Toys4RJill

Was wondering what peoples thoughts were about on this subject. Would you say all brands could perform up to high levels or would only a few tire brands be able to achieve this?

I used to look down upon Good Year for the longest time. A few weeks back we observed a Maybach S600 Mercedes with Good Year Eagle F1 tires. We just recently saw the latest Lincoln Continental sedan which had the exact same times. A Mercedes S-Class coupe came standard with Pirellis which Audi was a wash bag with Hancook, Michelin and Good Year. The Lexus RCF and Chevrolet Corvette share the same Michelin tires....While some LX570s come with Dunlop. Some pretty pricey Rolls Royce and Bentleys come with Continental tires....

Lexus generally uses Michelin but I recall the original 1990 LS400 had Good Years whereas Lexus had Good Year work with Lexus to fine tune the Good Year Eagle GA tire and LS400 suspension for 18 months before the vehicle launch.

Anyone got any thoughts on tire brands? Likes or dislikes? Are tire brands just marketing etc etc.

mmarshall

In general, for the type of driving I do, I've had my best luck with Michelin and Continental, but there are other competent tires and brands, too, depending on the type of driving and vehicle involved. I liked the old Goodyear Regatta for quiet running (low noise level is important to me), but I don't think they are produced or marketed any more. Michelins seem to come from the tire plant with the fewest problems involved in mounting/balancing (some tires are not perfectly round, and can be difficult to get to roll smoothly even if perfectly balanced). Two cars I owned came with Bridgestone Potenza RE92 all-seasons, which were OK from an all-around driving and traction point of view, but were pure crap durability-wise...even worse for the Goodyear Invictas on my '95 Celica, which were nice when brand-new but howled like a drum with road noise after 10,000 mies (I switched to Regattas at 14,000 miles). The Michelin Pilot Sport has an excellent reputation on high-performance sports-cars....one of the best tires in the business for that role. My Verano has Continental Contipro Contacts, which I have been very pleased with so far, except for their sensitivity to punctures and leaks from road debris.

The tires with some of the worst reputations, of course, were the old Firestone 500s and the later Firestone Wilderness ATs, which were involved in the recall/replacement issue on the Ford Explorer/ Mercury Mountaineer roll-over incidents. Some of that, of course, was Firestone's fault for not designing in an adequate safety-margin. Ford was also partly to blame, for insisting on too-low tire pressures to try and get a smoother ride to address customer complaints, and, in some cases, on the owners themselves for not inspecting the tires, checking PSIs often enough, overloading their vehicles, and driving them too fast on hot roads. (heat is one of a tires's worst enemies).

Aron9000

Corvettes used to exclusively use Goodyears, then switched to Michelins some time during the C6 generation I think. I know the Corvette racing team ditched Goodyear 10 or 12 years ago for Michelin tires because they lost to Ferrari at LeMans. Guess what sort of tires Ferrari was running. After doing some testing they found the Michelin race tires were several seconds faster than the Goodyears they had been using.

I really think Goodyear makes crap performance tires, I know people who had the stock runflats on their C5 and C6 Corvettes hated them, said they were noisy and rode like hell. That being said, for normal tires, I have some on my truck, they're all right. Noisy, but they are smooth.

Still though for the best tires, low profile performance, passenger car, light truck duty, its Michelins. They're expensive, but IMO worth it if you are going to keep your vehicle for another 40-50k miles. For a bit cheaper tire, I've been happy with Pirellis, Continentials, and BF Goodrich. I've had Khumo tires on two of my cars, took them off before they were wore out they were such a sorry, vibrating pieces of crap that wouldn't balance.

tex2670

I would say that you just can't go by brand anymore--maybe with the exception of Michelin. You cite to some high end models with Goodyears, but I had Goodyear Integrity on my old Pilot, and I hated them. And the Goodyear choices when I had my Lexus IS all had mediocre ratings on Tire Rack. I think if you look around on Tire Rack, you will see Pirellis, Bridgestone, Contis, etc., with a spectrum of reviews.

Sulu

I had Goodyear Integritys as replacement tires on my 2002 Camry and I hated them.

If I remember correctly, my 2002 Camry came with Michelins (the only brand of tires I consistently like) but were starting to wear down to the point that they had to be replaced by late into my 4-year lease. With so little time left on the lease, I wanted to avoid getting brand new tires.

What I did was take the Integritys off my father's 2004(?) Camry because he wanted Michelins on his Camry; he just felt more comfortable with Michelins.

With the tire pressure pumped up to door placard levels, the Integritys were squirmy -- handling was absolutely atrocious. So I pumped up the pressure to the sidewall value, which improved handling but traction (especially wet traction) decreased a lot.

My father may not have been able to describe the problems when he drove on the Integritys, especially because he drove his Camry off the lot with the Integritys (he had nothing to compare it to) but since I was able to compare with the Michelins (perhaps MX4 Rainforce tires), I could tell how bad the Integritys were.

mmarshall

That's because, when you pumped the PSIs up over recommended to sidewall value (which is not the figure set by factory engineers, but the maximum, short of a built-in safety-margin, that the tire can physically sustain without internal damage), it causes the center part of the tire tread to bulge out, and less tread (only the center part) is still actually in contact with the road surface. The impression of improved handling may be just that.......an impression, because yes, with a harder tire, initial steering response will be faster on a dry road. But, ultimately, the tire will actually have less than ideal traction dry or wet......and could be subject to easier hydroplaning in the wet, because, with the center of the tread bulged out, the water under the tire will have less tread surface to lift before hydroplaning starts. I'd bet the monthly rent that, with the PSIs at sidewall value, the car rode a lot stiffer, too.

SW17LS

Great topic.

Lexus uses a combination of Michelin, Bridgestone and Dunlop tires. The Michelin tires are in general quite good, the Bridgestone and Dunlop tires are terrible. Luck of the draw. My 98 LS had Dunlop SP Sport 4000 A/S (pretty good, very short treadwear replaced them with the same tire a couple times and went to Michelin) from the factory, the LS430 had Dunlop SP Sport 5000 A/S (also not terrible, short treadwear and got loud quick, went to Michelin) from the factory, 03 ES had Bridgestone Potenza RE 92 (horrible tires, went to Toyo and then to Michelin), the 2010 ES350 had Bridgestone Turanza EL400 (horrible tires, went to Michelin), my 2013 GS350 had Michelin Primacy MXM4 (quite good, replaced with Toyo Versado Noir and sold the car not long after), and my LS460 had Bridgestone Turanza EL 42 (horrible, went to Pirelli P7 Plus). So, I've gotten lucky only 1/6th of my Lexus purchases lol

As for brand, I firmly believe that Michelin has overall the most complete set of very good quality tire models in the industry. They have a few clunkers, but they have a lot of segment leading tires, and I personally have never had a set of Michelin tires I didn't like.

With that said, other brands also have excellent models. I am extremely pleased with my Pirelli Cinturato P7 Plus on the LS, and I was very pleased with the Toyo Versado Noir I put on the GS. I had a set of Toyo Proxes TPT I put on the 03 ES that I didn't care for. Goodyear for instance has the Comfortred line that is very well regarded, Bridgestone has several very good performance tires and their Turanza Serenity is quite good. I have a set of Continentals on the Sedona I don't like, but they also have some excellent models. I've had Yokohamas that were very good.

I think when you're in a crunch and don't have time to do research, go with Michelin. If you have the time you can save a good bit of money and get tires of equal or greater quality by going elsewhere, but you have to do your research first.

Had these OEM on our 04 Prius. HORRIBLE tires.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

i will likely continue to be a michelin fan. they're smooth, quiet, long wearing, grip well and very consistent quality.

mmarshall

Agreed.....the Potenza RE92s were junk from a durability standpoint. But, they were surprisingly good from a wet/snow traction standpoint. My 2006 Outback had them, and, in conjunction with the Outback's excellent AWD, system, nothing in the winter could stop them.

Fizzboy7

I'll be another to stick with Michelin for the longhaul. Every car I've had since the late 80's I've put Michelins on and never been let down. Same goes for my dad and all the cars he's had. I currently have a set on my IS250 and they are wearing twice as long as the stock Dunlops did. They also grip well and aren't any louder than the others. The only thing I haven't tried is their condition in the rain, being it hasn't rained in SoCal in ages. Tried Hankook, but they were soft and wore quickly. Michelin is ranked #1 for a reason, and I feel is worth the extra cost.

blacksc400

iTrader: (4)

It depends on the model of the brand as well, but can't go wrong with michelins. I love my Pilot super sport on my M, only gripe is it lasts only 10k miles with normal driving.

mmarshall

Well, when you want that kind of grip for dry-weather cornering, braking, and acceleration, it necessitates a very soft rubber compound that is highly abrasive, creates a lot of friction between the tire and the road surface, and wears away quite rapidly. Modern tire engineering and new rubber/silicone compounds have helped compromise the inevitable trade-offs, but, in general, tires can't do everything at once. Strength in some areas will still mean weakness in others...there's no completely free lunch.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

At least until we can get a working Mr. Fusion reactor fueled by garbage to power our hover cars

UDel

I have not had much experience with different tire brands but for regular street driving my experiences have been it does not matter much what brand you go with. I originally had Michelin Pilot Sports summer tires on my car that I drove until one kept losing air and they were clearly end of life. I wanted Conti all seasons but they were unavailable and I had limited time to get them so the guy at Tire rack recommended Khumo Exsta's All Seasons which I never heard of. They were cheap so I went with them, I could not believe how much smoother my car felt with those new tires on and I had no complaints the whole time I had them, very smooth, did not prematurely wear, I had a few holes from nails in 2 tires so that was the only reason I replaced them along with they were pretty close to the end of their life. I got Conti Extreme Contacts now which I got a great deal on and they feel mostly the same as the Exsta's, good tires. I have experience with Bridgestones which seemed to ride little rough but were acceptable but I would not say I have noticed much differences between brands. With some track driving with sports cars brand/tire makes a much bigger difference when over and under steer really come into play, Michelin Pilot Sports seemed the best.

Byprodrive

iTrader: (1)

I have worked at 5 different tire stores & bought several different brands of tires. 25 years ago I stopped experimenting, when my cars need tires I buy Michelin, I never have a problem. If a good tire allows you to stop 10 feet shorter than a cheaper or poorly maintained tire to avoid a accident, it has more than paid for itself. I belive Bridgestone is 2nd best brand overall.