Tyre Wear

[Sportingmac]

Originally Posted by frizz

Firstly Sportingmac, I think I would be better off taking my car to my local tyreweb who can do a full alignment check for 25 quid.
Travelling is mainly A roads and back lanes with plenty of corners and roundabouts. About 15% is motorway driving. I have Dunlop sportmax 295/35 R21's which I run at 44F 49R and generally leave the car in automatic.

Thanks for the data Frizz - useful. I note that you have set your tyre pressure to max (ie 5+ pers) - is that your call or the required setting? I have experimented with the max setting for a few thousand miles - and it seems to have slowed the rate of wear. I have set it back to the petrol cap settings for normal (35/35) and we shall see. It goes back to Audi on Tues for a few small adjustments - we'll see.

I noticed in the handbook that it tells you to set the tyre pressures as for full load (5+ pers) and this would be 45/49 - which is at odds with the petrol cap recommendations - anyone seen the same?

I have a printout from my local tyre dealer who did a free check for me - my settings on his machine showed my car to be way out - but Audi said their machine was OK.



Is your car new? and if so did the Dunlops come as OEM? I ask because my local dealer is talking about a set of these as replacement for my tyres (Oct 2007)

[frizz]

Sportingmac.
I bought my car S/hand with 6k on the clock. At 8k I swapped the tyres round( front to back as they are directional ) to extend tyre life.
It appears that the tyre pressures are correct according to the petrol cap info.
The car was new last April and came with the 21" wheels on as new, so I can only assume that the Dunlops were fitted as standard.

[Sportingmac]

Thanks for the information Frizz. One more question if I may - what is your normal suspension setting? Comfort/Automatic/Dynamic.

It would be a great case study if we all responded with settings/ tyre pressures /mileage and tyre size.

When I spoke t Goodyear they do not see the same problems with other vehicles fitted with their tyres - and I don't think that many other SUV's come with air suspension as standard - ?

So the theory goes like this: Comfort mode and tyre pressure F35 R35 is the worst mode for eating tyres as teh suspension is doing more work anf has more movement under those settings - but it is teh best for comfort.

Dynamic and F40 R42 is a stiffer set-up and helps with suspension movement and so can be controlled better - eats less tyres

So there is my 10p worth.

More research on suspension set-up under way - initial findings are that to have excellent control and stability I would need race type bushes on my suspension (i have that on my Cosworth and it is painful but brilliant) - I can't see Audi doing that - so hence the compromise - soft suspension and to hell with the tyres.

But you seem to have the best of both world - so I suspect your set-up is accurate and in accordance with the specifications. My beef is that I am certain that my set-up is not within spec.

[Quacker]

My suspension set-up is within spec and I have the before and after print-out from the four wheel alignment machine to prove it. It was a state of the art machine that measured each wheel individually including individual toe settings left and right, front and back.

I drive at 38 to 40psi with suspension always set to 'automatic'.
Tyres are now down to legal limit after 11500 miles. Indeed they might well verge on the illegal and will be changed in the next week.
Tyre brand is Pirelli P Zero Rosso.

Mate has just had his 'new' ex demo Mercedes GL today and it has 7500 miles on the clock. The tyres look like brand new.

[Disgruntled]

Having fought with Audi to resolve my tyre problems on my first Q7 I had done 13 - 14K on the new tyres without uneven or excessive tyre wear (and was happy) before I took delivery of my second car. At 3500 miles I noticed the uneven tyre wear and at 5000 it went in to be checked. It was confirmed that it was wearing tyres unevenly, however I was told it was within expectations and Audi would not even cover the cost of a geometry check.

With the usual explanations about how heavy the car is etc. I advised my neigbour's X5, with 21000 miles and tyres almost as new, and my friends X5 with 40 000 and original back tyres were also heavy I was told to google X5 tyre wear. Low and behold I found this forum. Enough said.

I want a car to drive and not fight over and after 5 consecutive Audi's I have had my last.

Anyone any suggestions for a reliable cost effective alternative please??

[Badger61]

I think you answered your own question there fella, get an X5, thanks for popping in for a whinge.

[Quacker]

Originally Posted by Disgruntled

Anyone any suggestions for a reliable cost effective alternative please??

The secret of having a cost effective car is to buy it right. Also to buy small. However I think you may want a big expensive car really I had a X5 and it was good and solid but suffered one or two electrical problems. Generally liked it and wouldn't hesitate having another. Same goes for the Range Rover and that must make the Discovery a contender. The Mercedes ML was appallingly badly finished but mate's new GL which I saw today looks to be in a different league.
Its a great pity that such an otherwise great car like the Q7 should be blighted by one issue that spoils it for so many people. If Audi made an effort to sort it out then everyone would be happy. Apparently they are either not interested or cannot cost effectively cure the issue. It is an issue that is obviously well known to them but one which they choose to claim isn't real.

At the end of the day it is only a tin can and as such can be disposed of without emotion. To be emotional about it would be illogical. Its a nice car to drive and very nice looking in my opinion but at the end of the day the flaw is fatal to its long term ownership prospects.
How much per ton is scrap these days?

[Disgruntled]

Originally Posted by Quacker

At the end of the day it is only a tin can and as such can be disposed of without emmotion. To be emmotional about it would be illogical. Its a nice car to drive and very nice looking in my opinion but at the end of the day the flaw is fatal to its long term ownership prospects.

Thanks for the reply.

Absolutely no emotion involved and it can be disposed of without any, however it can't be disposed of without financial considerations and on this count it would probably be more cost effective to put new tyres on it more often and keep it. This is when emotion becomes an issue in driving a car that the manufacturer refuses to be responsible for and not doing so certainly has an acceptable cost (just to decide how much).

My real frustration stems from the fact my first Q7 was cured and they refuse to even check the geometry on this one. I also prefer it to the X5 and would rather they cure it than drive an X5.

Another option may be to pay Audi for the geometry check and let them adjust it (even if they tell me it was fine to prevent covering the cost).


Anyone out there legally challenged 'fit for purpose'?

[Sportingmac]

I am thinking of sending a letter to Michael **** - who is Audi Board Member for Technical Development. It appears to be his department that is responsible for quality and technical innovation. Suspect that it will be batted back by one of his legal team with a holding letter that will take years ti interpret - but it might be worth it. Q7 sales for 2007 was 21,000 so there maust be a lot of pissed-off teddy bears out there - or a whole lot of people who have either sold up PDQ or are just shelling out. Or maybe we are only the few who have issues.

Whatever - I'll let you know how we progress. As for BMW X5 - no chance. And as for emotion - can't afford it and rarely use it. But logic and market depreciation rates dictate that it is worth holding for 2 years and trading in then.

[Disgruntled]

Interesting comment re 2 year optimum period for trade in, what would you anticipate losing?

I certainly have learned of Q7 owners that have simply changed tyres without question, so I don't think we are few in numbers with the problem, just in voice.

I can appreciate legal challenges might take too long and be too expensive, however could we not play a plublicity card with the view of putting pressure on the manufacturer as a whole?

Must be some Q7 owners int he legal profession?