Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Tires, tires, tires

1…3334363839…149

Comments

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I paid $420 for four X-Radial Plus's (X-One clones) at Costco back in March 2000 for my '99 Quest. I've put 35,000 miles on them since and my experience with them is favorable (can only compare to the OEM Generals and those were barely good for 35,000 miles).

    I drive to the local ski resort about a dozen times a winter on a snowy, but well maintained road, and haven't had any problems there either, although I take my time and do carry chains "just in case." The rest of my driving is mixed city/highway in good weather (never rains here).

    I think I'd buy them again, but I'd look pretty hard at the X4's too, since they've gotten good reports around here and Tirerack. Less treadwear means no dry rot worry too :-)


    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • sgrd0qsgrd0q Member Posts: 398
    Has anyone tried the Michelin Sport A/S? I don't have space to store winter/summer tires depending on the season, so I thought I'd go for the All Season Michelins. What's the dry/wet/snow traction on these? How much is the dry traction compromised compared to the Michelin Sport summer tires, for instance?

    Thanks!
  • bretfrazbretfraz Member Posts: 2,021
    There's been lots of talk on this subject here. Dig back into older posts and you'll find plenty of info to help your decision.

    Re: leasing - Many lease companies have contractual stipulations regarding tire condition at lease maturity. Most have a minimum tread depth requirement. Many contracts demand leasees return the car with tires similar or identical to what was OE. I suppose a few leasees can get away with a junkyard tire but many will be penalized heavily if the tires are worn or inferior. Leasees are typically charged dealer prices for replacement tires so I'm sure that is incentive enough to install a set of top quality tires prior to lease turn-in.
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Member Posts: 647
    I would get the base tires and wheels if possible, and just store them away. Buy a good quality aftermarket wheel and tire package and run those.

    When I turn in the car, I'd bolt on the factory wheels and sell the aftermarket stuff.

    FWIW,

    TB
    Who seems to have twice as many wheels and tires as I do hubs to mount them on.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    that there is a per mile penalty on excess use. If the original tires had over allowed miles on them, could they double-dip you on the penalty? I also think, that a dealer selling the car as a turn in, might want to put on new rubber, if for no other reason than to give the perception that the car was well taken care of. Just a thought.
  • hvan1hvan1 Member Posts: 8
    Thank you for your responses. It's nice to hear other peoples opinions before you make up your own. I also found a November 2001 Consumer Reports that rated the X-1 the best overall premium car tire. I think this is what I am looking for, and I will be off to Cosco to purchase them this week. Again, thanks for your help.

    Hvan1
  • jimmyj1945jimmyj1945 Member Posts: 141
    I had X-One's on my last car and loved them. The car I have now came with H-Speed-Rated tires. The X-Ones are T-Rated. The tire shop says that I should not put anything less than H-rated on my car. I don't drive 150-MPH, but I don't want to do anything stupid. If the tires have the weight capacity why do I need the higher speed rating? Does anyone know for sure?

    Thanks,

    Jim
  • bretfrazbretfraz Member Posts: 2,021
    I'm not sure what you mean by "Double-dip" but if you are referring to being charged for over miles *and* worn tires, the answer's yes. But both are separate issues and separate charges.

    Each finance company has their own requirements for tire wear at the end of a contract. The only time people get into trouble is when they don't read their contracts or take bad advice.

    I've always heard from dealers that they want trade in's with either brand new tires or completely worn tires. I think you'll find many dealers installing new tires on trade in's prior to putting them on the lot. Once at an Infiniti dealer I saw a mobile tire installer put on new Yokohama's on several used cars. Probably easier and cheaper to have a mobile guy do this that tie up a service tech.
  • bretfrazbretfraz Member Posts: 2,021
    Just got a mailer from Michelin stating until Oct 5 '02, buy a set of Michelin car or truck tires and get a Samsonite carry on and a 2003 Michelin road atlas. Check out the promo at http://www.michelinman.com
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Seems like speed rating was an issue with Odyssey replacement tires - be a good thing to check Hvan1. This is over my head - ideas, Bret?

    Steve
    Host
    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 50,513
    I think the OEM tires were only S rated. Seems to be borderline for a 2-ton+ van.

    My sister-in-law just had to replace the original Firestones on her '99 Oddy. Got 45K out of them, but they were shot. I was leaning toward the Turanza LS-T as a replacement, but she needed them quick (I don't live nearby), and got Bridgestone Weatherforce from Sears. $75/pert tire, and she is happy with them. They have to be better than bald Firerocks. Also are T rated.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • hpulley4hpulley4 Member Posts: 591
    T rated tires are fine. They caution you because the manufacturer will usually speed limit the vehicle to the speed of the stock tires. In this case if you really wanted to, you could drive 130MPH instead of 118MPH on the T rated tires which might cause problems (though driving at 130MPH may cause problems regardless of your tires). Many people put Q rated snow tires on vehicles that originally came with S, T, H or higher speed rated tires without detrimental effects so you'll be fine with T rated rubber, certainly as long as you remember to keep it under 118.

    All that said, you may find T rated tires in general have a bit less grip than H rated tires on dry pavement. This is not because of the speed rating but T rated tires usually have longer tread life which usually means a harder compound which doesn't grip as well. Not all T rated tires are less grippy than H rated and not all H rated tires wear faster than T rated tires but in general it seems like tire manufacturers make them that way. Good tire shops will usually let you upgrade to a grippier tire if you don't like the first ones they put on.
  • caperosiercaperosier Member Posts: 58
    The Michelin Symmetry seems to be the better of the compromise All Seasons. Had them now for a full winter to replace Duelers on a AWD Forester last Fall. The Symmetrys have been not the same as the Nokians for snow/slush/ice, but not bad.
    Dry and wet road performance is excellent. We'll see about wear...23K so far.
    Also did not want to "store" and change tires 2x/year.
    Check out the Michelin site and evals on Tirerack for performance in snow and hydoplaning.
  • alfoxalfox Member Posts: 708
    Decided on Bridgestone Potenza RE950. Between Tire Rack and NTB ratings it seems to have the best mix for my car.
  • ashutoshsmashutoshsm Member Posts: 1,007
    Potenzas (9xx) are notorious for their hydroplaning 'feature' - as soon as you've got them about half worn-out. Great overall comporomise tire, though!
  • alfoxalfox Member Posts: 708
    I'm hearing that the 950's, which are fairly new, have corrected the partial-depth sipes that caused that problem, no? What do you hear about Dunlop SP Sport A2's?

    Al
  • ashutoshsmashutoshsm Member Posts: 1,007
    But if Tire Rack has enough reviews and miles for which the tire is rated (see summary page for the tire), then I'd feel safe if I had to go for it.

    As for the SP Sport A2 - no clue. Although I believe a whole bunch of people on the Mazda Protege board now swear by these tires. Drop by and ask for yourself!
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Sidewall stiffness is another difference between tire speed ratings. In general, a T-rated tire will have more sidewall flex than a H-rated tire.

    Ken
  • hvan1hvan1 Member Posts: 8
    I don't proclaim to be an expert, but I did speak to a technician today from Tirerack. The main difference other than speed (118 vs. 130 mph) is in tirewall stiffness. According to the technician, the H-rated tire tends to be stiffer in turns, and also gives a stiffer ride in general. If you have a high performance car, or if you want more responsive handling, then you may want to buy H-rated tires. The trade-off is that H-rated tires will not last as long, and you will have to replace them more frequently.

    By the way, I did a weight comparison with my minivan vs. a large luxury car to see how they compared. The Honda LX Oddysey weighs 4245 lbs.,
    and a Lincoln Continental weighs 3895 lbs. My Van is 350 lbs heavier(without towing equipment and accessories) than the Lincoln. It also is more top heavy. This is why I feel it is important to place good quality tires on larger minivans, and I still feel consumers or other rating services should consider rating tires for how they handle on minivans in general. That said, I think the X-1 meets my needs.
  • alfoxalfox Member Posts: 708
    Actually, I think all vehicles should have good quality tires that are properly sized to carry the load, minivans among them. Mounting the proper size and load range assures the tires are correct for the weight of the vehicle, not the quality of the tire.

    Good luck - the X-one is an excellent tire.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    If I ever decide to lease instead of buy, I'll certainly want that to be perfectly explained. Good advice for all.
  • dardson1dardson1 Member Posts: 696
    that had tires rated @ 149 mph, and very low profile. Very cool looking with the 17" wheels and practically no tire showing. I kinda think they were Bridgestone but not sure. Anyhow, in the 20 months (and 20k miles) I owned the car I had 11 flats, ruined two tires with punctured sidewalls and replace the other two because the tread was separating. There was plenty of tread left. They were just gone after 18k miles.
    Is that the price you pay for a great looking wheels/tires or did I just get a bad set of tires? I now drive a Tahoe. I think there's about a 8" sidewall on the bad-rep Firestones, but I've not had a single flat....lol. I saw a Yukon today with giant chrome wheels and ultra-low profile tires. Very, very cool looking, but after my experience, afraid to go there.
  • tbonertboner Member Posts: 402
    How low.

    I've been running 215/45-17's on my car without drama. I've had one puncture (a nail) but not really more or less than with other vehicles. (I had three last year on the other two cars.)

    I've been running this combination since June of last year.

    And finally, the tires are Firestone SZ 50 EP's

    TB
  • dardson1dardson1 Member Posts: 696
    I have no idea of the size on the Volvo tires. It was the GLT, not the serious Turbo model. I suspect the tires were not the most aggressive. All I know is......give me old-fashioned fat and ugly tires if it means 40k miles and no flats. Cool tires only work if they work.....The tire guy (who, of course, was selling tires) said low profile very sticky tires are not very forgiving. Sound reasonable to me. There's gotta be a reason most new cars come with something other than low-profile tires. thanks for the response.
  • cmack4cmack4 Member Posts: 302
    I'm looking for a set of replacement tires for my wife's Mercury Villager, and these tires are rated excellently at Tirerack (8.7 overall and excellent reviews). I just thought I'd check here first to get any of your impressions on the Yok's, since I have no experience with them.
  • hvan1hvan1 Member Posts: 8
    I know it was mentioned here once before, but be careful on comparing the Michelin X-1 with the Michelin X-Radial that cosco, bj's and sams club carries. The X-l is a T-rated tire and the X-1 radial is a S-rated tire. They are not equivalent. The discount club tires seemed like a great deal, but I've changed my mind.

    I am looking at the Bridgestone Turanza LS-T now because of price. Them seem like a good tire for the money. Does anyone have them on their van or car, and if so, how do you like them?

    hvan1
  • kansankansan Member Posts: 115
    I've bought Avid Tourings for my car and my wifes mini-van (Lumina APV) and they are the best tires I've ever driven on. They are definitely the quietest and the best at preventing hydroplaning and driving in rain. They are also good in snow, although I've never driven in any real deep snow, only 3 inches or so. They seem to be wearing well too. The best part was that they were better than the Michelins but were less than half the cost of the Michelins. When you buy Michelins you paying a lot for the name and advertising. When's the last time you saw a Yokohama add. They count recommendations for their advertising. Save your money and buy the Yokohama's, everyone I know has been glad they did.
    Ken
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Michelin Sweeps Tire Category Again


    JD Power best OEM tire



    Steve

    Host

    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards

  • hpulley4hpulley4 Member Posts: 591
    Yes, the store-branded X Radials are not necessarily the same. There are several X Radials, some that are the same as the X Ones with Durablack and a 700 treadlife rating while some others are lower tread and speed ratings -- Michelin doesn't sell the lower rated ones with their name on it. I've got X Ones on my Saturn LW200 and find them to be a very good tire -- the looked expensive at Tirerack but locally I found them to be much cheaper than similar tires from other manufacturers (and cheaper than the list price at Tirerack) so I went with them (was also looking at Goodyear Aquatread 3's but they were a lot more).

    My father-in-law has H rated Bridgestone Turanzas on his Mazda 626 and he likes them. Tirerack seems to rate the H rated Turanzas VERY well but the T rated ones 'only' good (still OK but not top of the class like the H rated ones). I'm not sure how much more expensive the H rated ones are.
  • rs_pettyrs_petty Member Posts: 423
    I'm looking at this tire as replacement for OEM on 2wd pickup. Any useful feedback is appreciated.
  • bretfrazbretfraz Member Posts: 2,021
    While I am not a big fan of the low priced "value" performance tires the Ecsta 712 seems to be the tire du jour with the Fast & Furious crowd. I don't know why the Kumho is so much more regarded than comparable tires from Toyo, Sumitomo, Falken, Hankook, and others. Even Dunlop and Yokohama have introduced cheaper low profile tires to compete with the Kumho juggernaut.

    Do some searchs at online car clubs or a place like http://www.roadfly.com for users opinions of Kumho.
  • sgrd0qsgrd0q Member Posts: 398
    I am looking to switch to Michelin Sport A/S - has anyone had any experience with these? Thanks!
  • hengheng Member Posts: 411
    do you have on the Yoko Avid Touring?
  • kansankansan Member Posts: 115
    I have about 35,000 on the tires. The fronts are showing a little wear, I'd guess they still have about 3/4 tread, the back tires look like they're still about 90% tread, which is to be expected on a mini van. I am going to rotate before winter to put the best tread on front. I expect to get at least another 30-35,000 miles before I change them out.
    I have the Yoko Geolandar H/T (Y816 I think?) on my 2000 Silverado, and the Yoko Avid S/T on my Hot Rod and am also very pleased with them. When I first bought the Yoko's it was due to the low price, after having them I prefer them to Michelins. Now it's a no brainer for me when I need tires, I just hope Yoko's don't get so popular that the price starts going up.
    Ken
  • kansankansan Member Posts: 115
    After looking at the Tire Rack surveys, about every category Yoko makes a tire for they were either the top rated tire or real close to to the top rated one. I would trust those ratings more than any JD Power rating, because they come directly from the customer and Tire Rack sells all brands of tires.
  • cmack4cmack4 Member Posts: 302
    Kansan,

    Thanks for the feedback. I felt the same way about the tire rack ratings.
  • microrepairmicrorepair Member Posts: 508
    I'm currently running a set of Avid's on my Mercedes E-class and am impressed with their quietness and traction in the rain. I've got about 7K miles on them and they are near the top of the list of excellent tires I've owned.
  • hpulley4hpulley4 Member Posts: 591
    For sales and service of cars, tires, etc. JD Power sends out surveys. I've done some. You can register for them if they haven't found you randomly.
  • hengheng Member Posts: 411
    Yoko Avid Touring weren't even on my radar screen before. Michelin X-one/Plus are my standard for comparisons (since I've owned 2 sets).

    The tirerack ratings has them very comparable to the Michelin X-ones with the statistical edge in snow traction, noise and ride comfort. Of course the price, like you said, is half the Michelins.

    It seems that my choices are limited by available sizes. I recently put Dunlop Sp sport A2 on my son's car because they were a top rated tire in the size needed. I would have perferred a tire like the Avid Touring or the X-one for long tread life. Neither the Michelin or Yokos came in the needed size (215/60-15).

    I will be needing a set of truck tires for my SUV before this winter. Again my choices are limited by available size. Looks like Michelin LTX M/S unless someone can suggest something else. The Yoko Geolanders don't come in 235/70-15. Need a mildly aggressive tread for snow and some off-road duty. The BFG Long Trails don't have the balance of characteristics that the LTX M//S offer.
  • suvshopper4suvshopper4 Member Posts: 1,110
    Yeah, I'm still shopping for new tires for my '01 RAV4. But I've actually gotten to the point of going to local dealers for prices. Progress!

    Thanks to some recent posts, I've just gotten interested in the Yokohama brand, specifically the Geolandar H/T. Survey results seem above average, and the price is right. Very right.

    Don't know if I can justify the extra bucks for the Michelins. And Bridgestone Dueler H/Ls are still in the running.

    I'd appreciate any feedback on these Geolandar tires.

    I don't anticipate doing any serious off-roading.
    We get occasional snow.
    Road noise and rain performance are major considerations.

    Thanks.

    -ss4
  • porknbeansporknbeans Member Posts: 465
    I don't know about the H/T's, but I am getting the A/T plus II's put on my Durango today. I read the reviews on tire rack, this board and the Durango board. They supposedly give excellent wet and snow traction, good ride quality and acceptable (for me) sound quality. The main drawback I've heard of is that they wear out quick. Don't know if this helps (probably not, sorry).
    Porknbeans

    Grand High Poobah
    The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
  • cmack4cmack4 Member Posts: 302
    That's funny, I also currently have the Michelin X-one's on my Wife's mini-van, and use those as a standard since they were great tires. I can't justify paying twice the price as the Yok's though. I plan on buying within the month, so I'll post my comparison once I've gotten the Yok's installed.
  • kansankansan Member Posts: 115
    If you go with the Geolandar H/T make sure you specify the Y816 one, it is the number one rated Highway All Season Truck Tire on Tire Rack (rated above Michelin's Cross Terrain SUV). I have put about 20,000 on my set of Geolandar H/T Y816 tires and have been very happy from all aspects. If you want an Off-road All-terrain tire, the Geolandar A/T Plus IIs are the number one rated Off-road All-Terrain tire on Tire Rack (rated above the Michelin LTX A/T), and the wear rating looks fairly decent. A friend of mine put those on his truck and he says they're the best truck tires he's ever had, I think I'll try them when I need a new set (I like a little variety once in a while). Whether you go with the H/T or A/T depends on your driving habits. The H/Ts should last longer.
    These are my opinions, and I'm a bargain hunter so when I find a great product (Yokohamas) for a great price I stick with them.
    Ken
  • anonymous02anonymous02 Member Posts: 1,538
    "...The tirerack ratings has them very comparable to the Michelin X-ones with the statistical edge in snow traction, noise and ride comfort. Of course the price, like you said, is half the Michelins"

    Wow! That pretty much seals it then.
  • ashutoshsmashutoshsm Member Posts: 1,007
    You can play around with the tire size a little bit!

    See

    http://miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

    Enter the current size, and then try a few variation

    eg: for 215/60-15 I would try 205/65-15 and 225/55-15


    I don;t know if those sizes would be available, but you get the general idea. Read a few articles on "Plus Zero" sizing of tires to fit existing wheels, and the effects of going with higher and lower profile tires (on ride, handling, wear as well as speedo error, if any). It is often possible to switch to another size and save some money an/or get a better tire/ride/handling characteristics! Make sure to change all 4 tires, though, at the same time (unless you already have different sized OEM tires, eg some RWD vehicles)

  • anonymous02anonymous02 Member Posts: 1,538
    "... for my SUV before this winter. ... unless someone can suggest something else. The Yoko Geolanders don't come in 235/70-15. Need a mildly aggressive tread for snow and some off-road duty."

    It seems that the most popular BY FAR for mildly aggressive and some off road duty is the BFG AT KO. You might want to go to the 235/75R15 or even a 30X9.50 size, which will give you a little more ground clearance for that snow and off road stuff you mention.
  • anonymous02anonymous02 Member Posts: 1,538
    The BFG AT KO's are supposed to be pretty long lasting and quieter than more aggressive tires as well.
  • porknbeansporknbeans Member Posts: 465
    I had them installed this morning on my Durango. I haven't put 100 miles on them yet, but I can already tell that they are a huge improvement over the original equipment tires. Comfortable ride, good dry traction and they look good. Being an A/T tire the sound that they make is minimal (they're quieter than the Goodyears that they replace). They do get a little "wallowy" in the sidewall, but nothing objectionable. What closed the deal on buying these over many other tire brands that I looked at was their wet and snow performance.

    The Durango isn't a small or light vehicle. Mine also doesn't have 4-wheel ABS so I wanted a tire with every bit of traction that I could find.

    I'll let you know how things go after things start to get wet and sloppy around here.
    Porknbeans

    Grand High Poobah
    The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
  • porknbeansporknbeans Member Posts: 465
    $435 for the 4 tires. Including tax, spin balance and disposal of the old tires.
    Porknbeans

    Grand High Poobah
    The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
  • bretfrazbretfraz Member Posts: 2,021
    My personal feeling is that the diffs between your OE Bridgestone's and the Yoko's you're looking at will be minor. My only concern is snow traction which is an area where Yoko doesn't do well in (neither does Bridgestone for that matter).

    But if things look good to you and the price is right on the Yoko's, I'd say their a good choice and certainly a good value.

    Michelin's are nice but nice has a price. And it's always hard for me to recommend a tire when someone is happy with their current choice. So the Dueler HT's and the Yoko's are a toss up, IMO.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles