Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Nissan Maxima



  • bowke28bowke28 Posts: 2,185
    i drive different ones every day, and ALL have torque steer. this is not bad as long as you expect it. mostly, it is in a str8 line.
  • This is in response to austinman7. My 2004 maxima SL has 2000 miles on it and is two months old. The vibration and noise in the front end is terrible. On local roads the problem is when you are driving over small bumps on a straight drive.Increasing the speed such on highway's the car rides smoothly.
  • joecrash, p100, jbadams, bowke28, and langer3...

    Thanks so much for your input on torque steer and related handling issues. Sounds like something that would bother me, but I'll reserve final judgement until I drive it.

    Perplexing to me that Nissan engineers, as good as they are, let this get by them. I know torque steer is not unique to the 2004 Maxima, but it does seem to be more pronounced. I remember noticing this a little with a 96 Buick Regal I had, but not at all with my current '02 v6 Camry.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    I wonder if defective front struts are not your problem. Or they could be poorly matched to the vehicle's front suspension. Personally, I am very disappointed with these problems with the new Maxima. I mentioned several times that I came very close to buying a new 03 SE but walked away when I noticed vibration around 60 MPH in two vehicles at two different dealerships. I realized that this was no coincidence and that Nissan has chronic problems with their Bridgestone tires. I will not even consider a new 04 until they work out the bugs, which I believe will take at least a year. As a rule, I do not buy first year redesigned models of any car, especially those made first year in the US, no matter how attractive the car or price.
  • This is a response to my message 7356. I took my car to the dealer's sevice dept and was taken for a road test.They said there was a problem with the front right stabilizer link. they have to order a part to replace. I am not sure what this means but it will be done next week. Stay tuned.
  • Hey all...

    36K on an 02 Max, and time to finally get rid of the stock tires. Since we all know the size is limited to only a couple of options for tires, has anyone gone Plus 0 to 235/50/17? Current size is 215/55/17. I've checked the differences in size and it is almost a perfect match. Anyone here upsized? I'm planning to get Michelin Pilot Sport A/S tires, which is a HUGE improvement from stock. Just curious if anyone else has.

  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    Michelin Pilots are certainly great tires, but be prepared to replace them quickly - especially V and Z rated versions. I have P205-60HR15 size on my Mazda 626 and they are just about worn out after 30K miles. And I rotate my tires regularly. If I had not rotated them, the front ones would have been finished by 20K mile mark. Expect 25K or less miles for V or Z rated versions. Pilots are also rather noisy, but provide outstanding grip and handling potential.

    For comparison, the original Toyo Proxess tires on my 98 Maxima SE (size P215-55HR16 )lasted almost 60K miles. Because of low speed limits in this country I believe that V and Z rated tires are a waste of money. H rating is good for sustained 130 MPH driving. How many of us do that?
  • Michelin Pilot Sport A/S come in stock size 225/55/17. I don't remember but isn't the stock size 225/55/17 unless you have the GLE which is a different size? That's what my '02 SE has. I bought the Pilot Sport a/s and love them. Yes, they were pricey but the wet grip is outstanding. There's NO comparison between the original Potenzas and the Michelins.
  • Good timing on this subject as I bought a set of 4 of the Pilots yesterday. I own an '01 SE, (automatic) and could have gone up to winter with the Potenzas but they were getting scary in the rain - got 29,000 out of them after having rotated every 7,000 miles.
    I do not know where the noise issue comes from with the Pilots because I don't hear it. I read of a harsher ride as well but, man - the ride is soooo much smoother and comfortable than ever with the Potenzas. These tires look real serious as well. As I mentioned above I just bought them yesterday so I do not have much more feedback than that but they do seem more "responsive" to even a simple lane change on the highway than the OEMs. I can't wait till it rains as these are supposed to be about the best,(THE best in 225 50 17) that you're going to find.
    Expensive, yes but if rotated every 5,000 miles, 30,000 should not be a problem. They have a much higher treadwear rating than the Potenzas, something like 400 to 140.
    I have 36 psi in the front and 34 in the rear - I'll see how that goes for awhile.
    My total cost - $892.52 including 4 tires, ballance, valves, alignment, tax and a 5% discount for AAA membership. I negotiated $199.99 per tire.
    Yeah - hopefully they'll last.
    BTW - there is no warranty for the treadwear as these are "ultra high performance" tires.
  • ....if you buy 4 Michelins B4 9/27, you get a free JVC DVD player. Not bad.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    I need a set of tires for my Nissan SE V6 truck -Michelin LTX M/S tires (size P235-75R15) are almost worn out after 74,000 miles. This is the highest mileage I ever got out of any set of tires on any vehicle.
  • Yeah, the Sept. deadline for the DVD player is also forcing my hand. I have had Pilot sports before, on my 00 GLE, and they were awesome. With that tire change I also lowered the car with eibach spring and tokico struts. Made a huge difference in handling and stability. The pilots that time were the standard ones, not the a/s models. Ended up getting an 02 GLE and have so far run it up to 36K on the Touranzas. I checked the size dif. for the 235/50/17, and it is almost identical to the the oem size of 215/55/17.

    I agree that they are expensive and don't have the typical warranty, but the quality is worth it.

    Take a look at the HUGE difference between the Pilot Sport's A/S and the stock Touranza's.

    You get what you pay for. I agree, V and Z rated tires are useless in this country, but these tires are for exceptional handling in all weather.


    As you can see...the Pilots beat stock across the board. WELL worth the money. Think I'll probably buy them from Tire rack, and get them drop shipped. I checked with the local stores for stock and price, and the lowest price I found was $269 for the Pilots, WITHOUT mounting. Talk about gouging the customer. It's much cheaper to have them drop shipped to a local place.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    There is a lot of price gouging going on with other Michelin tires as well. For example, the price for a P235-75R15 LTX M/S truck tire ranges anywhere from $ 112 to $ 160 or more in Central Florida. Sam's club has decent prices on Michelin tires, as they had the lowest price I could find for the above tires. And they do not rip you off on mounting and balancing, which some tire stores do (they sell you the tires at a reasonable price, but out the door you pay a lot more than you thought was a good deal).

    Even though V and Z rated tires are expensive, they dissipate heat very well and are least likely to fail from excessive heat buildup.
  • habitat1 - you have electricity over there is Rockville?
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    Since hurricane Andrew caused over $ 20 billion worth of damage in Florida in the early nineties, the home insurance rates have risen sky high in Florida. Premiums have just about quadrupled and the coverages now have 2% to 5% deductible for hurricane damage, instead of standard $ 200 or $ 500 deductible for all perils. I wonder if the rates will go up in the states hit by the latest hurricane. Fortunately, the damage assessment is nowhere near that of what Andrew caused.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    We live in DC - Chevy Chase area - and were fortunate to get power back on Saturday. Two blocks away, they never lost power; two blocks in another direction, they're still in the dark.

    What about you?
  • Seems like a lot of people are getting around 30k on there Maxima tires before having to replace them. I have never yet, had to replace a tire before 40k on any car I have owned. I have the stock Good Year Eagle RSAs on my '02 Max. Have 39k on them and a ton of tread left. Above someone mentioned that they expect to get 30k on their Pilots. For the money you spend on them I would hope to get at least 50k. For $800 I would expect to get 30k if I floored it off the line at every stop sign, slammed on the brakes at every stop sign, and cornered every turn on two wheels!
  • We're across the Potomac in Mitchellville. Lost no power this time although we have several trees down and my back yard is like a swamp. In the storm three weeks ago we lost power for 3 days. I went to Home Depot in Annapolis and got one of the last 4 generators. I didn't need it this time.
  • p100p100 Posts: 1,116
    Just because a tire is expensive does not mean it will last long. In fact high speed ratings and expected tire tread life are inversely proportional.

    Z rated tires, for example will wear the fastest because the rubber compounds are a lot softer in those tires than in regular S,T, or H rated tires. They are also thinner in cross section to dissipate the heat better. V rated tires are somewhere inbetween.

    It is not unusual to wear out a set of Z rated tires in 18K miles or less. I have talked about this to a foreign car repair shop owner who does a lot of work on very expensive German cars. He has seen these car owners go through expensive tires very frequently. Some of these tires are over $ 300 a piece.

    I have not been impressed with wear on Michelin Pilots. I had these installed on my Mazda 626 V6 and never spun the tires once. They have high tread wear rating but they are essentially worn out after 30K miles. I just talked to somebody who claims to have over 58K miles on a set of Michelin energy MXV tires on their Honda Accord V6. Go figure.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I agree with p100 on a couple of points:

    First, in general, the higher the performance rating of a tire, the lower the treadlife. Exacerbating that is that in many cases, high performace cars have staggered front and rear wheels that prohibit tire rotation.

    Second, while I appreciate the desire to get the most performance out of a FWD Maxima, the wheels and tires can only do so much. And a good quality "H" rated tire, IMO, is about the most anyone really needs.

    I feel somewhat fortunate in having a 1995 Maxima SE that used "dimunitive" 215 15HR60 tires as the original equipment. In 143k miles, I've replaced the original Eagle RSA's twice and still have 20,000 miles left on the current set (average 55k per set). That's a grand total of about $900 in tires, balancing, etc. over 9 years. I do not rotate any more frequently than the normal 15,000 mile service intervals.

    Over the last 9 years, the Maxima (SE's) has bumped wheel size to 16", 17" and now 18" wheels and higher and higher performance spec tires. I attribute this to 20% performance objectives and 80% to marketing and aesthetic objectives. A FWD Maxima with 20" wheels and tires is not going to handle as good as a RWD BMW 530i non-sport package car, let alone a sport package one. Yet the tire replacement cost over 9 years and 143k miles would be about $4,000-$5,000 instead of my $900. And, although I am sure some would debate this, the 1995 SE riding on 15" wheels does not give up much, if anything to the handling of a 2003/4 riding on 17" or 18" wheels. They are both about 60/40 front end heavy.

    Differences in wet weather traction and other characteristics are indeed important considerations. And I would never advocate going cheap on the connection between a car, the road and your safety. But ultra high performance tires for a FWD sedan is an inherant contradiction, don't you think?
Sign In or Register to comment.