Regenerative Braking Drive Modes Gimmicky?

I agree the tire wear is minimally different depending on B vs D modes. Also, don't forget these cars do not have high performance race tires. The tires are long wearing, low rolling resistance tires and are thus hard tires (not sticky quick wearing rubber found on summer racing tires) that last a long time. They may last so long that you'll need to replace them from sunlight damage before they run out of tread.

f1geek said:

I agree the tire wear is minimally different depending on B vs D modes. Also, don't forget these cars do not have high performance race tires. The tires are long wearing, low rolling resistance tires and are thus hard tires (not sticky quick wearing rubber found on summer racing tires) that last a long time. They may last so long that you'll need to replace them from sunlight damage before they run out of tread.

Click to expand...

I drive my e-Golf as gentle as I do my Passat TDI or my Touareg. The 2012 Touareg has 43k miles on the factory Goodyear LS 2 tires and is reading 7/32 of an inch, 11/32 when new. The Passat is reading 9/32, 11/32" when new, on the Continentals with 37k miles on it. My 2015 e-Golf with Bridgestone Ecopias Plus has 10,500 miles on it, tires were 11/32 new, worst of 4 VW's that I own. I used to use "B" mode exclusively. Not any more, as I can see feathering on the trailing edges of the tire blocks, and it's from braking, not acceleration. I use all 4 tires to brake now. YMMV, I don't see myself getting even 40k miles out of a set of tires on the e-Golf, not the way they are wearing now, with a 3450 # car with heavy battery on ultra skinny tires with lots of silica rubber in the tread for economy.

JoulesThief said:

Take a physics course, then think about braking with all 4 tires versus only 2.

Click to expand...

I use B mode frequently because I drive mostly in the city, and despite not rotating the tires for over 11k miles (there's almost 12k on the car now), there's only a 1/32 difference in tread depth between the front and rear pairs. And that can be easily attributed to the fact that FWD cars are much harder on front tires than RWD/AWD ones simply because of both the pronounced frontal weight bias as well as the fact that on a FWD car the front tires have to do most of the work.

I'm not getting the feathering problems that you are, and I'm also on the OEM Bridgestone Ecopias.

Given that the total amount of force necessary to slow the vehicle would be the same, this is a non-issue. Any difference in the wear of the regenerative breaking tires vs the non-braking tires would be accounted for in rotating the tires.

Any questioning of JT's driving style or belief system, however, results in an inexplicable increase in the amount of snark generated in his replies, which cannot be explained by "taking a physics class" (although a psychology class might help.) :lol:

Some of the RWD electric cars - Tesla & BMW i3 in particular since optional wheels & tires have staggered sizing which can't be rotated between F&R - seem to chew through rear tires and one theory attributes that to this drivetrain configuration's extra rear tire scrubbing under hard regen deceleration as weight shifts forward (since those cars are capable of greater regen than e-golf and the i3 has skinny tires), similar to how high-powered (and thus high-engine braking) motorcycles wear their rear tires even for riders who accelerate gingerly.

The e-golf will load its front tires more under decel which may reduce scrubbing and the standard tires can be rotated between all 4 corners, anyway.

Compare cost of brake pads versus cost of tires on an e-Golf, installed. Don't think I've ever turned or replaced rotors on any vehicle I have owned.

JoulesThief said:

Compare cost of brake pads versus cost of tires on an e-Golf, installed. Don't think I've ever turned or replaced rotors on any vehicle I have owned.

Click to expand...

And nor will you on the cars with 'B' mode.

Though, I guess you don't own cars very long because brake maintenance is definitely something you have to do after 40k.

Considering the manual requires you to change brake fluid at 30k, I would be surprised that you weren't sold a brake pad change at the same time.

forbin404 said:

JoulesThief said:

Compare cost of brake pads versus cost of tires on an e-Golf, installed. Don't think I've ever turned or replaced rotors on any vehicle I have owned.

Click to expand...

And nor will you on the cars with 'B' mode.

Though, I guess you don't own cars very long because brake maintenance is definitely something you have to do after 40k.

Considering the manual requires you to change brake fluid at 30k, I would be surprised that you weren't sold a brake pad change at the same time.

Click to expand...

I've never gotten less than 110 to 120k miles on a set of front brake pads from my 81 jetta Coupe Diesel brand new, to my Audi 5000 turbodiesel brand new, to my 96 passat tdi, 2002 Jetta TDI GLS, and all had over 200k miles on them when I sold them, save the 81 jetta coupe that someone T boned me in running a red light with about 120k miles on it. It was getting near time to do the brakes, I'd had the timing belt done at 80k and it had 7mm of brake pad left on the front when they did the timing belt. They too tried to sell me a brake job.

All German cars above.

My 87 Toyota 4x4 Xtra Cab SR5, on the other hand, would make 40k on a set of front pads. Never did the rear brakes in 232k miles. Fronts, every 40k. The Toyota ate pads. I put new rotors on the front of that one at about 165k miles with the pads.

YMMV. I drive slow and steady, tortoise style, making mostly green lights on surface streets and steady on the freeway. I let many hares pass me, only for me to pass them again in traffic driving smoothly.

JoulesThief said:

My 87 Toyota 4x4 Xtra Cab SR5, on the other hand, would make 40k on a set of front pads. Never did the rear brakes in 232k miles. Fronts, every 40k. The Toyota ate pads. I put new rotors on the front of that one at about 165k miles with the pads.

Click to expand...

You must have been driving it wrong then, because the ones on my '89 Toyota 4x4 lasted MUCH longer than 40k. Either that, or the calipers were defective (like the right front one on my '86 Nissan Hardbody 2WD was).

RonDawg said:

JoulesThief said:

My 87 Toyota 4x4 Xtra Cab SR5, on the other hand, would make 40k on a set of front pads. Never did the rear brakes in 232k miles. Fronts, every 40k. The Toyota ate pads. I put new rotors on the front of that one at about 165k miles with the pads.

Click to expand...

You must have been driving it wrong then, because the ones on my '89 Toyota 4x4 lasted MUCH longer than 40k. Either that, or the calipers were defective (like the right front one on my '86 Nissan Hardbody 2WD was).

Click to expand...

Yeah, I must have. Raybestos lifetime pads, red backing. Take them back to Beck Arnley, get a free new set, install. Clean and lube the pins and bolts the calipers glide on. Hauling around a bunch of tools and lumber all the time, with a construction rack on the shell as a general contractor.

JoulesThief said:

Hauling around a bunch of tools and lumber all the time, with a construction rack on the shell as a general contractor.

Click to expand...

Well, having a big load in the bed all of the time is going to make a difference in brake life, as well as that of the tires. So 40k/set is not "eating" brakes under those conditions.