Mazda CX-7 Tires and Wheels

SylviaSylvia Member Posts: 1,636
Mazda CX-7 Tires, Wheels


  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24

    Mazda is tricking/ripping off new CX-7 buyers with a last minute tire spec change.

    All the reviewers had CX7 with Eagle RS-A M+S. One of the reviews specifically mentions they were good tires.

    Well now Mazda is switching to some of the worst tires you can get - Bridgestone Turanza EL42...

    TireRack ranked them 23 out of 25 in that category: L42

    Mazda should know better. Zoom zoom my [non-permissible content removed] :mad:
  • deaniedeanie Member Posts: 172
    Hi Sayadasti:
    If what you say is true about Mazda swaping the tires, I'm furious. That would probably sway me from getting the car. I have no desire to spend the better part of a grand on new tires for a new car to get it to perform the way it did in all the published tests.

    I was interested in the CX-7 specifically for its stellar braking and handling despite having all weather M+S tires. Usually high end performance tires are needed to get the CX-7's published numbers. Its braking/handling are so good I was willing to forgive it's 4-passenger capability. You can call it a 5-seater in Twiggy and her two clones were sitting in the back with her. You can't comfortably fit 3 across with only 55.8" of shoulder room (way too tight).

    With the EL42 marshmallows, we'll almost certainly see braking #'s from 60mph increase by 5-15 feet, slalom speeds decrease by 2-3 mph, and a ride a tad softer and more comfortable - not the best tradeoff where safety's concerned.

    I hope Mazda will be offering us a choice of tires. I hated the EL42's I had on my 05 Toyota Avalon - hated them. I sold the Avalon (not because of the tires) and am currently shopping CX-7 GT, Avalon Touring (Michelin tires), and an Odyssey EX-L minivan.

    Now that I've finished my rant, does anyone have any idea when NHTS and/or IIHS will test the CX-7? If it doesn't excel (5 stars all around), that would be be a big minus in my book. Getting the crappy tires AND not having the peace of mind of 5 star safety would definitely scratch the CX-7 off my list. Yes, I know the Odyssey (and possibly the Avalon Touring too) cannot match the CX-7 numbers even if CX-7 gets the EL42's, but they can carry 8 and 5 passengers respectively, and have a plethora of other benefits too numerous to list.

  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    I agree about the tires. I now am not going to consider the CX7 and I'm postponing my purchase so I can try/drive the new competitors coming in the fall. Mazda not only doesn't have the new V6 that the Edge/CX9/MKX has but now has these worthless tires:

    Maybe I'll consider a Mazdaspeed CX7 with proper tires and a DISI V6 if they make it. I'm pretty sure they could fit it in there as even GM managed to shoehorn the Honda J35 engine/tranny into the Saturn Vue cute ute...

    :mad: :mad: :mad:
  • zoom49zoom49 Member Posts: 76
    While at Mazda headquarters over the weekend I snaped a pic of a CX-7 on Bridgestones. Fron the several I saw they switched from Goodyears to Bridgestones aboout Vin 2000 or so.">">
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Write Mazda, Motortrend, Edmunds, Autoweek, etc, so they can exposed/stop this dirty trick!!!

    CX-7 reviews are not representative of production car performance with this underhanded tire swap. They should print this so Mazda will be embrassed and lose sales for this dirty cost cutting trick :mad:
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Now, I would like to think I am picky. I would never NOT buy a car because of the brand of tires that are on it.

    I really don't think the tire makes this car do all it does. Did you ever think the car was designed to do what the reviewers said it did? You might be giving the tires a bit too much credit.

    However, switching the tires is kinda stupid by Mazda. That I do agree with.
  • unixxusunixxus Member Posts: 97
    Most car manufacturers use multiple tire vendors and Mazda has always used Bridgestone as a supplier on all their vehicles. They never stated that Goodyear was going to be the sole tire supplier. If you take the time to read the Bridgestone statement you will notice that it states...

    “Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire, LLC (BFNT) announced today that Bridgestone brand Turanza tires will be ONE of the original equipment tires to be fitted on Mazda’s first crossover sport-utility vehicle (SUV), the CX-7.”

    It could be that the Grand Touring models are fitted with the Eagle RS-A M+S tires or four wheel drive models come with these. It is a misinformation to state that Mazda is “tricking/ripping off new CX-7 buyers.” Manufacturers can change specification on their vehicles at any time without prior notice. :)
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Most car manufacturers use multiple tire vendors and Mazda has always used Bridgestone as a supplier on all their vehicles

    This hold's true for the Mazda3. The Mazda3 i uses Toyo Tires, and the Mazda3 s (with 17") uses Goodyear.

    Unixxus, very informative post, thanks.
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Good tires can make a bigger difference than having AWD vs. FWD - Motortrend, Car and Driver, etc have all had various articles that prove this.

    Also racing slicks do wonders for performance cars...

    At every autoshow and review so far, Eagles have been used - it definately should be clearly noted in reviews about this performance difference if Mazda is only doing it for certain models. If they don't put Eagles on the upper trims it is definately a dirty deal :mad:

    It will cost about $800 for a new set of tires for the CX-7 :sick:
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Good tires can make a bigger difference than having AWD vs. FWD - Motortrend, Car and Driver, etc have all had various articles that prove this.

    I am not doubting that tires do help, because they do, all I am saying is that maybe you have over estimated how much this tire does for the CX-7, considering, there are no reviews of the CX-7 with the Bridgestone's on them. A bit premature in your thinking, possibly?

    We are getting our's in next week, hopefully, I'll drive both and let you knw if there is a difference.

    Maybe in rare situations, but, as a whole, AWD will provide better traction, especially in cornering. Unless, the tires on an AWD vehicle are garbage. It also depends on who makes the AWD system. I would have to read those articles to see the exact context of how they reaches their conclusions.

    Also racing slicks do wonders for performance cars...

    Thank you Captain Obvious. ;)
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Motortrend March 2006, Page 71:

    "Which is better, one of our AWD competitors on all-season tires, or its front- or rear-drive counterparts on dedicated summer or winter rubber? Summer is a close call; but winter isn't. All-wheel drive has its benefits, but not the 28-30 percent offered by dedicated snow tires. And AWD won't help at all when it comes to stopping in snow. Of course, the best choice for winter conditions is all-wheel drive and snow tires."

    The 28-30% figure comes from comparison testing of all-season and winter tires on snow - snows are 28-30% better.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    OK, from what I got from that was snow tires are better to stop with. Everyone knows AWD does not help you stop in the snow. And, as I figured, that was an isolated test based on one driving factor. Which, goes back to my original statement on how AWD is better for cornering, and all out driving. These are the CX-7's selling points over it's competition.

    The CX-7 is a CUV with a "sports car" dynamic. Snow tires, or the AWD system in the snow is not the main feature of this vehicle. Mazda, so far, is pushing the "fun to drive" aspect. Have you seen a commercial, or ad, with this car in the snow? No, they have been concentrating on how it fit's Mazda's "zoom-zoom" spirit.

    Also, the CX-7's Goodyear tires are not snow tires. I fail to see your connection in that article by Motor Trend and how it apply's to the CX-7 tire issue.

    Do the other publishers you mentioned before refer to dry pavement?
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    It says they are 28-30% better on snow AND they help with stopping too. So AWD all-season vs. FWD w/snow tires FWD will have 28-30% better traction on snow and they will also stop better than AWD with all-season tires (obviously).

    A good set of tires significant an effect on wet or snow performance - up to 15% in the wet (as per Car and Driver) and up to 30% in the snow (as per Motortrend).

    Mazda AWD system is not very advanced as discussed earlier in this thread (see juice's post), so most likely having better tires (ie summer and winter tires vs. using all season) combined with the 220 lbs. weight savings would give you better handling and performance.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    Ok, I got that. However, this car has not been tested in any conditions with the Bridgstone's on them, so, I think it is more then safe to say there is an unknown factor with them. Which constitutes a test before you can jump to conclusions and say that with Bridgestone's on the car, it is a deal breaker, and that Mazda is "misleading" their potential buyers. Afterall, it is independent publishers that are driving this car with the Goodyear's on them, and giving their own opinion and performance data (slalom speed etc.), not Mazda.

    However, if this were to be totally true, they why are some of the top-rated handling vehicles AWD? Those test's are situational, and are more like a lab experiment. They are author's that like cars. They are not mathmatitions, so, I wonder how they came up with a percentage advantage for handling. Is there a formula for that? Or more like a guess? Just because something is published in Motor Trend or C&D does not mean it's always 100% acurate. I have found to take what they say with a grain of salt.

    I am fully aware of what AWD system Mazda uses, Haldex,(juice informed me quite some time ago, lol) for their Active-Torque Split AWD. Similar to Volvo. Definitely not as advanced as Symmetrical, Quattro, or the new SH-AWD.
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Misleading for sure - all showcars, reviewer cars, and the brochure photos had the Goodyear's.

    Take a close look at the Mazda brochure - all photos where you can read the label on the tires say "Goodyear Eagle"

    C&D and Motortrend tire tests were conducted in a objective scientific manner and there is no reason to consider bias. Regardless, tire performance can differ significantly even in the same class (ie summer, winter, all-season, etc...) You sound like a car salesman trying to sell Mazda's AWD system - I ain't buying it from the clueless :P

    Also 220 lbs. is not a chump change difference for handling.
  • driverdmdriverdm Member Posts: 505
    Take a close look at the Mazda brochure - all photos where you can read the label on the tires say "Goodyear Eagle"

    Take a close look at the Mazda brochure - all photos where you can read the label on the tires say "Goodyear Eagle"

    Hold on a sec. All the pictures in the brouchure are of the upscale model. Someone got to it before me but car manufacturers differ in the tires they use by model and sometimes arbiutrarily so that there is not so much reliance on one supplier. It is a supplier power issue. If you invest a majority of your business with one supplier it increases your risks and it increases that suppliers ability to negotiate pricing.

    Mazda has not misled anyone. The test vehicles have not been the "sport" base model. The base model that will be used mostly for grocery shopping and the people that want the fun to drive factor but are looking really for an everyday SUV as well. For people like us, we need better tires. We'll all have to just wait and see how the tires fall out. It probably won't be the deal breaker people think. Upon hearing the new information it is alarming, which is why it is good that we all have this forum to hear the other side of things. :)
  • zoom49zoom49 Member Posts: 76
    It could be that the Grand Touring models are fitted with the Eagle RS-A M+S tires or four wheel drive models come with these
    The only one I saw at Mazda last weekend with Bridgestones
    was a GT AWD with vin # above 2000. All others had the Goodyears including one with an even higher vin number.
  • driverdmdriverdm Member Posts: 505
    If it is arbitrarily done, you can ask the dealer to swap the tires out at no cost usually. This may turn into a non issue.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I don't accept that snow tires are 28-30% better, because they are only better IF they are mounted on the vehicle at that particular time, when a snow storm hits.

    You have to guess when the season begins and ends. Here in DC our last major storm was in March, and by then everyone had removed their snow tires. Having them in the shed stored away wouldn't do you any good.

    The rest of the time you are sacrificing 28-30% of traction in the dry, because the tires are soft and squirmy.

    So it's not quite the magic solution you imply it is.

    I have a set of snow tires and will use them, by the way, but I have a hydraulic jack and a torque wrench and can mount/dismount tires on a whim. How many people will do that? Most people make an appt in November and then another in late February.

    AWD is there all the time. So you get the advantage of AWD in the rain, snow, gravel, sand, slippery spots, you name it, year-round.

    Gimme both.

  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Yes but Mazda's AWD system is not full-time AWD like a Subaru or the like. Its FWD most of the time.

    AWD cost extra and weighs more (handling and mileage will be off in dry conditions).

    And you mentioned snow tires were providing less traction because they were soft. You do realize racing tires are quicker wearing lower durometer tires? Having softer pliable tires gives more traction at the expense of wear.

    Also the tires are softer also due to lower temperatures in the winter time to compensate - rubber gets harder as the temperature drops. So you'd get better traction in the winter in the dry compared to all season tires which must work in a much broader temperature range.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    AWD costs more, but so does a full set of snow tires and rims. Over the life of the car, it might even end up adding up to the same amount or close.

    Weight, yes, but nowadays that's down to 150 lbs in many cases. Not sure about the Haldex Mazda uses.

    I realize the CX7's system is not full-time, but it acts when needed. Snow tires won't do squat if they're not mounted.

    Snow tires' treads are very soft but are nothing like racing slicks. The tread blocks have tiny siphons that easily give, it takes almost no pressure from my fingers to fold them over on the set that I have.

    You gain traction on ice and snow, but lose traction on dry pavement and rain, no doubt.

    I agree about the temps.

  • russ_49russ_49 Member Posts: 54
    I have been waiting for mine to come in since I ordered it in December 05. I can tell you that the tires on the car, will be a "deal breaker" for me if it comes in with Bridgestones on it! I expect it to have the performance that has been advertised! I own an 02 Milli S, which came out of the factory with Dunlop's, when it was recently time to replace them, for me, there was no step down, and Dunlop's went on!

    Mine that is on order is a fully loaded GT with the NAV package, i'll be hard pressed to drop $32 large ones, if they cut this deal, and went with garbage tires! It will be the first thing that I look at when the dealer calls me to let me know that it is in. I just may ask when I receive that call if it does have the Bridgestone's on it, and if it does, he can keep it! :mad:
  • driverdmdriverdm Member Posts: 505
    Easy russ, you may just want to ask the dealer to swap the tires as it seems that they are coming with both tires and it is not listed as a pay-for option in any brochures. You can't ditch the CX-7. I am looking forward to your review of it too much. :D
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    I expect it to have the performance that has been advertised!

    Where was it advertised that you get a specific brand tire? With the rare exception, I don't know of any model that specifically advertises a specific brand/type of tire.
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    It was advertised by the brochure photos, autoshows, and giving auto reviewers what was claimed was a production car. If you swap to cheaper tires, the performance isn't as advertised.

    If he wanted a cost cutting mudane car, he'd get a Ford or Chevy :P
  • richmlrichml Member Posts: 156
    It is a production car with those tires.

    What vehicles come in every configuration with exactly the same tires?
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    Sounds to me like you made some assumptions...I'm a dealer and don't have any idea what brand tires are coming on the vehicle. I asked the factory rep and they didn't know either... I've got the brochure in front of me...the only pic that I can make out the tire brand is on the back inside cover and they look like Good Year's. It's also a Grand Touring model. Remember, it is very common for different trim levels to have different brand/model tires.
  • syadastisyadasti Member Posts: 24
    Don't play dumb.

    Brochure - all pages with parked CX7's you can make out the tires:

    pg. 5 - red CX7 - you can see Eagle RS A on the rear tire

    Silver CX7 w/the 4-way split page - rear tire can see RS A and Goodyear and the front tire you can see Goodyear Eagle RS A

    Red CX7 on last page w/accessories - can see Eagle RS on both front and rear tires.

    All autoshows, could see all the tires and they were Goodyear Eagle. Various reviews mentioned the tire specifically and performance was benchmarked in the reviews with what was supposed to be a production spec'd car.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    All true, however, it's common knowledge that the press often drive PRE-production cars, not production cars.

    The brochure is probably a teaser (is it?), I'm sure they'll create a new one for dealers to pass out. Check to see if it has any disclaimers about pre-production, I'd be surprised if it doesn't.

    A-HA! Mine does!

    It says:

    Following publication of this brochure, certain changes in standard equipment, options, prices and the like, ...

    Voila. Read the fine print. Actually it's not even fine print, it's full size. A lawsuit would only be tossed.

  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    first of all I'm not playing dumb so you need to keep your arrogant know it all attitude in check. I don't know a thing about tires and don't pretend to. I also said that in the pic I could see the tires were good years....which they are....

    The most spcific thing about tires I could find...

    P235/60 R18 H-rated all seson tires

    No mention of usual.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, it's a conspiracy, and audia8q is behind the whole thing, he has total control over the tire choice of Mazda. :D

    C'mon now, give him a break. Read the disclaimer I found above.

    A lot of things change from pre-production cars.

  • dave90dave90 Member Posts: 27
    I don't think this is even a change. As mentioned above, most cars come with a number of tires from the factory. Toyota's sometimes have even 4 or 5 different tires.

    I think it is pretty clear that the CX-7 will come with both Goodyears and Bridgestones. Probably the Goodyears were available earlier, so they show up in the photos etc.

    If you really hate Bridgestone, I'm sure the dealer will swap them out for the Goodyear's on another vehicle. Most likely other buyers won't care so much about brand. Heck they might even DRIVE the car with both types of tire before deciding which one is best.
  • topgun7topgun7 Member Posts: 412
    Syadatsi, sue Mazda if you think they deceive you. Ask the dealer to swap the tire if you like the other tire. I am not sure why you should give peopel such an atitude when they just try to help out and I don't know why you think Mazda try to deceive you.

    I bought an RX300 a few year back and it came with 2 different tires also. I asked the dealer to swap the tire and they had no problem doing that. It is a common practice within the industry to have mulitple tire supplier for the same car. Is this your first car? Buying car is a happy occasion and if you truely don't like CX-7, may be an RDX is in your future.
  • audia8qaudia8q Member Posts: 3,138
    I got some further info on the tires.

    Mazda is putting both Goodyears and Bridgestones on the CX-7 -- The two brands meet all the specs of the CX-7. The mix will be about half each, an even mix across all the trims and option packages. Even the first batches of cars from the factory have a mix of both...

    The Goodyears were available for the preproduction vehicles and that's why they are in the shots in the brochure and on the cars the press drove.
  • zoom49zoom49 Member Posts: 76
    Audia8 is right, Of the five CX-7's that were delivered to my LA dealer today 5/21, four were on Goodyears image
  • navigator89navigator89 Member Posts: 1,080
    Wow the CX-7 still looks great even away from the spotlight of all the recent auto shows.

    That pearl red really is the color for this car.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Member Posts: 3,159
    You sound like a car salesman trying to sell Mazda's AWD system - I ain't buying it from the clueless

    How was I trying to sell Mazda's AWD system?? lol...that comment tickled me, thank you!

    Also 220 lbs. is not a chump change difference for handling.

    I don't see where I mentioned that, either! lol

    Show me some concrete evidence that the two different tires affect the CX-7 as much as you are claiming. (unfounded claim's might I add) You seem to be the only one who think's the Goodyear Eagle's are the main reason the CX-7 performed as it did. Just to let you know, if you have been reading, I did agree that tires affect handling, I just have yet to see any evidence backing up your claim specific to the CX-7. That's what this forum is, the CX-7.

    Maybe for you, Mazda should change the name to the "Mazda Goodyear Eagle", then they won't be deceiving you. lol
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    That red does look sharp. Thanks for checking on the tires. Thanks to audia8q as well for the info.

    More proof that we should not jump to conclusions...

  • lilarrylilarry Member Posts: 13
    With all the back and forth on tires, I'm thinking I'd want the very best tires available for my CX-7. My Jeep Grand Cherokee came with Goodyear Wranglers on it, a firm truck/SUV tire. I wanted something that would give a gentler but sportier ride and decided to switch the tires to Goodyear Forteras. Our local Goodyear dealer was happy to swap the Wranglers for Forteras (as long as there were less than 500 miles on them). I am now on my second set of Fortera's and absolutely love them - on the Jeep.

    If I can get a CX-7 with Eagles on it, I'm sure the local Goodyear dealer would swap them for the tire of my choice (only charging me the difference). I'm wondering how a CX-7 would perform with these Goodyear Fortera light truck/SUV tires.

    Better yet, do Bridgestone/Firestone dealers do new car tire swaps? If so, I might consider swapping the Turanza EL42's for Turanza LS's. Unlike the EL42's, the LS's are supposed to be excellent tires - extremely quiet with exceptional handling and traction characteristics. In addition to being a far superior tire, they might also help ease the highway road noise problem.

    Any thoughts?
  • satchmosatchmo Member Posts: 34
    First, I don't think the EL 42s are all that bad. I have owned a 2002 Accord LX coupe (V6) shod with these tires for the first 30K miles (my wife the primary driver): they were very smooth and fairly quiet on good, dry roads (which constitutes maybe 90% of my driving)and were good handling (notably quite sticky in corners). The down side was that traction in heavy rain and (even light) snow was mediocre at best --especially after the tires had more than 10K of wear. They were also quite noisy on concrete surfaces and over rain-grooves. So why did they fare so badly in Tirerack's survey (I ascertained that only 22% of respondents said they would buy again)? I can't answer for sure, but I conjecture that Tirerack's constituency are mostly a very sporty and demanding bunch --I notice that very few OE (original equipment) tires, especially on a sporty/upscale models, meet with their(Tirerack's client's) general approval. So for cars like the Camry Solara Convertible, the Acura TL, or the BMW 745 Li, all of which carried OE Turanza EL 42 tires, the minority of owners for whom handling is THE priority are not going to be happy & will order more performance oriented tires as replacements (presumably from Tirerack). Typically these upscale or premium but sporty cars (though not pure sporty or sports cars)are shod with tires that are a compromise between quietness, smoothness, performance on good roads, reliability and durability: typical of such tires are the Continental ContiTouring Contact CV95, the Michelin Pilot HX MXM4, Goodyear Eagle RS-A (but not LS), and, yes, the Bridgestone Turanza EL 42 (and the presumably similar Turanza EL 41 as well as the recent Turanza EL 400).
    (Incidently, I recently replaced my EL 42's with Goodrich Traction T/A V tires, highly touted in the same surveys: I did not find much, if any, difference in dry handling and braking. Admittedly, handling in snow and rain was considerably better.)
    My point is that the Turanza El 42's are not bad as touring tires go --significantly better on favorable surfaces than the Goodyear Eagle LS tires (based on Consumer Reports tests). You could easily live with them unless you did a lot of driving in snow or heavy rain. The Eagle RS-A's are about the same in many respects (I have them on my Mazda Mazda3). And, yes, I do agree that replacing them with Bridgestone's Turanza LS-H or LS-V would be an improvement, but mainly in wet conditions. Finally, I'm not sure that true performance tires (say, the Michelin Pilot Sport) are a good idea for cars that are not really designed for very high speeds, and at-the-limit handling: until proven otherwise, I assume the Mazda CX-7, is, after all, an SUV (albeit sportier than most).
  • deaniedeanie Member Posts: 172
    Hi All:
    The tire thing is extremely annoying. For those who don't care too much about braking and handling of their CX-7, it doesn't matter which tire they get. For those who do (me for one - better braking and handling = more fun and a safer car), the availability of those vehicles with the better tires is greatly diminished, impacting our ability to find a CX-7 with the right color, tires and options we want.

    P.S. Any comments on CX-7 vs. Oddysey & Murano SE aside from their obvious relative pricing and size advantages?
  • deaniedeanie Member Posts: 172
    Yes this is the CX-7 forum, and the CX-7 has tires, and tires are as crucial to the performance/braking/handling/safety/comfort of the CX-7 as a running shoe is to a runner or the strings are to a tennis racket, et al. Pro athletes don't use crappy equipment, so why should we?

    Tires matter a lot and unless the dealer has a lot of profit in a sale (such as for the schmo willing to pay near MSRP or above), they won't "swap out the RS-A's for the Bridgestones because that costs a lot of money (time) removing 8 tires from 8 wheels, then mounting 8 tires to 8 wheels. That's a lot of work and a lot of opportunity for damaging a wheel of a new car in the process.

    If you're smart and don't pay too much above invoice for this or any other Mazda (wait a month or three), there won't be enough profit in the deal for the dealer to swap the tires, and if there is, you're just tossing money out the window - especially for one of the first vehicles off the assembly line (build quality probs will likely crop up in the beginning). Yes, I know it's coming from Japan, but they make mistakes too.
  • topgun7topgun7 Member Posts: 412
    Some people change their tires the moment that they get their new car. I had an 02 SC430 with run flat and a lot of people don't like the run flat and replace them at the moment they picked up the car. A lot of car come with mulitple tires. I guess my point is that it is not such a big deal and there are multiple way to handle it. However, making it sound like such a big deal is more like my teenage daughter making a big deal out of a bad hair day. It is just not warrented.
  • honakerhonaker Member Posts: 74
    So, assuming I feel like replacing all 4 tires when I get my CX-7, what should I get? I know nothing about tires except that I have to make the numbers match. I don't know what a touring tire is vs any other kind.

    If I go back to tirerack, and search on my size, P235/60 R18, then it's only showing me 3 tires available.

    Goodyear Eagle RS-A@ $172 ea
    Michelin Pilot HX MXM4@ $194 ea
    Bridgestone Turanza EL42@ $163 ea

    None of them seemed great, but according to their survey, yeah, the Turanza EL42 didn't seem to be good at anything.

    So, is there a different way I should figure out what tire I might want to put on a new CX-7?

  • lilarrylilarry Member Posts: 13
    Thanks for your post, Satchmo, and for sharing your experience with the Bridgestone tires. You made several good points. I noticed you mentioned rain and snow handling a couple of times, and how the EL42's didn't perform as well in those conditions. But isn't at least one of the purposes of a CUV/SUV with AWD/4WD their increased traction in snow and rain? I don't need to go off-road, but my business requires me to be mobile regardless of the weather - one of the reasons I drive an SUV. I don't want that ability hampered by tires that have lower snow/rain capabilities. I suppose that's why I am so concerned about this issue and am looking for solutions.
  • satchmosatchmo Member Posts: 34
    Agreed, if you're going to need to optimize handling under adverse road/weather conditions, then the Eagle RS-A edges out the EL 42. I suspect there are even better alternatives: I've not driven the Michelin Pilot HX MXM4, but friends report that it's pretty decent all-around and holds up longer than some (it's OE in many Mazda6's). Likewise, while I've not driven the Pirelli Scorpion Zero, various surveys suggest it performs well, especially for AWD and 4WD vehicles.
    Just out of curiosity, have you considered the AWD Toyota RAV 4, say, with the powerful V6, as an alternative to the CX-7? To me, the less powerful CX-7 would seem like the better vehicle for driving and handling in its lighter, road-oriented 2WD version. But with the additional weight and friction of an AWD transmission, and used for more heavy duty driving in rough weather and on rough roads, I might opt for the stronger RAV4 V6.
    Anyhow, thanks for your input.
  • lilarrylilarry Member Posts: 13
    "Just out of curiosity, have you considered the AWD Toyota RAV 4, say, with the powerful V6, as an alternative to the CX-7? To me, the less powerful CX-7 would seem like the better vehicle for driving and handling in its lighter, road-oriented 2WD version. But with the additional weight and friction of an AWD transmission, and used for more heavy duty driving in rough weather and on rough roads, I might opt for the stronger RAV4 V6."

    I've given the matter some consideration and am also considering just hanging on to my Jeep or even getting another one. There are many factors in play:

    1. I hate scheister auto dealers and won't do business with them. I walk out when I start getting double-teamed or I can sense a rip-off or high pressure or a scam. Sadly, all of the local Toyota and Nissan dealerships around here are part of the same scheister family chain of some 16 or 18 dealerships of various makes. I will NEVER, EVER do business with them. That factor alone has sadly disqualified Nissan and Toyota despite the fact that the Murano, the Highlander and the Rav-4 are all possible options for me.

    2. My family and I like our Mazda dealer. We've bought 2 cars from them. They are sincere genuinely good people - perhaps among the last human beings in the auto business. As long as they have a model that fills my needs I'm happy to give them my business.

    3. My family and I like our Mazdas. We have a 3 and a 6 and used to have a Miata.

    4. I've been driving Jeeps for the last 10 years. They're great for what they are, but they're boring. I chomp at the bit for every opportunity to drive my wife's "6". Now that decent CUV's are coming out it's time for a vehicle that has has more of a fun factor while still fulfilling my SUV requirements. The CX-7 will probably fit that bill. The Rav-4 (and the Highlander) will probably not.

    5. The Jeep is in great shape and isn't that old. The "common sense" part of me is telling me to just keep it. But the "little boy" in me is drooling over the CX-7.

    This will all be easier to decide after a long test drive.
  • driverdmdriverdm Member Posts: 505
    Just out of curiosity, have you considered the AWD Toyota RAV 4, say, with the powerful V6, as an alternative to the CX-7? To me, the less powerful CX-7 would seem like the better vehicle for driving and handling in its lighter, road-oriented 2WD version. But with the additional weight and friction of an AWD transmission, and used for more heavy duty driving in rough weather and on rough roads, I might opt for the stronger RAV4 V6.

    These two cars are commonly compared unfairly in my opinion. The Rav4 is not really cheaper than the CX-7. A base 4X4 V6 Rav 4 $23,735 and tjat os not comparitively equiped either. When choosing the RAV4, you are going to get slightly better acceleration and mpg, but it will cost more. So it is a cost/benefit analysis.
  • satchmosatchmo Member Posts: 34
    Then go for the Mazda CX-7. Who needs the aggravation of a crappy dealership?
  • satchmosatchmo Member Posts: 34
    My comment was based on the assumption (rightly or wrongly) that for the kind of driving lilarry was engaging in (presumably a fair amount of rain, mud and snow on secondary roads), the V6 RAV 4 would have more low-end grunt (whereas the Mazda CX-7, and especially the lighter 2WD version, would drive and handle better --be more fun-- on fast, smooth roads).
Sign In or Register to comment.