Not all of the tire descriptions on the Nokian webpage mention canola oil - for sure the WR and WRG2 do mention canola-silica in the formulation of those tires. It looks like the canola oil is used in their winter / all-weather tires only.
I've never seen canola mentioned in the webpages for other tire manufacturers, but then I reallly haven't looked for it either. Once you've had Nokian tires, it's kinda hard to go back...
Okay, my VW Passat (2003 model) came with H rated Michelin MXV4's. I've had Nokian WR's on for the last two years, but I need new tires before the end of the month as these won't pass my state safety inspection.
My local Nokian dealer has finally gotten the new Nokian WRG2's in for the season. But they only have it in stock in the T speed-rated version (they can get the H, but it will put me past the end of the month and I'm due for inspection before the 31st). The load rating (at 91) matches what VW spec'ed for my car.
I drive like my kid's grandma - mainly because I usually have my kiddo in the car with me and I'm stretching my fuel economy out as much as I can.
Would you consider the T tire, or just wait out the H version delivery? My dealer doesn't see a problem going with the T, even saying I might get better wear out of them. I never drive anywhere near the speed rating for the T, at 118 mph.
Sounds like T's are the best answer, given your unusual situation. I'm not even sure a 2003 Passat can go 118 mph - most modern cars have speed limiters which seem to be around 100 - 110 mph or so (not the ultra high HP models, though :surprise: ).
You might ask your local state inspector if there are allowances for waiting for the "right" tires, and see if they will allow inspection to be delayed until after you get the H series. They may tell you you cannot drive the car after the due date until it does get new tires, though. Or they might let you drive it for a very limited period and require you submit proof that the tires have been upgraded by end of that period.
Yes, the Passat has a speed limiter, but I've read it higher than 118, hence why they spec the H tire. Whether that's true or not, I don't know. I've never had it past 95 mph (uh...I think I need to insert "on a closed course with a professional driver" verbage here ).
Generally speaking, 75 is my limit.
I can chance it and wait, but I could get a ticket for an invalid inspection sticker.
Hey, ruking - what's your thoughts behind the H's over the T's? I'm sorta of there myself. The price differential isn't much at $8 a tire ($117 vs. $125). Why the local dealer has had such a hard time getting these in is unknown to me. I've been calling about the WRG2's for over a month, and the T ones just came in this week. I'm a little worried they might string me along waiting for the H's for a couple of weeks longer than promised.
What I am thinking is sort of a "educated hunch" I run H and T tires (side by side) and the H tires (all things being equal... but of course we can echo: they are NOT) seem to last FAR longer than the T tires; given the same/SIMILAR conditions In my case 73,000 miles vs 111,000 miles. For example I will need new T tires at 75,000 miles, no if ands or buts. The H tires are still (@ 111,000) a wait and see (for another 10,000 miles) proposition!? Indeed that does not really tell the story in that the T tires are primarily used for a daily commute as were the H rated tires for a large portion of its life. So the difference was the H rated tires were used on the weekends for higher speed, longer distance travel. The H rating is really specified or built to run all day @ autobahn speeds, (H rating is 130 mph I believe) . So obviously if you run @ far less speeds, aka 55mph to the flow of traffic the H rated tires should (in my case HAVE) lasted far longer. The T rating is @ 118 mph (as I believe and remember)
Hi, just joined in hopes of drawing on the collective knowledge of the group. I had a question I needed clarity on and never learned much about cars, so thought I'd surround myself by folks who do.
My wifes car has an OEM tire size of 195/65/r15. My neighbour has been trying to sell me his year old winter tires for a pretty good price. They are 195/60/r15. He keeps telling me they would be fine. He says its fine, but thats kinda like the sales lady saying, 'no, those horizontal stripes dont make you look fat at all.'
Would I be putting my wife in any kind of danger over the winter by buying tires of a different size as mentioned above?
If it matters, car is a 98 Honda Accord LX 4cl, and tires are year old Micheline x-ice..
The middle number in the tire rating is the aspect ratio. A 65 series tire will be "taller and skinnier" (lower profile) than a 60 series tire.
You can check Honda Accord specs to see if Honda shipped a '98 Accord with 60 series tires. If they have that means the tire should fit inside the wheel well without rubbing its sides. Or you can visit places like Tire Rack or others and use their tire size calculator to see if that lower profile size tire will fit.
Total tire/wheel combo change in height will be 19.5 mm, or about 3/4 inch. You will be lowering the car slightly, no increase in tire width, so you should not run into any wheel well or suspension parts clearance issues.
As to whether you are putting the spouse in danger... if the additional grip increases her confidence level, so she is out cutting donuts, leading to vertigo... well then yes.
This is not a good idea. This is going down in load carrying capacity and that increases the risk of a load realted tire failure - which sometimes has tragic consequences.
And to answer kurtamaxxxguy's question, this tire is smaller in load carrying capacity than ALL the tires supplied to the 1998 Honda Accord's. But there were a lot of different versions of Accord's and some of them had LARGER tires (load capacity wise). To be sure what the proper load carrying capacity is, you need to look at the placard.
On every vehicle sold in the US, there is a sticker – commonly called the tire placard - that lists the original tire size and the proper pressure for that size. The placard is usually located on a doorpost or in the glove box – but sometimes it is located in the trunk or on the fuel filler door.
Good point on load carrying capacity. When I changed to Nokians, they advised me to verify that the replacement load capacity equalled or surpassed the originals. Fortunately they did (95H orig, 101V XT replacement).
XT is apparently an "extender" rating, which rates tires higher in load capacity for lower temperatures.
you would have to look at the utqg ratings...they are three rating every single tire has to have stamped on the sidewall...they are as follows: tread, temperature and traction...tread will have a number anything really above 400-450 will last awhile/temperature ratings will go anywhere from a-c, a being the best rating and c being the lowest. the better buy is going to be an a rating because it describes the tires ability to get rid of heat to keep longer tread life. and, traction goes on a scale from AA,A,B,C..if your looking for a good decent lasting tire go with any tire rated 400-450 A, A...pirelli's arent bad but not what they are worked up to be unless your buyng the extremely expensive racing or sport tires, if your looking for good tires at a reasonable price...look for a set of cooper CS4 touring tires h or v speed rated are gonna be the best or even better would be a set of kumho ecsta platinum lx's. they are the first tires to be made v-speed rated and rated to 60,000 miles. they are the best normal driving tires i have seen in a long time as far as handling and wear just make sure the same as you would normally keep up with your rotations every 5-6k and align twice a year and you will get what you want out of them
i dont advise going to the t-rated tires for a few reasons...one being the fact that the car came originally with h-rated tires, it doesnt matter how you drive the car, its what the car is designed for, the biggest reason i advise not to switch to t-rated tires is because if ur dealership told you its not a big deal they are lying...i work at a dealer in new york and came here from pa. pa alone is ranked i think the 5th hardest state to get through inspection and ny's inspection is a joke. but even here if you have a rating on a tire lower than factory spec same as in pa the vehicle fails outright and your up the creek without a paddle unless you buy new tires. and i know thats not just a ny/pa thing, thats a nationwide rule that you can only go up in ratings in tires but not down. especially the fact that you have your kid in the car i advise against it, as far as them telling you it would take that long to get them, that place is full of it, there are many ways anyone who sells tires to have them at minimum of next day up to 4 days at the most id press them a little more to get the h-rated tires there
I probably should also mention that the car the T tires are on is 450#s LIGHTER than the car that runs H tires!!!! The one thread that so call "connects" the two is those are the tires the oem selected to actually MAKE the EPA ratings. So outside of probably being the cheapest, they also are uniquely specified to get the BEST mpg aka have lowest rolling resistance, etc.
im just gonna put this on here for everyones sake, its not to bash anyone, but by all means do not ask your car inspector to write a waiver for you to drive past the limit of your state inspection in any state. no inspector is above the law and if you get caught that mechanic cannot in any way give you an excuse to get out of a ticket...just hope the cop you get if you get pulled over is a nice guy and gives you a warning...i have had a million people ask me for an extension as a service manager, and the answer is simply no, in what way do i have seniority over an officer of the law, we dont, dont bother asking it just makes you as a consumer look like a jerk, not to be mean but people get all upset and nasty when u say u cant, people have to realize people who fix cars and run shops are not magicians who can pull strings to do anything they want with a car or fix it in two seconds, we are humans just like you, we are subject to all the same laws and stipulations as everyone else around
when i say 400-450 or higher im talking about the tread utqg...nothing about production or epa...its a rating on the tire that the national minimum is 100 but thats equivalent to a piece of rubber laying on the side of the road...what people mean by oem tires is this: 195/60r15 92H...means this...tread width=195mm/60=sidewall ratio/r15 is obviously rim size/92 is the load index, when you buy a new tire the new tires number cannot be lower than that only equal to or higher and h=speed rating obviously and replacement tires can only in that case be rated H,V,W or Z
yes you could put those winter tires on your wifes vehicle, actually that tire size would be better for the car, you and your wife during winter due to this: on the 195/65r15 tire the tire is going to be slightly taller than the 195/60r15 tire. having the 65 series tire on your car gives you a higher center of gravity compared to the 60series tire meaning with the 60 series tire you will have a slightly lower center of gravity realistically giving the car a little better handling capability not only with the snow tires but in the respect of the car being able to take tighter dry road turns due to the slight difference, all in all, yes you can put those tires on the vehicle as long as its all four without interfering with anything at all whatsoever set up on the car
Again what we are both saying is/are common knowledge, and a lot of it, I assume most if not all know it. If they don't they can so state, or go back further in the threads posts as all to most is repeated and repeated multiple times.
In our state (NC) if the vehicle fails the inspection, a temporary sticker is issued, and you have I think 30 days toe correct the problem. Your state may have a similar procedure.
im moving to nc!!! both pa and ny you fail the safety inspection your done, you have to make repairs before the car passes...only difference is in pa the car has the emissions and safety inspections separate and the vehicle has to pass emissions tests before a safety sticker can be put on...for people who have older cars its a royal pain but in comparing ny cars to pa cars i would much rather be riding around in a car from pa that passes compared to a ny car, the test in ny is stupidly pointless
I'm ready to replace the tires on my '06 Subaru Outback 3.0R. I'm looking for good wet traction, good ride comfort, good tread life, and at least decent winter snow/slush performance. I've narrowed it down to the Bridgestone Turanza Serenity or the Michelin Primacy MXV4. I'm leaning toward the Bridgestones and will probably get them soon unless something else comes to my attention. Any thoughts on these tires or any other suggestions? The OEM size is 225/55-17V.
i dont suggest those tires because both those tires usually come from the factory, i work at a dealership and the tires manufacturers install are junk to be honest, they make these contracts with tire companies to get the cheapest things possible since they are getting so many of them. if you are looking into a good tire take a look at a set of cooper cs4 touring tires. i know they come in that exact size and rating. the only other option i could tell you which i have been preaching to everyone about is the kumho ecsta platinum lx's. i know they come in that size as well, they are the first v-rated 60,000 mile all-season tire that actually fully lives up to its life expectancy and handling capabilities. couple of bonuses with the kumho's too is that they come with a free road hazard warranty which helps and im pretty sure 2 yr roadside assistance with them and i know that if something happens in the first year the tire gets replaced for free if i remember correctly. your gonna pay slightly less for the kumho's and less for the cooper's. the cooper v-rated come with a 50,000 mile life expectancy and i know personally they live up to their standard as far as handling goes. you will pay less for the coopers than the kumhos. hope this suggestion helps
Thanks for the suggestions. I have considered the Cooper CS4. It looks like an excellent tire. The problem is, I want to buy locally and the only place that sells Cooper is quite expensive. Locally I can get the Michelin or the Bridgestone for about the same price as the Cooper. If the Cooper was less money I'd probably go for it but at the same price, my preference would be for one of the other two. The Michelin and the Bridgestone tires that I listed are not really OEM tires and they are far from junk. They are both relatively new designs wit the latest technology. In fact, they are both extremely highly rated tires. Take a look at them at Tire Rack. Now the Bridgestone RE92's that came on my Subaru are another story all together. They are indeed crappy tires which I would never recommend to anyone. The Kumhos seem good as well but they are apparently a little lacking in wet traction, which is something that is important to me. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=112
I just bought a new Impreza Outback Sport which seems to have a a more "performance" size tire at 205/50-17. I am new to Subaru so maybe its not an odd size after all?
I have the stock Bridgestone 92a tires and since I live in Connecticut i'd rather have a better all season tire on my car. For every day use not to mention when it does snow I have a steep driveway. So something better then the 92a's is my goal. I really dont want to use a real snow tire as I don't have the money to buy a complete set of rims and TPMS sensors; or the $90 it costs to swap each change over.
So here are what I came up with:
Option 1 - this is what I am leaning towards: Goodyear F1 All Seasons // these seem like a low profile version of the Goodyear Triple Treads everyone likes so much. But maybe its the name or the low profile BUT they look like they would be worse in snow/ice then the stock 92A tires? Has anyone here used these in a northern state with some decent snow/ice? I wish the TT's came in this size as I have had them on an other car.
Option 2 - these tire have a much reduced cost over the F1's Bridgestone G019 Grids // these have a "meaty" look to them but at the same time also seem to be more sporty as the snipes or blocks are closer to each other. which might not be as good in winter or rain?
Option 3 - might be the best option but no one sells them near me and online they are not cheap Nokian WRg2's - they seem like a true snow tire but can be used year round?
Now don't get me wrong I know it doesn't snow that much anymore in CT but when it does we get a fair amount; not to mention its not a flat state. I need to be able to get to work and back home with out overly stressing out. That and I drive about 500 miles a week so they are used more then just around town. PLUS one of the routes on my daily commute really complements a "sporty" ride if you know what I mean :-)
And I am open to take additional suggestions or any data you folks have
I have no first hand experience with them, but I've heard nothing but good things about the Nokian WRG2. In fact, I was going to buy a set for myself. They can be used year round but I think they may wear a little too quickly when used in warm weather. But if good winter traction is you main concern they would be your best bet in a year round tire. Another tire to consider is the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S although they aren't going to be nearly as good as the Nokian in the snow. Probably better than the tires that came with your car though. It seems that most of the tires that come in your size are summer performance tires. Not that many good A/S choices in your size.
The Nokian WRG2's seem to work very well on the '09 Forester I have. The ride is a bit smoother, tire noise is less, and handling seems about the same if a tad bit more floaty than the original Yokohama Geolanders..
My GY TripleTreads did __not__ work well on ice (lots of skids and my Maxx got stuck on a moderate hill). Nokians are claimed to do fine on Ice but I won't know for another month or more for sure.
The GY F1 A/S are kind of pricey in this size IMO, plus they didn't test very well in the latest Tirerack tests, and received low marks for snow traction.
The Bridgestone G019 Grid isn't a bad choice, they've also tested well. A word of caution: I've heard of previous owners of the G009 (the preceding tire) complain of the tires getting louder with age, and a lower treadlife than expected, even with non-aggressive driving.
The Nokian WRg2s will definitely give you an edge in the winter months, but based on past Nokian experience, they're hardly the partner you want on a twisty backroad when the weather is dry compared to the others. The price is a bit of a downer as well.
I'd also check into two other inexpensive tires, the BFGoodrich g-Force Super Sport A/S and Dunlop SP Sport Signature. Both test well and are rated highly on Tirerack.com, and I've heard owners of the BFGs say that they are excellent performers in dry and wet weather, and are more than adequate in winter months.
I put Goodyear Assurance Triple Treads on our 2002 Outback wagon, H6, and were very pleased with them. Good in all kinds of weather, even in 6"-8" of show ('course, the AWD helps ). Had almost 45,000 miles on them before I sold the car to my son. Only downside is that the steering response is a bit more sluggish than it was with the original Bridgestones, something I attribute to the softer sidewalls. For that reason, I would not put them a more performance oriented car, but for a passenger sedan or wagon they were great.
Got the Nokians installed - the WRG2's are noticably quieter than the WRs when they were new. Haven't had any weather to speak of yet, so I can't comment on handling wet or snow conditions.
420 A A rating. Passed state inspection with no problem. The "reasons-to-fail" for PA are silent on speed-rating, although it does mention that "not for highway use" tires wil cause a fail. The tech doing the inspection was very interested in my tires - so much so that he was going to buy himself a set before winter. So I know he carefully examined them.
Rainy weather doesn't seem to give the WRG2's on my Forester any problems - if anything they seem to run a bit quieter in the wet.
Good to know the WRG2's run quieter than the WR's - my dealer accidently put WR's on the Forester first and I noticed the same thing.
They're still breaking in so I'm being easy on them.
If you visit Nokian's Finnish website, you can download a pdf that details their testing procedures and tracks. The winter track is very impressive, with a unqiue slushfilled roadway (something the WRG2's are supposed to be good at handling).
With the exception of the Goodyears - none of the tires you've listed have alot of "Total Miles Reported" which would concern me since it's a challenege to predict how these tires will perform when they hit 30,000 plus miles...I for one am impressed with the Cooper CS4's that are on my wifes' CRV; just as good as the more expensive Michelin Harmony's...I'll most likely be putting these same tires (though they'll be H rated) on my Edge sometime this winter...Kinda surprised to hear that these CS4's are gonna cost you as much as the Michelins/Bridgestones :surprise:
As for the T/H speed ratings - in many cases I find this to be a complete joke (courtesy of the auto manufacturers)...My last car was a 2001 Honda Accord LX sedan with the 4 cylinder, & guess what the folks @ Honda reccommend - H rated tires :confuse: ...Instead of wasting my hard earned $$$ on another set of Michelin MXV4 Plus (which were rather so-so in snowy conditions) - I opted to purchase the Harmony, & had my brother install them...I noticed a little loss of cornering ability, but the wet/snow traction was alot better - which is what I was looking for...I understand that Honda probably had the intentions of installing H rated tires for their more powerful V-6 Accord, but to expect those of us with the 4-banger to pay more was just plain silly.
It would seem to me perspectives, expectations, uses and actual miles are all over the map.
..."which would concern me since it's a challenge to predict how these tires will perform when they hit 30,000 plus miles..."..
I could not help but notice the above quote. On an 04 Honda Civic the (23/24 on tire rack ratings ) oem provided Dunlop FE20?, S rated tire gave 74,300 miles, and I felt it was fast wearing (UTOQ 320) !? H rated tires on a 2950 # vehicle are still good to go @ 110,000 miles. (Again not rated well @ all on Tirerack) It was ( third) aligned before the new tires were R/R mounted and balanced.
I did some research and T rated Toyo 800 Ultra tires (UTOQ 700) came to the fore for that size. (They have since been discontinued and now Versado LX occupies its "premium" designation, with the Spectrum at the workhorse position. We were looking for: 1. low rolling resistance 2. longer life 3. adaptability for the 54 mile R/T commute done daily with 2 folks and a mpg range of 38-42 mpg.
We are still under tire break in mileage (300-500 miles), but so far things are looking good, sans the braking distances seem a tad longer. I fully expect a min of 1 mpg loss by virtue of switching to new tires. I will report if folks are interested.
""New tires will crash mpg anywhere from 1-6 mpg. I have new tires and alignment and swag I will lose 1-2 mpg (or from 38-42 mpg) , so the range will now be between 36-41 mpg for a while. "
First tank full after the above quote, 38.5 mpg (354 miles/9.2 gal) . So I (still) swag (all things being equal) a new tire set loss of app 1.5 mpg ( getting app 40 mpg before tire set swap and alignment) . The first tank came almost dead in the middle of my original projection. We shall see what another 3 tank fulls will mike out to be.
Got a set of these in the 205/55/16 size for the wife's Mazda 3s and the car drives much smoother than the BF Goodrich T/A's that were there for the last 32k miles...but the Yoko's are touring and not performance tires which must be the reason for the smoothness and quietness. So far, we're pleased.
I am also glad you posted your size tire (205/55/16) . Anymore with out knowing that or actually having the exact same size tire, it is increasingly difficult to really put tires in apples to apples comparison mode. So for example, Mazda 3 sized tires are definitely "performance" oriented; as such, it may be anathema to expect "economy." Indeed in the Yokohama closest to the tire you have (like mine the touring is being phased out in favor of the S touring) the price is 75 per vs 60 per or 25% more.
So in the interest of really overloading one with information, tire size on my posts is 185/70/14. It is a coincidence the Yokohama's you mentioned are available in the "Civic" size (185/70/14) On the other hand, "performance" for me are:
1. more commute ride "cushion", aspect ratio of 70 vs 55
2. if I got 74,300 miles from the (crappy) oem 23/24 rated tires, I want to get as a min, MORE than that from these Toyo 800 Ultra (UTOQ 700) T rated up from S rated.
3. if I get between 38-42 mpg on the oem 23/24 rated tires. I would like to match or have slightly better rolling resistance (lower)
I've gone over to Michelin Harmony and Goodyear Comfort Tread tires on my vehicles. They are both good quality, great wet and snow traction, long wearing tires. I probably lost a mile or so per gallon, but well worth the tradeoff. Personally, I've never had a good Firestone or Bridgestone tire. I think they gear to lower cost OEM.
Where did you come from, Firestone/ Bridgestone? Also there can be soooo much change, that the latest and greatest switch in the rankings literally in months.
Anyone on here know about tires? Ive got an 06 330i, lookin for some all seasons that handle the absolute best in dry weather (hopefully better than the TERRIBLE stock bridgestones that are on it now) and are decent in the winter. Dont really care about ride quality THAT much, but i dont want something really harsh. Care most about feel, want crisp steering response and sticky handling. Looking at: Yokohama ADVAN S.4. Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus Any help would be awesome i really need tires asap! Thanks!
I think you have WAY too much help! While either of the tire brands and models you mentioned are fairly stellar, www.tirerack.com lists 157 choices for your vehicles tire size 225/45/17. However in the "segment" you are looking, Bridgestone Potenza RE 960 A/S are the current latest and greatest ( aka, top rated) followed by the Yokohama's you mentioned BF Goodrich g-Force Super Sport A/S holds 3rd position.
Thanks for the suggestions! Nope dont want runflats, terrible ride. I have the sport pkg, so mine are 225/40/18 and 255/35/18. The 4 i can choose from are the yokos, michelins, pirellis, and goodyears. I narrowed it down to the yokos and michelins based on the test reports. I just want to know which will feel the best, in terms of sporty handling/steering/ride. I know u might think its overkill but i feel like i should spend a long time picking out really good tires if i have a car that is meant to handle and drive well
Comments
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I've never seen canola mentioned in the webpages for other tire manufacturers, but then I reallly haven't looked for it either. Once you've had Nokian tires, it's kinda hard to go back...
My local Nokian dealer has finally gotten the new Nokian WRG2's in for the season. But they only have it in stock in the T speed-rated version (they can get the H, but it will put me past the end of the month and I'm due for inspection before the 31st). The load rating (at 91) matches what VW spec'ed for my car.
I drive like my kid's grandma - mainly because I usually have my kiddo in the car with me and I'm stretching my fuel economy out as much as I can.
Would you consider the T tire, or just wait out the H version delivery? My dealer doesn't see a problem going with the T, even saying I might get better wear out of them. I never drive anywhere near the speed rating for the T, at 118 mph.
I'm not even sure a 2003 Passat can go 118 mph - most modern cars have speed limiters which seem to be around 100 - 110 mph or so (not the ultra high HP models, though :surprise: ).
You might ask your local state inspector if there are allowances for waiting for the "right" tires, and see if they will allow inspection to be delayed until after you get the H series. They may tell you you cannot drive the car after the due date until it does get new tires, though. Or they might let you drive it for a very limited period and require you submit proof that the tires have been upgraded by end of that period.
Generally speaking, 75 is my limit.
I can chance it and wait, but I could get a ticket for an invalid inspection sticker.
Hey, ruking - what's your thoughts behind the H's over the T's? I'm sorta of there myself. The price differential isn't much at $8 a tire ($117 vs. $125). Why the local dealer has had such a hard time getting these in is unknown to me. I've been calling about the WRG2's for over a month, and the T ones just came in this week. I'm a little worried they might string me along waiting for the H's for a couple of weeks longer than promised.
My wifes car has an OEM tire size of 195/65/r15. My neighbour has been trying to sell me his year old winter tires for a pretty good price. They are 195/60/r15. He keeps telling me they would be fine. He says its fine, but thats kinda like the sales lady saying, 'no, those horizontal stripes dont make you look fat at all.'
Would I be putting my wife in any kind of danger over the winter by buying tires of a different size as mentioned above?
If it matters, car is a 98 Honda Accord LX 4cl, and tires are year old Micheline x-ice..
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
B
You can check Honda Accord specs to see if Honda shipped a '98 Accord with 60 series tires. If they have that means the tire should fit inside the wheel well without rubbing its sides.
Or you can visit places like Tire Rack or others and use their tire size calculator to see if that lower profile size tire will fit.
As to whether you are putting the spouse in danger... if the additional grip increases her confidence level, so she is out cutting donuts, leading to vertigo... well then yes.
See this handy tire size calculator:tire calc
This is not a good idea. This is going down in load carrying capacity and that increases the risk of a load realted tire failure - which sometimes has tragic consequences.
And to answer kurtamaxxxguy's question, this tire is smaller in load carrying capacity than ALL the tires supplied to the 1998 Honda Accord's. But there were a lot of different versions of Accord's and some of them had LARGER tires (load capacity wise). To be sure what the proper load carrying capacity is, you need to look at the placard.
On every vehicle sold in the US, there is a sticker – commonly called the tire placard - that lists the original tire size and the proper pressure for that size. The placard is usually located on a doorpost or in the glove box – but sometimes it is located in the trunk or on the fuel filler door.
When I changed to Nokians, they advised me to verify that the replacement load capacity equalled or surpassed the originals. Fortunately they did (95H orig, 101V XT replacement).
XT is apparently an "extender" rating, which rates tires higher in load capacity for lower temperatures.
So for example 2950#'s- 2514's is not app 450#s (436 to be exact). I am not using oem tires?. etc.
What I am saying is as it is, and common knowledge.
I'm looking for good wet traction, good ride comfort, good tread life, and at least decent winter snow/slush performance.
I've narrowed it down to the Bridgestone Turanza Serenity or the Michelin Primacy MXV4. I'm leaning toward the Bridgestones and will probably get them soon unless something else comes to my attention.
Any thoughts on these tires or any other suggestions?
The OEM size is 225/55-17V.
The Michelin and the Bridgestone tires that I listed are not really OEM tires and they are far from junk. They are both relatively new designs wit the latest technology. In fact, they are both extremely highly rated tires. Take a look at them at Tire Rack.
Now the Bridgestone RE92's that came on my Subaru are another story all together. They are indeed crappy tires which I would never recommend to anyone.
The Kumhos seem good as well but they are apparently a little lacking in wet traction, which is something that is important to me.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=112
I have the stock Bridgestone 92a tires and since I live in Connecticut i'd rather have a better all season tire on my car. For every day use not to mention when it does snow I have a steep driveway. So something better then the 92a's is my goal. I really dont want to use a real snow tire as I don't have the money to buy a complete set of rims and TPMS sensors; or the $90 it costs to swap each change over.
So here are what I came up with:
Option 1 - this is what I am leaning towards:
Goodyear F1 All Seasons // these seem like a low profile version of the Goodyear Triple Treads everyone likes so much. But maybe its the name or the low profile BUT they look like they would be worse in snow/ice then the stock 92A tires? Has anyone here used these in a northern state with some decent snow/ice? I wish the TT's came in this size as I have had them on an other car.
Option 2 - these tire have a much reduced cost over the F1's
Bridgestone G019 Grids // these have a "meaty" look to them but at the same time also seem to be more sporty as the snipes or blocks are closer to each other. which might not be as good in winter or rain?
Option 3 - might be the best option but no one sells them near me and online they are not cheap
Nokian WRg2's - they seem like a true snow tire but can be used year round?
Now don't get me wrong I know it doesn't snow that much anymore in CT but when it does we get a fair amount; not to mention its not a flat state. I need to be able to get to work and back home with out overly stressing out. That and I drive about 500 miles a week so they are used more then just around town. PLUS one of the routes on my daily commute really complements a "sporty" ride if you know what I mean :-)
And I am open to take additional suggestions or any data you folks have
Thank you all in advance,
john
Another tire to consider is the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S although they aren't going to be nearly as good as the Nokian in the snow. Probably better than the tires that came with your car though.
It seems that most of the tires that come in your size are summer performance tires. Not that many good A/S choices in your size.
My GY TripleTreads did __not__ work well on ice (lots of skids and my Maxx got stuck on a moderate hill). Nokians are claimed to do fine on Ice but I won't know for another month or more for sure.
The Bridgestone G019 Grid isn't a bad choice, they've also tested well. A word of caution: I've heard of previous owners of the G009 (the preceding tire) complain of the tires getting louder with age, and a lower treadlife than expected, even with non-aggressive driving.
The Nokian WRg2s will definitely give you an edge in the winter months, but based on past Nokian experience, they're hardly the partner you want on a twisty backroad when the weather is dry compared to the others. The price is a bit of a downer as well.
I'd also check into two other inexpensive tires, the BFGoodrich g-Force Super Sport A/S and Dunlop SP Sport Signature. Both test well and are rated highly on Tirerack.com, and I've heard owners of the BFGs say that they are excellent performers in dry and wet weather, and are more than adequate in winter months.
Good luck with whatever you decide.
420 A A rating. Passed state inspection with no problem. The "reasons-to-fail" for PA are silent on speed-rating, although it does mention that "not for highway use" tires wil cause a fail. The tech doing the inspection was very interested in my tires - so much so that he was going to buy himself a set before winter. So I know he carefully examined them.
Good to know the WRG2's run quieter than the WR's - my dealer accidently put WR's on the Forester first and I noticed the same thing.
They're still breaking in so I'm being easy on them.
If you visit Nokian's Finnish website, you can download a pdf that details their testing procedures and tracks. The winter track is very impressive, with a unqiue slushfilled roadway (something the WRG2's are supposed to be good at handling).
As for the T/H speed ratings - in many cases I find this to be a complete joke (courtesy of the auto manufacturers)...My last car was a 2001 Honda Accord LX sedan with the 4 cylinder, & guess what the folks @ Honda reccommend - H rated tires :confuse: ...Instead of wasting my hard earned $$$ on another set of Michelin MXV4 Plus (which were rather so-so in snowy conditions) - I opted to purchase the Harmony, & had my brother install them...I noticed a little loss of cornering ability, but the wet/snow traction was alot better - which is what I was looking for...I understand that Honda probably had the intentions of installing H rated tires for their more powerful V-6 Accord, but to expect those of us with the 4-banger to pay more was just plain silly.
..."which would concern me since it's a challenge to predict how these tires will perform when they hit 30,000 plus miles..."..
I could not help but notice the above quote. On an 04 Honda Civic the (23/24 on tire rack ratings ) oem provided Dunlop FE20?, S rated tire gave 74,300 miles, and I felt it was fast wearing (UTOQ 320) !? H rated tires on a 2950 # vehicle are still good to go @ 110,000 miles. (Again not rated well @ all on Tirerack) It was ( third) aligned before the new tires were R/R mounted and balanced.
I did some research and T rated Toyo 800 Ultra tires (UTOQ 700) came to the fore for that size. (They have since been discontinued and now Versado LX occupies its "premium" designation, with the Spectrum at the workhorse position. We were looking for: 1. low rolling resistance 2. longer life 3. adaptability for the 54 mile R/T commute done daily with 2 folks and a mpg range of 38-42 mpg.
We are still under tire break in mileage (300-500 miles), but so far things are looking good, sans the braking distances seem a tad longer. I fully expect a min of 1 mpg loss by virtue of switching to new tires. I will report if folks are interested.
""New tires will crash mpg anywhere from 1-6 mpg. I have new tires and alignment and swag I will lose 1-2 mpg (or from 38-42 mpg) , so the range will now be between 36-41 mpg for a while. "
First tank full after the above quote, 38.5 mpg (354 miles/9.2 gal) . So I (still) swag (all things being equal) a new tire set loss of app 1.5 mpg ( getting app 40 mpg before tire set swap and alignment) . The first tank came almost dead in the middle of my original projection. We shall see what another 3 tank fulls will mike out to be.
So far, we're pleased.
The Sandman
I am also glad you posted your size tire (205/55/16) . Anymore with out knowing that or actually having the exact same size tire, it is increasingly difficult to really put tires in apples to apples comparison mode. So for example, Mazda 3 sized tires are definitely "performance" oriented; as such, it may be anathema to expect "economy." Indeed in the Yokohama closest to the tire you have (like mine the touring is being phased out in favor of the S touring) the price is 75 per vs 60 per or 25% more.
So in the interest of really overloading one with information, tire size on my posts is 185/70/14. It is a coincidence the Yokohama's you mentioned are available in the "Civic" size (185/70/14) On the other hand, "performance" for me are:
1. more commute ride "cushion", aspect ratio of 70 vs 55
2. if I got 74,300 miles from the (crappy) oem 23/24 rated tires, I want to get as a min, MORE than that from these Toyo 800 Ultra (UTOQ 700) T rated up from S rated.
3. if I get between 38-42 mpg on the oem 23/24 rated tires. I would like to match or have slightly better rolling resistance (lower)
If I get winter rims that are 16 x 6,5, Can I put P225 60 R16's on them and what effect would the larger size have.
A friend is willing to GIVE me some one year old winter tires, but I was wondering what the larger size might do?
Even without knowing what car you are putting them on.... That tire is 7% bigger in diameter.. over 1.5" taller...
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I've seen Lincoln Towncars with 22s and rubber bands. :P
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Thanks, I was afraid of that.
My wife would kill me if anything happened to her new Vibe. Winter rims and new X-Ice II's will have to do for plan B.
Ive got an 06 330i, lookin for some all seasons that handle the absolute best in dry weather (hopefully better than the TERRIBLE stock bridgestones that are on it now) and are decent in the winter. Dont really care about ride quality THAT much, but i dont want something really harsh. Care most about feel, want crisp steering response and sticky handling. Looking at:
Yokohama ADVAN S.4.
Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus
Any help would be awesome i really need tires asap! Thanks!
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Nope dont want runflats, terrible ride.
I have the sport pkg, so mine are 225/40/18 and 255/35/18.
The 4 i can choose from are the yokos, michelins, pirellis, and goodyears.
I narrowed it down to the yokos and michelins based on the test reports.
I just want to know which will feel the best, in terms of sporty handling/steering/ride.
I know u might think its overkill but i feel like i should spend a long time picking out really good tires if i have a car that is meant to handle and drive well