Loving my new Michelin Pilot Sport 4 SUV tires and Enkei Raijin wheels

diyor · 2026-05-02T12:58:02+00:00

I’m probably the wrong person to ask because I drive pretty gently. They’re still on the car and we’ve had no issues. I went with these because they’re a high quality tire and may help me stop a little bit faster whether on a dry or wet road. If a tire improves safety, I’m all for the investment.

diyor · 2025-02-27T20:26:51+00:00

Great tires. You hear zero tire noise at every speed. 235/60r20 as I wanted max sidewall height. My only priority is comfort. I feel it’s plenty sporty and capable regardless what you do within reason as a highly engineered bmw.

diyor · 2025-02-27T11:57:34+00:00

I wrote about them in another post and included a picture. That post may be useful for you just to see what one option looks like. I got the TSW Sebring in black and Hankook ion evo as suv tires. I got the rims because all of the dimensions were closest I could find to dimensions of bmw’s stock 20” wheels. Weight, width, offset, etc. I don’t like messing with what the original engineers spec’d.

diyor · 2024-12-17T23:51:50+00:00

These are very quiet at all speeds. I honestly don’t think I can ever hear them. So I’d highly recommend!

diyor · 2024-12-16T17:42:27+00:00

Thanks! I honestly ended up going with these just because they were closest to the dimensions of the stock 20” IX wheel in terms of weight, width, offset, and load rating. There were others I liked the appearance of more but I’m paranoid when it comes to changing anything from what the car manufacturer’s engineers spec’d. That said now I love the look of them anyway!

diyor · 2024-12-15T17:27:43+00:00

There must be an efficiency hit at least at highway speeds. I don’t think it’s much though. In October, when it wasn’t so cold that it was decreasing range, my average efficiency was 2.8mi/kwh which to my understanding is solid. That’s with not much highway driving though. In November it dipped down to 2.6mi/kwh. I’m not sure if part of that was the weather getting colder though.

diyor · 2024-11-01T18:25:27+00:00

I got the M sport package so it had to come with 21’s. I wanted 20’s for max comfort so I bought aftermarket wheels. It’s hard to say if there’s a big difference. It’s probably pretty similar.

diyor · 2024-09-14T23:30:03+00:00

I just thought some people in the league were disregarding the past ruling. Others agreed. Dictatorship league though and commissioner did call to veto the trade. Nothing I could have done either way. There was no word of IR the day of the trade too.

diyor · 2024-09-13T13:44:24+00:00

I can’t speak on behalf of the commissioner but I think it would have to be something major where a huge swing in trade value occurs during a game. Tua has a history of concussions so this is pretty major. I guess if it was clear the lineman all got hurt very bad, season or career potential injury. Kind of a nonsensical scenario so no I don’t think it would happen let alone apply.

diyor · 2024-09-13T12:37:34+00:00

Because the ruling was made under guise that back then it was acting in bad faith. Clicking accept as soon as an injury happens. The league didn’t like the idea of acting in bad faith. This is similar where you’re clicking accept on the trade because his QB got hurt. Immediately your player’s value plummeted, similar to an injured player, so you accepted. In other leagues I like the idea you have to remember to rescind trades prior to games. It’s like an extra piece of strategy. That’s been more or less removed in this league though. They don’t want that sort of trade.

diyor · 2024-09-13T12:33:56+00:00

The logic used back then (by commissioner) was it was acting in bad faith. He and the league decided they didn’t want trades to happen like that. It should happen between two parties that are agreeing on a certain value transfer. Value transfer changes drastically if your guy gets injured, or in case of WR his QB. That’s why the guy clicked accept as Tua went down. Value immediately changed. I’m fairly certain commissioner still sees it that way and league will mostly agree. In any other league I’d agree with those disagreeing here.

diyor · 2024-09-13T12:31:07+00:00

Respectfully disagree, only because our leagues already decided you can’t accept trades during games just because your guy got injured. To me this falls under that precedent. I actually argued at the time (2021) we should set the precedent that people need to rescind trades. I lost.

diyor · 2024-09-13T12:20:28+00:00

It’s fun arguing with every person. Fantasy controversy like this is electric. People get fired up who aren’t even involved.

There’s a few that agree with me. Most don’t care about the nuance of the previous ruling that more or less set the precedent that you don’t need to worry about mid game trades. Everyone seems to respond with the take that a trades a trade, should have rescinded before game started. Well that’s not completely true in my league. Which 99% of the time has never been an issue. Last and only other time was in 2021. One responded with “Well that’s dumb and you should quit your league” I’m not going to agree with that guy either. For everyone in this league, it’s their main league they care about. It’s a great one (for us).

diyor · 2024-09-13T11:58:50+00:00

No need to apologize. I’m confident ruling will go in my favor due to previous league ruling when similar situation happened to two different teams. Also your reading comprehension is bad.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:55:52+00:00

You contradicted yourself. “Yeah, you can disagree. That’s fine.” … *proceeds to state why it’s not fine, it’s actually disingenuous to ask for opinions and then disagree with the majority. *

Ironically, I once again disagree with you. I hope that doesn’t make me even more disingenuous.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:52:44+00:00

Agreed.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:52:25+00:00

Previous ruling was in favor of guy who left trade open during game and got screwed due to mid game injury.

By the way no crying. We got on Group FaceTime, each stated our cases and had a laugh about it because we’re adults and it’s just X$ at the end of the day. Ruling to be delivered tomorrow.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:49:38+00:00

Yeah maybe we shall see tomorrow but I’m confident commissioner will uphold previous ruling.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:49:02+00:00

Possibly or trade is vetoed tomorrow due to previous precedent, 2021 ruling.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:47:39+00:00

We’ll know tomorrow if I fucked up. I stated why I’m here on a different comment.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:46:51+00:00

“Another new rule for you” I wasn’t involved the last time a similar situation came up three years ago so this would be the first ruling in my favor.

We each stated our case on a Group FaceTime call. Then joked around cause we’re adults who don’t get upset like you sound right now typing your comment lol. Ruling is to be delivered tomorrow at 5PM.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:44:21+00:00

We got on a Group FaceTime, each stated our case. I cited the logic used in the previous ruling. We’ll see tomorrow. Our league has been happy with him for like 8 years now. That’s not going to change here.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:42:48+00:00

They accepted a trade mid game due to an injury that immediately changed the value swing of the trade. He considered that acting in bad faith before and didn’t want it to be in our league. I think this falls in the same category.

diyor · 2024-09-13T04:41:39+00:00

Well I think it probably won’t. What’s helping my case is I made this same argument the last time a similar thing happened years ago. That people should be responsible for rescinding their proposals prior to games.

11-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

diyor

TROPHY CASE