to be electronically relaxed for winding in. Forcing it will cause damage. My friend used a high end Bosch diag unit, but obviously Carista would be better for a one off. I know it’s only 14k miles total and not being used as much recently, but I'm still out twice a week for city driving. Inside of the discs were quite bad and pads were almost gone: