Howdy, Stranger!

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

02 Windstar Replacement Tires

jdugginsjduggins Posts: 1
edited March 2014 in Ford
I just bought a 2002 Windstar SE. It has the factory Uniroyal Tigerpaw. I've heard a lot of negative about the Uniroyal's. Does anyone have a good replacement tire to go back with. Mostly city/highway driving. Safety/wet traction and quite comfortable ride are the most important factors for me.


  • pluto5pluto5 Posts: 618
    I have had several sets of satisfactory Uniroyal tires. Uniroyal tires used to have high adjustment rates but now that Michelin owns the brand quality has improved. Would rather have them than Goodyear's or Firestone's. Just my opinion.
  • hengheng Posts: 411
    They are a highly rated replacement tire for most vehicles and did great on my 95 Windstar.
  • bretfrazbretfraz Posts: 2,021
    For a smooth ride I'd go with Michelin Symmetry. You can get them at WalMart for a great price. Will do most everything you want.
  • q45manq45man Posts: 416
    Michelin X ones have a very high treadwear index thus the rubber is much much harder than oem if good wet traction / braking is a concern be very very careful about a tire which has a higher than oem [as came on the car] treadwear index.

    Hard to correlate index to stopping distances but some evidence shows each 100 unit bump may increase distances by 5% depending on road surface friction and temperature. Straight ahead wet braking is denoted by traction code AA, A, B [ugh] this has nothing to do with turning wet traction [not tested].
    Generally the higher the speed rating and load rating the more reserve is built in and the better the braking......T and S rated are always suspect and at the very low end of quality especially as they age [over 2 years]

    Think twice about increase oem stopping distance also ABS and traction systems are calibrated for oem tires.
  • hengheng Posts: 411
    with your hypothetical analysis of the X-one. The wet traction and braking of the X-ones are not compromised by the high wear rating. In fact they are much better in every respect to the OEM tires that I've replaced with X-ones on 2 vehicles.

    Keep in mind the X-ones are high end T tires and I rate them higher than the much respected Dunlop SP sport A2s (which are H rated) which I have on another car (I would have gotten X-ones instead of the Dunlops but they don't make them in the size for the car).

    Q45man you make some good points but they don't hold as rules for tire selection.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    but that's an "elitist" attitude if I've ever seen one.

    q45 is an outstanding contributor here. His wealth of automotive knowledge continually blows me away with interesting automotive information - just when I thought I knew everything.

    Please watch your tone with the regulars here - there's no need to slam anyone. We're talking about tires here, not nuclear science. Besides, everyone already knows I know everything about tires AND nuclear science.

    And we're talking about tires on a freakin' Windstar! That's a large version of a Neon, given the reliability and resale value!
  • hengheng Posts: 411
    Don't quite know what you are referring to as elitist as what q45man expressed was basically a formula that doesn't always apply but it sure sounded like it was gospel.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    doesn't mean we're writing his words into law and engraving large stones.

    I can speak in very technical terms, as can he, but I'm sure he refrains from doing so for the same reason as I do - folks who may not readily understand what I'm saying could easily be offended by it, and there's no need for that. I break everything down into layman's terms, much like I do in court - understanding is easier and there's no hard feelings.

    And by the way, I'm glad you like your X-ones, but for every reason a tire has a higher treadwear rating, those reasons make them worse in traction, temperature and handling. The harder the treadwear compound, the longer they last, but the harder it is to make them handle without the suppleness associated with softer compound tires.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Posts: 2,918
    Actually, I have to agree with heng. Heng was simply stating what q45 was saying is not always true for all tires. And i don't think the "regulars" have any special privilege that states their opinions can not be questioned by someone else. Yes, Q45man is a wealth of knowledge and I have been very apprieciative of his input on a number of boards. But there are a couple of holes in his argument or al least what he wrote here.

    For example, q45 mentioned about not going higher then the treadwear index on the OEM tire. If I remember properly, the treadwear index is not transferable between brands of tires. They are only a good indicator within the same brand tire. Also he mentions about stopping distance and increase treadwear index by stating:

    "Hard to correlate index to stopping distances but some evidence shows each 100 unit bump may increase distances by 5% depending on road surface friction and temperature."

    He starts his argument that it's hard to correlate index to stopping distance, then he mentions that "some evidence" says stopping distance increases with increased treadwear. I'm the type of person who like to see evidence and not just a general statement. Now considering he wrote the message the day after Christmas, he may have been hungover from all the presents the day before and did not finish his thought on this. I'm not saying he is completely wrong but there are many more factors then what he mentioned to selecting a good tire.

    Also you mention about heng "Please watch your tone with the regulars here - there's no need to slam anyone." After reading heng's post 5 times (maybe I should read it a sixth time) I don't see him "slamming" q45man. Plus I think q45man can take care of himself if he felt offended.

    Quite honestly the Michelin X-ones are very good tires and heng is the only one that has any practical experience with these tires on the Windstar.
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    that a softer compound tire - why is that so hard to believe?

    A soft rubber eraser does a better job at removing pencil marks than a hard one.

    I've got nearly a million miles of driving in 25 years - I've been driving since I was 13 (Texas farm license). I've raced cars since 1987 (road race and autocross) and have driven very large trucks. Additionally, besides being in the car business for quite a few years, I was West Coast Regional Manager for Super Shops, one of the nation's largest performance tire chains, for 3 years.

    I know a more than average amount about tires.

    If you still need "statistics" (I can't stand that concept here on Edmunds), you 'll have to do some independent tire tests.
  • q45manq45man Posts: 416
    If you compare equal sizes in the same make say 215/65/15 on a 93 Q45. We have measured a 17-19 foot longer stop from 70 mph same road same day same car same driver with Michelin X vs say a Michelin V4 with half the treadwear index.

    The oem Michelin tire [a no longer available 170 treadwear Sport XGTV] stopped in 127 feet from 60 mph with a calculated Mu [road to tire friction coefficient of 0.87]....the current available softest tire in that size Michelin V4 takes 139 [+-3]feet........we sell Michelin tires to our 4,000 Lexus and Infinti repair customers and have done quite a bit of testing to help them chose!
    more later
  • q45manq45man Posts: 416
    It amazes me that owners don't understand that factory tires are soft for a reason - the faster they wear out the less legal liability TIME a car manufacturer has.

    Plus since every car is tested for some magazine or the other the factory has a vested interest in showing good to excellant braking distances.

    By the time a tire has 10,000 miles or 6 months use the rubber friction coefficient is much harder than brand new but the tread is worn so less squirm so the two tend to cancel out in someways at least in dry braking! Wet braking is 90% the tread compound once the water depth exceeds the tread depth!
  • zueslewiszueslewis Posts: 2,353
    I was appalled, when I managed at Super Shops, when I'd compare an OEM Michelin or BF Goodrich to one we had on the rack.

    Of course, we couldn't hardly get the replacements for the red-headed stepchild tires they put on at the factory and the sidewalls were night and day different. The OEM tire's sidewalls could be ushed in with one finger, while tires like the MXV, XGT and All-Terrain T/A took your whole hand to move the sidewall. This is in comparison to Michelin's X Radial and BFG's Long Trail T/A, both OEM garbage.

    I always recommend to stay away from the OEM design or spec. Look at tires that test well and forget about what came on your car - they're junk.
  • q45manq45man Posts: 416
    I can assure you the problem can be the converse on high end vehicles as some oem specs are better than the aftermarket tire of the same name....kind of a custom made blend as the identical sidewall molds are used with different internal construction same with the same branded tire with different tread pattterns.
    Take Bstone RE92 in different sizes it varies from S, T, H, V,and Z speed capability, the sidewall may be single, 2, 3 ply and some have full nylon caps, some only edge caps, and some no caps.......each tire is very different yet they have the same name........worse in the same size you can get 3 levels of performance!
  • Hey, wait a minute! I'm a red-head.

    BTW, nobody asked if this guy needs all-seasons that have to occasionally go on snow...

    I understood that UTGQ was self-rated by the manufacturer and thus not particularly useful for comaparison between brands.

    I'm looking forward to recommendations as this spring I will need new summer tires for my '98 Windstar when I take off the dedicated Michelin Arctic Alpines that I put on to replace the OEM Michelin MXV's I just took off at 75000 miles with 6/32 tread left on 'em...
  • swschradswschrad Posts: 2,171
    namely, silicon on geranium or silicon on sapphire? every hacker wants to know which is better. silicon on diamond is barely even in the lab at this time.

    with north korea and the -rant countries (I-rant and I-rate) both trying to build the bomb, we don't need any more public discussions on the best place in the reactor to put the lithium... outside of the operators' coffee, that is :-D
This discussion has been closed.