Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Tires

13468913

Comments

  • pblevinepblevine Member Posts: 858
    I appreciate your dialog. Yep, I was the one who wished to stay at the "V" rating. But I'm listening and what ya'll saying is very interesting. Butch11's review of the X-Ones leading my to ask tireguy: What is the designed application for them vs the MXV4's?
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Get it from the horse's mouth.
    www.michelin.com
  • rtl2rtl2 Member Posts: 7
    Chris. Thanks for your help and tips. However, no apology was needed on your part. You're not only a great resource on this forum, but you represent your employer very well!
  • bnormannbnormann Member Posts: 335
    Thanks for all of your great posts so far, Chris.

    Your Host, Bruce
  • briansbrians Member Posts: 14
    You can't judge proper inflation by appearance alone (and really not at all). Without more information I offer the following:

    You can check proper inflation, on a tire-by-tire basis, using a "chalk test." Use some heavy "sidewalk" chalk you can buy at a toy store in a light color. Chalk the edge of the tire where the sidewall meets the tread, overlapping chalk on both the treads and sidewall. Place these marks in three different locations on the tire. Take your car for a regular spin around the block, at cruising speeds. The chalk should be worn to near the edge of the tread/sidewall meeting point for proper inflation for cruising speeds. If the chalk is worn off the sidewall, you need more air (or you took a corner a little hard). If there is chalk on the tread that hasn't worn off, you need less air.

    Give it a try. Without a pyrometer to set exact inflation under current climate/use conditions, it's the next best thing.

    I assume that up until this point you have followed the manufacturer's recommendation on inflation.

    Good luck,
    -Brian S.

    PS Once you get the inflation right, using an accurate tire gauge, note the inflation for each tire. Remember ambient temperature will affect readings, as well.
  • 98monte_ls98monte_ls Member Posts: 117
    I always used to rotate tires front to back every
    6000 mi. Now, on my new car, I've had 2 tires
    replaced at once and then recently another one.
    So, 1 tire has 24,000 mi on it, 2 others have
    14,000 on them, and one has only 3,000 mi on it.

    it has now been 6,000 since the last rotation. Do
    I skip this rotation? Or rotate only two of the
    tires (the oldest one + 1 of the 2 middle ages
    ones)? Keep the oldest one on the front wheels
    (its a fwd Monte Carlo)?

    What can anyone recommend?
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Okay, you guys knew this was going to happen. Here goes...
    The BF Goodrich All-Terrain T/A has been one of the most successful all-terrain tires of all time. Last year they came out with the new generation, designated the All-Terrain T/A KO. The old style is now obsolete, so if you find them somewhere, don't buy them. If you were to destroy one, you won't find a replacement.
    The AT T/As have a reputation of being an outstanding tire, bolstered mainly by word of mouth. This is in contrast to Goodyear's reputation of being a well-known tire, based on prolific advertising and blimps. It seemed as though every time a customer asks me about the AT T/As (which my store has never kept in stock), their reason for wanting them was "my buddy runs 'em and he swears by 'em." The old ones had a reputation for being outstanding off-road tires, though sometimes noisy and not the longest lasting tires. The new KOs tackle these complaints head-on.
    The most obvious difference between the old AT T/As and the new KOs is that on the KOs the tread extends up the sidewall (a la Mickey Thompson), giving it a radical, sporty look which demands your attention. It improves traction in deep mud and snow, as well.
    BFG has made some changes to the compound and tread blocks to prolong tread life, reduce noise, increase traction... basically, they took a great tire and made it better.
    The key feature of both the old AT T/A and the new KO is the Tri-Guard sidewall. To help understand the advantage of this, I'll give a little background:
    This is a bit off the subject, so if you're easily bored by technical tirespeak, skip to the smiley face.
    Most broadline tires from P225/75R15 to LT265/75R16 (and up) are composed of two nylon plies, wrapping from bead to bead, capped by two steel belts in the tread. Thus they are considered a 6-ply tire (2 sidewall + 4 tread). Even most tires branded with the "10-ply rating," load range E, employ this 2+4 construction. There are a few exceptions; every Michelin truck tire in the D (8-ply) and E ranges contains an additional steel belt, making it an actual 7-ply tire (2 sidewall + 5 tread). The Goodyear Unisteel and Michelin XPS tires actually use a full steel casing. And thus I shall expose one of the perversions of the tire industry:
    Take for example tire size LT245/75R16 LRE. The Michelin XPS, with a full steel casing (plus three steel belts in the tread) is the brick s---house of tires. The General 550AS in this size, also load range E, utilizes the aforementioned 2 nylon, bead to bead, plus the standard 2 steel belts, though it bears the same "10-ply rating/load range E" inscription as the Michelin XPS. The cheaper tire companies don't bother going the distance to provide you with a better product. The capacity of the flimsy 6-ply construction somehow allows them to meet the bare minimum for an E tire. The customer sees a tire for $79.99, branded with an E, and he can't understand why he should pay $120 for Michelin's seemingly equal product. Little does he know the Michelin far exceeds the standard, without exclaiming it.
    Looking at the cross-sections of these tires, it's an I-beam compared to a 2x4. But when you shop, you are led to believe all load range E "10-ply rating" tires are created equal. The cheap tire manufacturers are marketing a 6-ply tire with a "10-ply rating," while Michelin adds the 7th ply to both the D and E load ranges. The result: a load range D Michelin is actually beefier than a load range E General. But why does Michelin do things like this? Why do they put so much effort into innovations the majority of their customers won't even know exist? Perhaps they don't want the ignorant consumer to purchase their product--the kind of person who drives around with a 5 degree toe-in, then blames Michelin for the "defective" tires which wore only on the outside. Some people have complained to me that they won't buy Michelins because of some problem they had in the past, upon which the company "refused to make good." Ninety percent of the "defects" customers present before me are a direct result of their own neglect. If I made a near-perfect product, I guess I'd be a bit defensive as well.
    :-)
    Now, what was I saying? Oh, the Tri-Guard sidewall employs a third nylon ply, also bead to bead, which makes it an actual 8-ply tire (3 side + 5 tread). This substantially increases puncture resistance while getting personal with jagged rocks along the trail. It also makes them more stable, increasing on-highway handling.
    Regarding appearance--these tires made me wish I still had my CJ5. When the first set came in, we just stood staring with longing eyes, drooling, running our fingers over the down-to-business tread blocks. A week later at least one of us had a set on his truck. Scott LOVES them. On his K1500 they look like lion's paws digging into the turf, ready to pounce in an explosion of forward fury. They catch the eye of even the regular joes who come in looking for 185/75R14s. Once we stacked four 33x12.50R16.5s (standing shoulder-high) near the doorway. Very few guys could walk past without dragging their hands across the jagged shoulder of the tread. They make you want to trade your minivan for a Humvee.
    THOUGH... If you're looking for the best, I don't know if this is what you want for your truck. Unless you go off-road very frequently, this is not the best all-terrain tire (which includes not only off-highway driving, but the paved stuff too). The Michelin LTX A/T is the best aggressive all-terrain tire for 4x's which spend less than 10% of their time off-road. I hate to sound redundant, but it's a fact, guys.
    In this case, it's a no-brainer. Michelin owns BF Goodrich. The tires which bear the Michelin name are the real deal, no sacrifice, best of the best. The BF Goodrich line is aimed at a more price-conscious market. They provide the highest possible quality at a competitive price. That's not to say the upper-end BFGs are not outstanding tires (Comp TA and All-Terrain TA KO are at the pinnacle of their class). I'm just saying if Michelin America were General Motors, BF Goodrich would be Pontiac, and Michelin would be Cadillac.
    Sam's club used to be the best place to buy the KOs. This is no longer true, as we have been banned by Michelin America from selling the KOs. Sam Walton's theory was to "buy it low, stack it high, sell it cheap." Get them in the most unimaginable quantities, at a(n almost shady) low price, then sell them so cheap people question whether they're the real thing. Michelin America had set a minimum price for the tires, but I guess some clubs violated that, and started selling the tires cheaper than M.A.'s wholesale price to the independent dealers. This caused some discontent, and you can no longer buy a 31x10.50R15 T/A KO at Sam's for under $80. Last summer, the day we saw them in our special order catalog, we pushed them like crazy, even outselling some of the tires we keep in stock. But that's over.
    But don't fret. As I said, if I still had my old CJ--which actually did her time in the rough, stomping ecosystems--I'd buy the KOs. NVH wasn't an issue; if I had purchased quiet tires, over the flapping of the vinyl roof and the roar of the glasspacks, I wouldn't have noticed. However, if I had a brand new Silverado, I'd buy the Michelins.
    You can still buy the KO tires relatively cheap at Sears, but their installation package is an absolute rip-off: $20 for the exact same deal (lifetime balancing and rotation, new stems, lifetime road hazard insurance, disposal) we sell for $7.50/tire.
    One other warning: BF Goodrich makes a cheap tire called the Long Trail T/A. This is not the All-Terrain T/A. It's not even close. They're great for the price ($59 for a 225/75R15), but, they're making serious compromises to achieve that price. Do not confuse them! Like I said, the "KO" is important.
    --Chris
  • hgileshgiles Member Posts: 66
    I have RE92's and I inflate them to 34-35. I agree that the fronts with the engine over them can look like they are deflated. I think they are fine. My car handles well and the tires have 24K miles on them without irregular wear patterns.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Don't overinflate your tires just because they look low; you might damage them. Yes, radials usually look underinflated, but unless you've been driving since the Johnson Era, I doubt you're used to the stiff look of bias-ply tires.
    The manufacturer has worked out a suggested tire pressure. But they have no idea what kind of driving you do, or how much you load up the vehicle. There is a near fool-proof method the layman can use to determine his proper tire pressure, though it takes a little time.
    For the best accuracy, you'll need some instrument capable of measuring tread depth in 1/32" increments. You can usually buy these at Pep Boys or Sears Hardware for less than $4. As the pressure is increased closer to the max, the weight carrying capacity of the tire increases. If the pressure is insufficient for the load on the tire, the wear will be concentrated on the shoulders. If the pressure is too high for the load, the wear will be concentrated in the center of the tread. Once a month, use your depth gauge to take three measurements across the tread: one inch from the right edge, the center, one inch from the left edge. Adjust the pressure accordingly, in 1-2psi steps above the recommendation. When you reach a medium, note the pressure and use the same gauge every time. If you had a pyrometer, you would perform the same test immediately after driving. Rather than checking for uneven wear, you'd check for uneven heat. The sections getting the most wear consequently run at a higher temperature.
    If you take corners like a sane person, yet notice a difference of more than 2/32 between the left and right shoulder measurements, your alignment is probably out.
    I drive a new Jetta with recommended pressures around 29 or something. I carry a 100# tool box (and whatever other stuff) in the trunk, and I exit ramps hard enough to make my books in the back seat slide from door to door. To offset the excessive front tire shoulder wear which is a result of my aggressive driving, I keep the front tires at 38. To adequately support the load in the rear, 36 has met the mark. All four of my tires are currently down to 4/32 completely across the tread. This works to prolong the tread life, but it makes for a harsh ride. You'll usually get the most comfortable ride at the recommended pressure. You'll almost always benefit from longer life and better handling by raising that pressure by 3-5psi. Just be sure not to exceed the max pressure. My MXV4s have a max pressure of 44psi, so I have room to play.
    To all you truck people with LT tires, they range from a max pressure of 50psi (LRC) to 80psi (LRE). So you REALLY have room to play. If the truck is driven empty most of the time, no matter what the payload, there is no need to have the rear tires above 60psi (most F250s call for 55/80).
    One final note: If you take your truck off road--I mean seriously off road--you can air the tires down as low as 15psi to make the tread roll over the terrain like a tank tread. Just make sure you pump them back up before driving home. This is why the Humvee has an on-board compressor.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    The whole point of rotating tires is to keep the tread wearing evenly at each corner. On front wheel drive cars, this means keeping the good tires on the front. As they pull and steer the car around, the front tires wear dramatically more than the rear. To make all your tires wear out at the same time, you rotate them. There is no absolute interval for rotating tires. Seven thousand miles is a safe bet. You want to rotate your tires when the front have wore 2/32 beyond those on the rear. If your tires on the rear--we're speaking exclusively of front wheel drive here--are worse than your tires on the front, there is no need to rotate them.
    There is nothing wrong with not rotating your tires and replacing them in pairs. It makes more sense, however to make them wear equally so you can always have a matched set of four (for more predictable handling). Rotating the tires will increase their life--no duh. I mean, if you replace them in pairs, you'll be close to buying three pairs of tires for the one set of four, otherwise. Giving the tires a break on the rear allows the tread to level its wear and start fresh when called back to battle on the front.
    The ride will not be significantly affected if you have wore-out tires on one end and new tires on the other, as long as they are paired up with equal partners. Having a new tire paired up with the old will screw up the whole science. Usually the car will pull to the side of the wore out tire due to its diminished radius. No big deal if you can deal with it. The wet traction will also be decreased on the tire with less tread depth; when you go through a deep puddle, it might pull hard enough to cause you to lose control as the water struggles to egress the shallow tread. You won't want to rotate the tires on this side until the front has degraded in depth beyond the rear. Rotate the side without the new tire independent of the other side.
    What you really should do is match up your 3K mi tire with a new one before it starts to wear. Use the other tire for a full-size spare (which I don't believe you have).
    -Chris
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Member Posts: 647
    When I was chasing vibrations at speeds in my car I noticed at our local NTB franchise that they had an article about with FWD cars, if you replace in pairs that the new ones go on back.

    While I understand that they were trying to control oversteer and having the back end slide out from under you, at some point you need to rotate the tires. Then, the new ones will be in front and the alleged benefits are negated.

    Right?

    Thoughts?

    Cheers,

    TB
  • ryanbabryanbab Member Posts: 7,240
    Thanks for the info it helped alot hopefully i wont need new tires for awhile though only have 1300 mls on em so far.

    Ryan
  • pblevinepblevine Member Posts: 858
    Again, I must thank you for these posts. I've learned a lot from them! Someone else also recommended raising my tire pressure in about the same manner. My MXV4's ('98 Accord Coupe EX V6) are now at 36psi (front) and 34psi (rear). The sticker says the correct pressure should be 32psi.
    These pressures seem (non-objective feeling - anyway) to produce the best compromise of traction and performance. I'll now go out and buy a good tread gauge and try it your way.
  • 98monte_ls98monte_ls Member Posts: 117
    Ok, then after rotating one side the mileage on my fronts will be: 3K & 14K, and the rear will be 14K & 24K. That should be more even...there really isn't much wear difference in 10,000 miles, right?
  • cwmartincwmartin Member Posts: 89
    tireguy: Thank you for the response on my post about tires for my new Yukon. The Yukon is due to be delivered next Tuesday and it looks as if it is going to come with Firestone tires. The factory size is P265/70R16.

    I will be driving my 2WD Yukon on the highway with no off roading scheduled. I am not a member of Sam's Club but I am a member of Costco. When I was there last weekend they had Michelin LTX M/S tires in a P265/75SR16 size for $105 each plus about $10 in mounting fees and taxes, etc. I was wondering if these can fit my stock rims. What does the SR mean instead of the R? According to some other people who provided a tire change calculator, putting this new size tire on the Yukon will result in the speedometer reading less than actual speed and the odometer reading more than actual mileage. I have been told the dealer can recalibrate the speedometer and odometer for about $35.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    You can't apply conventional wisdom in analyzing the thought process of NTB. They believe it is best to have the new tires on the rear because it minimizes the possibility of a spin-out in rain or snow. This is a rare event, but when the front tires are significantly grippier (for lack of a better term), there is a slightly increased chance for the rear to break traction first, causing an uncontrollable (for the average poor driver) drift. I guess people are a lot more likely to blame their new tires if they do a 360 into a wall, rather than plowing into it head on when the old front tires don't provide adequate handling. If the car continues sliding in a straight line, it's the fault of the old tires being slick--and thus unable to steer. If the vehicle spins out of control, it's the fault of the new tires being significantly stickier, and thus creating a pivot point which is conducive to the uncontrollable yaw movement.
    It's a B.S. liability issue. NTB actually suggests that front-wheel-driving customers who purchase only two snow tires install them on the rear of the vehicle for the same reason: to control braking. They won't even sell the Blizzak in a quantity less than four. Anyone who's ever driven a motorcycle knows that no less than 70% of the braking is done by the front brakes. So who can explain to me how a vehicle which drives with the front, steers with the front, and brakes with the front will benefit by having two low traction tires on the front and two snow tires on the rear?
    You're absolutely right. If one were to follow NTB's recommendations of keeping the good tires on the rear, you could never rotate your tires, since this would involve placing the good tires on the front. In the meantime, you burn up the fronts, go buy two more, they move the old ones to the front and sell you two more for the rear.
    So you drive around wasting the traction of the new tires as you cover their butts. Any accident you have will be the fault of the old tires being on the more important axle. If you were to blame them, their defense would be that they suggested you buy four tires, but you errantly chose to mismatch tires with your old pair.
    Make sense? Not if you have any. It's no secret that NTB hates people on a budget who buy only two tires. They try to cater to consumers who are fanatical about their cars and are not only shopping for four new tires, but four new chrome rims. They don't want to deal with people who drive minivans and just want to get their family safely to Disneyworld.
    Though NTB's legally-induced fear is rooted in the chance of their causing the possibile fishtail, it really has nothing to do with oversteer. Oversteer (imminent in rear wheel drive vehicles) is caused by the tires pushing the vehicle through the turns. In front wheel drives, where the tires are pulling the vehicle, understeer is more common. Tire pressure is, as in many other aspects of driving, a factor in controlling this. By raising the pressure in the front/reducing the rear, oversteer will be increased. And vice-versa.
    Let me conclude by saying that with front wheel drive, you are much, much safer with the good tires on the front, where the steering, braking, and driving takes place. This spin-out thing they speak of could happen to anyone who exceeds the capability of his or her driving skills or the vehicle's potential. But NTB has detected an Achilles' heel in their legal defense, and they'd rather protect themselves than you.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    You tell me. Check the tread depth. For me, after 10K miles, there would be significant wear. For my grandmother (if she drove that far in a decade), you could still pick the nubbies off the tread.
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Member Posts: 647
    That is what I thought. Let's see if I understand oversteer/understeer correctly. Generally, oversteer is when you can/are turning the front axle of the vehicle at a higher rate, (smaller radius) than the rear axle. Understeer is where the front does not want to turn as quickly as expected, or it continues to plow forward.

    I understand that it oversteer is most common in a RWD vehicle. I do believe, (NTB not withstanding) that it is possible to put a FWD car into an oversteer condition. Or at least a condition where the back end is no longer following the drive wheels. (In my youth I'd been in such a condition in an '88 Corsica. Best friend driving my rental car, he was accustomed to a 77 Cougar. He tried to induce some oversteer with the throttle, in the front driver, as you are probably aware, this made the understeer worse, so he gets on the brake hard. Yeah, now we have so much 'oversteer' the back is now the front and vice-versa. No blood, no foul, and a confirmed pledge to not purchase any known rental cars in the future :)

    I think you could say that either is caused by the differences in traction experienced by the different wheels. I don't think it really matters which wheels are the drive wheel, but rather oversteer, understeer is the vehicles response to the traction at each corner or the vehicle.

    Anyway, I'm a computer geek, so usually I'm just interested in on or off.

    Cheers,

    TB
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Right, only tires aren't semiconductors; there is a condition other than on or off. When people speak of understeer and oversteer conditions, they usually mean while the vehicle is accelerating. Oversteer is caused by push (as in rwd). Applying the brakes --hard-- pushes the vehicle into the turn, and thus creates an oversteer condition, no matter which drive configuration.
    When you accelerate into a turn, you will usually experience the conditions I described above. This is the not quite on, not quite off, edge of the envelope, which I too often find myself situated in.
    Please forgive the heavy metaphors.

    ---Chris
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Member Posts: 647
    To help justify my ignorance or at least a lack of expertise in this arena. I hope you didn't think I expected tires to be really be on or off. I don't even want to imagine the physics calculations behind all of this.

    I think as a side note, we've proven that there is probably just as much 'jargon' in the automotive biz as you find in the computer biz. However, how are you all doing on acronyms. Other than the military, I think it would be tough to top the number of acronyms in the computer arena.

    Cheers,

    TB

    (Sitting in Silicon Valley tonight, too far from my home and family. That is why I have way too much time on my hands tonight.)
  • cwmartincwmartin Member Posts: 89
    tireguy: What is the difference in the MC-type wheel weights and AW-type wheel weights? How can I tell the difference?
  • manishrbmanishrb Member Posts: 10
    Hi ,

    I need some advice as to how much pressure should the air in the front and rear tires of my VW passat V6 be ?


    Thanks
    Manish
  • mattchalmersmattchalmers Member Posts: 159
    I drive a Catera and noticed this morning (after your dissertation yesterday) that I have MC type weights on my car. I thought this would be good news, but there is a visible gap between the rim and the weight. What weight does this rim take? I appreciate your direction in these areas as you seem to be very knowledgeable.
  • bnormannbnormann Member Posts: 335
    look in the glovebox or on the door jamb of one of your (4) doors for a small sticker that will explain the manufacturer's recommended inflation pressures. As posted above, you can safely increase the pressure 3-5 PSI for a more responsive "feel", but I would not say that ultimate cornering force would be increased with these increased pressures. Only full scale testing will provide the data for that.

    FWIW, I have been happy with the recommended pressures for the (3) VW I have owned.

    Bruce
  • tboner1965tboner1965 Member Posts: 647
    I posted a question about struts for my 1987 Buick in a newly created forum. Rather than repeat the question, I've posted the link. If you have any helpful info, please contribute.

    I feel this is related to tires and expect new wheels and tires to be part of the final solution.

    Thanks,

    TB

    http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/engaged/edmund.cgi?t=1339&c=Maintenance&w=O&x=L
  • ejyejy Member Posts: 62
    Thanks for your explanation on tire pressure, I finally found a tread gauge this weekend at Wal-Mart (none of the local auto parts stores had one?!?). My tires have 4 main grooves in the tread pattern, so I measured each one (4 measurements/tire) and found that the front drivers side and the rear passenger side were the most worn (basically the same measurements) and the other two were less worn (by about 3/64ths). So I swapped the rear driver side with the front driver side tire to put the least worn on the front and the most worn on the back. The tires were balanced and rotated 3k miles ago (15k mile service) by the dealer. Does this indicate a problem with the cars alignment or a bad rotation job (it doesn't take a genus to rotate tires, or so I thought?).

    3 of the tires were at 34 psi and the wear was even across the tread, one tire only had 31 psi in it and it was worn a little more on the outside than the inside so I added 3 psi. Will check again in a month.

    Thanks again!!
  • teoteo Member Posts: 2,508
    I have been delighted by your extremely informative posts here in the "Tires" topic. I have absorb an incredible amount of information pertaining this key element of a any car's driveability. And.. I agree 100% with you...Knowledge is power!

    Four months ago, I purchased a brand new 2000 Chevy Impala LS. The car came with the stock Goodyear Eagle GA "Touring" 225/60R 16 rubber. The tires, so far, have performed well. (I have 4,500 miles on the clock).

    I know that you dislike "Goodyear" tires and I would like to get your opinion on the tires that came with my new Impala. Also any suggestions regarding substitutes for these tires that can help improve the already good handling and ride patterns of the car.

    Someone on the "Impala V" topic under the "Sedans" forum claims to have been told by another "Tire Expert" that the Goodyear GA's on the Impala have a problem with a very "weak" sidewall construction that tends to flex too much (Under the front end weight), causing "creaking" noises in the front suspension. Is this an accurate comment??

    Your comments and suggestion are very well appreciated.

    TEO
  • teoteo Member Posts: 2,508
    The tire inflation decal on my Impala recommends air pressure (At all 4 corners) to be set at 30psi (Cold). Any suggestions regarding tire pressure ratings for the Impala?

    I live in a very hot and humid climate (Miami, Florida).

    The car has the 5-spoke "Blade" machined finished rims. The same Chevy rims the 94-96 Impala SS had as stock.
  • butch11butch11 Member Posts: 153
    Back to X-One vs MXV4. Check out www.tirerack.com for the ratings of both and look at several of the comments on the MXV4-one guy said that during rain he spun out on a entrance ramp and another guy said the rear end of his car constantly broke loose on wet pavement. Big difference in the overall ratings also-it appears other people have had the same experience with this tire. I suspect car makers cut deals with tire makers to build a cheap tire for OEM purposes and sell it to replacement customers who will never know the difference and everybody is happy. When I replaced the MXV4's-the tire store guys said I would be nuts to buy that tire when the X-One was a much better tire-they had the X-One on their own cars. OKAY-let's agree to disagree but you could not give me a set of MXV4's.
  • teoteo Member Posts: 2,508
    I guess he is on vacation, uh? :)
  • hengheng Member Posts: 411
    Or else you'llbe accused of preaching.
  • div2div2 Member Posts: 2,580
    I'd replace all four. I've had good luck with Bridgestone, Dunlop, Michelin, and Pirelli. In my opinion Goodyears are mediocre and overpriced; if they ever lost their OEM business they'd go under in a month. The Tire Rack has the Yoko Avid T4 in your size for $34 each. Don't see how you could go wrong there.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Sorry guys, I was backpacking in Glacier National Park for the past week and a half. No Internet out there.
    MattChalmers: Your Catera most likely takes MC weights. Sometimes the fit isn't quite as precise as it should be, and you will see a slight gap between the rim and the weight. If the weights are factory, they're most likely the right ones. Just check and make sure none of them are working their way off.
    Tony: putting a set of 215/60R16s would improve the handling a bit.
    ejy: They might have put the tires in teh wrong place after the rotation. I suppose it could happen; they all look alike. Or it could be from differences in pressure. Any problem with alignment will cause the individual tire to have a difference of tread depth from side to side.
    teo: I'm not a big fan of the Eagle GAs. They're expensive tires and I can see no benefit in the performance of these tires over BFG's priced 1/3 less. They tend to handle like a cheap tire, wear out like a performance tire, go out of round, offer poor traction... basically they're a cheap tire at a ridiculous price. But you already have them, so you should be able to tell how they handle. Was the comment on creaking an accurate comment? In a word: NO. Poorly constructed as the GAs are, their sidewalls aren't much more flimsy than any other cheap brand. And flimsy tires don't create a creak, they squeal. I would increase the pressure by at least 2 or 3 psi just to prolong the life--actually, belay that--if I had a car spec'd with GAs, I'd want to burn them up as soon as possible so I could install a set of Michelin Pilots.
    Butch11: Get over it.
    ashutoshsm: Just replace all four. Life's to precious to trust in generic tires. If you had 17-inchers, it would be a bit tough on the wallet, but with 175s, you can buy a good tire for $35. You can buy a REALLY good tire for $45 (Michelin X-Metric).
  • mattchalmersmattchalmers Member Posts: 159
    Thanks for the info. I am also interested in which tire I should look at as a replacement. I have Goodyear RSA's, but I am not willing to pay $185 per tire (that is what the Goodyear shop quoted while repairing a nail in the tread).
  • pblevinepblevine Member Posts: 858
    Welcome back and hope you had a good time.
  • cdschockcdschock Member Posts: 1
    Gentleman (and ladies, if there are any),

    I am looking to replace my 205/55R16 Michelin MXV4's on my 1997 Acura CL. I am debating the Eagle HP's, no one seems to love Eagles here...why so? I found them for $80 a peice, do you think I should get them or pay more for Pirellis or Michelins. Thanks for your advice.
  • md_techmd_tech Member Posts: 84
    I'm not an Eagles tire fan.... I tend to lean toward the the better grade of tires. Pirellis handle better around turns and fast pace driving. How did the Michelin HP's handle on your 97 Acura Cl???? I guess it all comes down to what your looking for in a tire?? Are you looking for quality,afforabilty or performance?? What kind of driver are you? When you think about all of these factors it will be easier to find the right tire for your needs. Or you could always go (Eeeney Meeny Minny Moe)...

    Kristina/co host Out Turn
  • raychuang00raychuang00 Member Posts: 541
    Kristina,

    Quick question for you--what size tires are on the Acura CL from that model year? Once you know, run on over to www.tirerack.com and you can find a selection a very good tires at the size you need.
  • macuser2macuser2 Member Posts: 4
    Our mini-van had a bent rim (on the inside) when we bought it in December, but I did not know it until I rotated the tires and the tire with the damaged rim was rotated to the front right and I heard the 'knock-knock-knock' sound. The dealership was great and replaced the magnesium rim ($250 otherwise), but now the tire has two flat spots about 3 inches apart on the left side of the tread and so the sound is still there. The tires are General Ameri*GS60 P215 70R15's with 30,000 miles on them (and they still look pretty good). I am planning on replacing the worst 2 (and putting the new ones on the front) but I'd like some advice first. (1) Should I just let them go for another 10,000 and replace all 4 or is it imperative that I replace this tire now. (2) Is a Michelin MX-4 (Treadwear value 520) really worth $10 more than a MultiMile (Treadwear 700)? Thanks in advance for your help.
  • md_techmd_tech Member Posts: 84
    Sorry to say, but I was answering someone elses question... Thank You for the helpful advise on the tires for the Acura and the web site. Maybe he'll read your post...

    Kristina/co host Our Turn
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    It will not hurt you at all to drive on a tire with a slight flat spot. Just put it on the back so it won't be so irritating, then buy new tires when you have the cash. The Michelin MX4 is an outstanding tire for the price. If you want something better, the X-One/X-Radial Plus is an upgrade (in every respect), but slightly pricier. Note: Treadwear ratings are not government mandated. They are only used to compare within a single manufacturer's product line. A General with a rating of 500 is not the same as a Michelin with a rating of 500. All the UTQG means is that a tire will wear five times longer than that manufacturer's control tire, assigned rating of 100.
    Michelins are the best of the best. There is no comparison. That's the straight up truth. The only logical question which should arise (as it has, in your case) is of the price. We've established Michelin is the best. Is it worth it for you to pay the money for the best; will you truly realize the caliber of these tires, or are you the type of person who can drive with a flat right rear tire and not know it until it blows? If it's only a question of $10/tire, there is no reason not to go with the Michelins--except for the mostly O.E. XW4 model (which is merely better than average).
    I wouldn't even wait ten miles, let alone 10K, to ditch those Generals. If someone gave me a brand new set of Generals, I'd trade them for nothing more than a warm beer or perhaps a used (but still fresh) stick of Big Red.
  • macuser2macuser2 Member Posts: 4
    Ordinarily I would not have replied here for just a 'Thank You', being concerned about wasting space on the board and people's time with such a post. However, your answer to my question was so definitive and humorous that I could not help but give my thanks directly. I did not understand that the ratings were only within each manufacturer's line, so I was confused as to why the one with the smaller rating cost more. Ten dollars is not so much when there is a definite difference involved.
    Also, I've got two children under 4 to consider (together with the fact that it rains and rains here). Thanks again.
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    I know it's been a few weeks since you asked me about MC weights. I was reluctant to tell you you had the wrong type without seeing your car. Having never worked on a Catera (one of the few), I assumed, being a GM, it would take MCs. I recently discovered, however, that I was mistaken. The Catera is one of three GM cars (along with the Tracker and some other ex-Geo model) which requires the IAW type--the type used on 90-96 VWs, and 90-00 Volvos and Saabs. MCs are probably the closest contour, but they are not the proper weights.
    Just a little heads up for the rest of you: the overwhelming majority of domestic vehicles (and some imports) manufactured with alloy wheels in the 80s and 90s with alloy wheels require MC type weights. However, in a constant attempt to make simple things difficult in the automotive industry, they are seriously mixing it up.
    97-present VW/Audi require the ENS type. Prior to that was the IAW type.
    Most GM cars still take MCs, with the exception of the Catera and two former Geos.
    Most Japanese cars (except for Subaru) still take the FNS type.
    Ford and GM trucks of the new body styles now require TS type. Before that they all took MCs.
    And Chrysler vehicles now have their own LHS (easy to remember) type. I'm not sure about the new Jeeps. They're probably still MCs.
    And, as always, 99% of the steel wheels require the Plain Jane uncoated, thin wall steel wheel weights. The most common exception would be the new F-series trucks with steel wheels, which are supposed to use the same weights as the alloys.
    Sorry, Matt.
    --Chris
  • mattchalmersmattchalmers Member Posts: 159
    Thanks for the clarification. If I am going to go to a cheap place for balancing and they only carry MC type, what should I do? Can I buy the correct type and ask them to install those? Would that be too expensive?
  • tireguytireguy Member Posts: 200
    Most of the cheap tire shops are catching on that cars haven't used the AW type (once though to be one-size-fits-all) in over a decade. Sam's Club recently introduced company-wide a rack o' weights which includes a full stock of the 8 most common types. Each club was also given a gauge so the tire tech can check the contour of the rim (nearly idiot-proof).
    The only way to be sure you won't be given the wrong weights is to have the job done at the dealer or Sam's. If you have it done at Sam's, just be sure to remind the technician that your vehicle requires the IAW type. Suggestion: Rather than taking the condescending approach and informing him that your car requires IAWs (he probably already knows), simply inquire as to the stock status of these weights. If they're presently out of stock, come back later.
    No, buying the right weights is not practical, since you won't have any idea which values will be required. You would have to buy a box of each .25oz increment from .25 to 2.75 to cover the range of possibilities.
    Remember, if they use the wrong weights (especially AWs), your rims will likely be scarred forever.
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    I have a question. Why wouldn't the stick-on weights be ideal and thus universally used? What am I missing?

    -Colin
    (long time since I've been in this topic.)
  • butch11butch11 Member Posts: 153
    In LA Times today story on a lawsuit against Dunlap. Seems Dunlap found a way to save a few pennies by removing a belt from the tire-they said no problem-others say it causes tread seperation. This happened to a Dunlop tire on a van and driver was killed.

    A friend in Mpls was having trouble with her steering-asked me to drive the car-pulling very hard to left-went to the tire store-was a Dunlop with a seperated ply. Tire store people said this puppy would blow asap.

    If Dunlop is still doing this-you might want to avoid that brand. Once the value engineers-accountants-take over it is all down hill.
  • ryanbabryanbab Member Posts: 7,240
    Run the world. I have an engineering economics class and he said get used to it they accept and reject ideas because of $$$ alone. There is no heart involved. If it saves money then they accept it if it costs to much and they dont make a "profit" its no good.

    I guess you can say welcome to the realworld sad isnt it

    Ryan
  • ejyejy Member Posts: 62
    Yesterday, I saw a minivan pull out of the local (goodyear) Pensky Auto Center and loose his front wheel. Must not have good quality control... The van's owner was peeved :)
  • ejyejy Member Posts: 62
    Thats why your only worth $1.7 million (1996 dollars) to an airline. So, if a repair is more expensive than ( passenger+crew ) * $1.7M than its not worth doing.
This discussion has been closed.