Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I have been surprised by the problems I've had with this car compared to past Buicks and GM cars I've owned. Most of them never needed any work till they were approaching or passed the 100K mark.
So what to do. Does Toyota offer an extended warrantee at a reasonable price for a car that is 3 yr. old and has such a history? Guess I'll check with them in a few days. Perhaps someone has some experience with such situations.
NW Blizzard
If any Toyota mgmt is reading this - you'd better stop ripping us off like this
Mack
On a side note, I get 19.5mpg on regular 87 gas 90% city/10% hwy. My 97 Taurus got 18mpg in the same conditions, but had 120 fewer ponnies under the hood. Unbeilevable, how do they do it? Navigation system is a pain - I'm getting tired of "Accepting" every time - anyway of bypassing it? And the lady in the dashboard doesn't understand my voice half of the time - I hope she'll get used to me soon.
Roland
NWBLizzard
Mack :shades:
Thanks in advance,
Rewop
I don't know if these are the same tires as yours, but I live in Canada and I have
Michelin Energy MXV 4 tires on my 2006 Avalon XLS. We don't see a lot
of snow on the west coast, But I have found them to be a very good tire in all weather. Good luck.
Thanks in advance for your help,
NWBLIZZARD
Toyo Versado - available 215/55/17, and also 235/50 which is what I used on the stock rims (05 Touring). Wet weather been very very good, dry the same, but night and day in terms of road noise etc. Also got almost 50k on my Michelins, and think that between the low rolling resistance as well as a little less rubber on the road that the Michelins would be tough to beat FE wise. You wouldn't think that tire selection could effect FE but the Versados seem to be 'costing' me about 1/2-1 mpg. Toyo promotes the Versado as a 'luxury car tire' and after about 25k miles I'd have to agree.
Roland
That said those Michelins were probably the best set of OEM tires I've had in years after some bad experiences with some OEM Bridgestone Turanzas on a Nissan. The Altima got a set of Michelin Hydroedges which are wearing like iron, but are noisy. The Michelins on the Avalon probably would have passed inspection for another year, they are good tires. They had 48k on them but I have found over the years that tires will generally need to be replaced well before they wear down to the tread depth indicators.Today, after 25k (and 3 rotations/balances) the Versados still look new and good on the car - I try to keep them at 32 psi.
The Versados I would recommend - but they will cost almost a full MPG in FE vs. those OEM Michelins, given they are wider tires with a bit more rubber on the road. Small price to pay for the smooth quiet ride they deliver along with sone really good 'wet' behavior as well. Can't say much about the frozen stuff, don't have that down here in Texas. You didn't say whether your Toyo were the Versados or a different one.
The Falken Ziex is rated number 1 by CR, costs 123.00, but only has a "good" rating for noise and ride, with a "fair" rating for tread life, but scores high in braking on wet and dry pavement. Versado ranks high with captain2, costs about $130.00, but I'm a little concerned about the drop in fuel economy reported by captain2. I think gas prices are only going up.
So, at the moment, I'm leaning towards the Yokohama AVID (about $130.00) based on its high rating with Tirerack and the hope that it is as good as the Versado but without the fuel economy penalty. I will still churn through the internet for a few days to see if there are any other highly rated all season tires that would worth considering.
If there are any other thoughts or suggestions on tires, please let me know.
rewop
Have used Toyos twice. Better handling by far as others have mentioned. I posted once before that car feels like it's on rails compared to Michelin. Firmer in the corners and you can really notice it. Downside, you give up the a little ride comfort. Gas/tire mileage was the same but these were Proxes, not the latest Toyos.
Have a friend with two Acuras, he uses Yoko's and is very happy. Sporty ride compared to Avalons. Falken is not a tire to put on any Avalon for the long term (from my tire guy) and the Nitto is not available apparently. Good luck!
Mack
Roland
Hey Cap, what kind of mileage did you get out of those Turanzas? I only have a little over 20K on my Av with these tires and I am wondering if they are going to make it to the end of my lease with around 32K. I rotate every 5K and keep them inflated. They are noisy, not that great of traction and are wearing like crap. I will make sure my next car does not have them. My 2000 Solara had the Potenza line on it, and while grippy went back off lease with 27K down to the wear indicators.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
The point of this being - that if a mpg or so of FE is that important to you, you might want to check on any tire's rolling resistance as well as stick with the same size -so you don't increase road friction with a wider tire -- you may find that whatever you buy Yokos/Falkens whatever, may do the same thing. BTW the 3/4 of a mpg that I think (I do keep track of it that closely) I'm losing translates into about 3 gallons of gas more/month driving about 2000 miles/month. That $10/mo. IMO well worth it in the ride and noise depts.
got right at 30k with those tires on an 03 Altima (also 215/55/17) but they started having problems (leaks etc} 10k before that, and were also not wearing well, despite alignments/balancing etc.
IMO any decent OEM tire that is not a 'performance summer' tire (the type of tire you wouldn't put on an Avalon anyway) should provide 50k of service reasonably well maintained. The Michelin 'Energys' although I did replace them at 48k could have made it safely probably thru 60k safely - but as they get 'old' I notice losses in wet weather tration etc. so I tend to replace them faster than really necessary. All in all, I think the Michelins are good tires even if they are a bit hard and noisy and I love my new Versados - don't know anything specific on the Avalon Bridgestones only that set that was on my wife's Altima and a coupla other cars I owned previously.
I now have comparable FE data for winter months of 3 consecutive years, the first 2 with the original Michelins and the latest with the Versados.
Dec 05 - Mar 06 4838 km 634 liters 13.1 liters/100km = 17.9 mpg
Dec 06 - Mar 07 3986 km 541 liters 13.6 liters/100km = 17.3 mpg
Dec 07 - Mar 08 3856 km 497 liters 12.9 liters/100km = 18.2 mpg
So winter driving FE with the Versado was no worse, and possibly a little better than with the Michelins. My driving in Vancouver includes 50% city streets, 30% hills and only 20% highways, most of the time in rain and for 1-3 weeks in snow/ice (this winter was the worst one).
The Versado are certainly quiet, grip well in wet pavement and did fine on snow and ice. I really like the wider tread.
Thanks for your help,
Rewop
235/50/17 was the Captain's idea, see his original post #13673 and fin's #13674.
The 235/50 tire fits the OEM rims fine, also has the same outside circumference as 215/55, but is a bit wider. It has more rubber in contact with the road, and I also think it looks better.
This size change, 215/55 to 235/50, is referred to as 'plus 0' sizing and is generally a good idea with any car as long as there is enough wheel well clearance for the wider tire. Note that this can be done with anybody's tire, it just so happened that the Versado was available in the 235/50/17 that I wanted.
PS - I believe you'll find that your Avys speedometer is right on the number, but also that your odometers read about 3% low - meaning that if you are using odometer readings as a basis for your FE calculations, your FE will also come out about 3% lower than it actually is. Doesn't sound like much but over the last 70k miles I have found that 3% difference to be right about the same difference there is between the displayed trip computer average FE and my calculated FE - meaning I figure 26.2 MPG using the odometer readings but 27 mpg shows on the trip computer - the trip computer turns out to be right - adjusting the the extra miles driven in my calculations.
That's what I thought, hopefully I can squeeze 32 - 33K out of them and let whoever gets the car after me deal with it!
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
Mack
I do record km and liters at fillups. I had forgotten about the 3% odometer correction, so then my winter FE averaged closer to 18.7 mpg. I consider this really good, because sadly, most of my driving is stop/go city/suburban, with only a few stretches where traffic moves as fast as 50-65 mph (but this gives better FE than 75-80). When on a level highway my FE has been as good as 5.5 liters/100 km (43 mpg) but as soon as I start driving up a steep hill the FE plummets, of course.
And traffic here is slower than ever, with multiple construction sites in preparation for the 2010 Olympics and steady population growth. Highways such as the 99 to Whistler or the TransCanada are usually clogged or interrupted by construction by-passes. There is not much opportunity to get on a reasonably long stretch of open road unless you drive out of town for a good hour or more -- and then it will probably be a mountain road with steep hills and curves! Most of British Columbia is just not meant for high FE.
My next car will probably by a hybrid to take advantage of this terrain and my usual routes. I imagine that a hybrid Avalon will be available by the time I'm ready to trade my 05. But in the meantime, for the conditions here, I am happy with the FE I'm getting.
one beautiful drive -up 99 to Whistler - there several years ago, would not want think about that road 'under construction' - I mean the road is kinda carved out of those hills on the coast as it is - how or where would they widen or improve the road when there's no room?
always thought hybrids would do better on the 'flats' where the electric motors could handle more of the load. A hybrid Avalon is only logical given the 35 mpg CAFE coming up, but wonder whether it would save enough for your type of driving - especially to justify the cost premium.
My thinking is that a hybrid car harvests electricity on downhills and during braking, both of which I do a lot here, and when on level roads my speed is frequently low enough for the electric motor to handle it. On uphills and at highway speed limits, the hybrid will have no advantage (or a slight weight disadvantage). So on average, the improvement in FE with a hybrid Avalon will be greater under my driving conditions than yours, assuming that you drive mostly on level highways at or over the speed limit.
Yes, surely you are getting much better mileage in Texas than I do in BC, because you drive on level highways at uniform speeds. And this is also the reason why a hybrid should improve my FE more than yours. Most of the improvement with Toyota hybrids is in city FE, not highway FE; with some hybrids the city FE can be even higher than hwy FE. This is because in city stop/go driving there is much more energy to harvest during deceleration and re-use while driving at slow-medium speeds, than in highway driving (where our Avalons are already impressively efficient). I'm just looking forward to improving my city driving FE.
not so sure about this one: I think the reason might be that low speed City driving, and trafficky stop 'n go conditions will allow the hybrid to operate on electricity only, hence the difference between City and Highway ratings. We can be relatively confident though, that because Toyota 'invented' the true hybrids and because they already have combination drivetrains in the Camry and/or the LS that could conceivablely work in an Avalon, that it won't be long. The hybrids have had surprisingly (they are after all high tech and new) good reliability ratings but some serious overestimations on the old EPA FE ratings - but will definitely become more and more 'viable'.
Yes, this is ONE reason; hybrids don't need gas at low speeds. But this cannot be the only reason, because they would quickly run out of battery power UNLESS they also harvest electric power during decelerations and use it to recharge the battery. This is how the hybrid car uses 2x-3x less gas in city driving than the same car with conventional engine. And hybrids should love hilly terrain, generally speaking, for similar reasons.
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
And the more you have to stop in your daily driving, the more you benefit from this hybrid feature.
Mack