jpv7774

Huh....well at least u let me get away with saying what I have wanted to say for a while. I wont push it any further as I respect your knowledge and opinions. Your only half crazy in tire threads.....you make a lot more sense in all other threads
Talk to you later Michelin Man!

Lavrishevo

iTrader: (1)

What I said is illogical? The P7's at 245/40/18 have terrible tread life and a low speed rating. At least the pair I was considering on eBay. Of course this was not advertised in the eBay ad and I had to research the specs. This is a no go for the sports car.

As far as the Premeirs go, I would rather sacrifice a bit of tire noise and tread life for a better performing tire. A tire that maintains excellent traction and stopping distance as it wears. Something no other tire has shown. I find this sane and logical.

Where the P7's consistently fall behind is wet traction and this is when you need it the most. This performance disadvantage only becomes worse as the tire wears.

jpv7774

No I didnt say you were illogical.....I said you were half crazy on tire threads and that you had a block on accepting anything negative about a Michelin tire....Then I threw in some mushy stuff to be nice.

But I think if I read your last statement correctly you do understand what is going on a little better then I thought. The premiers are noisy and have poor tread life and that is what you would rather have. Got it.

Lavrishevo

iTrader: (1)

Tread life varies from rim size, vehicle weight, awd, and other factors. You can browse through these reviews to see your opinion is misinformed.

http://www.tirerack.com/survey/Surve..._desktop=true#

jpv7774

I was informed by you Werent you talking about the Premiers when you said you would rather have a noisier tire with less tread wear then a tire with loss of traction? I dont want to keep going in circles with you....find me a negative post on a 17" P7 plus H rated ON ANY SIZE CAR....even cars that eat tires...........and I will happily read it and take it for what its worth. I can send you 50 negative reviews on your brand in a half a second....why is that? I have talked to real people on my thread regarding P7s that they purchased and they love them.......I have talked to real people regarding Premier.....some love them some are not impressed and will not buy again.
I still believe Michelin is a great tire company but given what I have learned in the last year I would buy a Toyo before a Michelin.......

warminwisc

Man you guys have started fast out of the gate. I think Tom did not mean to start another mother thread on tires. You have a ways to catch the other mother thread at 500 posts. Thanks for the the input Tom.

My contis have a marginal rating on Tire Rack. I find they are a good tire in every regard easily buy em again no matter what Tire Rack says.
Happy with my Michelins though also.

jpv7774

Im done for now.......tires are tough.....if we were talking about a mirror or a quarter panel most all of us would agree with each other. I made my point. Lav I appreciate you keeping cool and not getting upset....we just have different opinions on this subject.

warminwisc

I think we all can agree there are now alot of good tires with new manuf techniques, quality control and new materials. Side to side I bet most people would not know the difference in most manufacturers top couple designs. I have A/S 3's, Contact 4 x 4, Pirelli Scorpions, Conti LX20, X Ice 3 currently on my 3 cars they are all quiet, easy to balance, steady at speed and have worn well or will get prorated (A/S 3) Cant compare em to Premiers but every bit as good as the 3 pair of MXV4 now in shreaders. They all drive just a little different but still comparable.

I think Michelin will always be the champ, but improvements by all manuf now take em 15 rounds. I am sold on A/S 3 only real tire which I really felt a huge difference but only Ultra high performance tire I have owned usually just got touring tires.

Had some Optimos on a loader Passat couple years ago when my Treg was in for repairs. Only real bad tire I have driven in a while. Not sure what model just said Optimo, crappy steering, uninspiring at speed grouly when turning at slower speeds. Anyway just my 2 cents prolly what its worth tires are so subjective.

Lavrishevo

iTrader: (1)

There are sacrifices that have to be made for performance over longevity and road noise. UHP tires handle much better mostly to due how soft the rubber is and hence they wear more quickly. Like Warm's A/S 3's. He will sacrifice some tread life for how well the tire performs. It really depends on what you are after. If you want a cruising tire that last a really long time (at certain sizes) the P7's are a great choice. If you want a higher performance tire that handles better in the wet conditions and maintains its performance as the tire wears the Premiers are a better choice. Unfortunately, we can't have it all.

Tom57

Thank you for understanding, Warm.

I posted objective facts and data obtained from my personal experience with the Michelin Premier and solicited members to post their mileage / tread wear data with the Premier. The tire is still relatively new, and I haven’t seen any objective reviews with actual tread wear / mileage data. Only Jimbo posted his data. Thanks again Jim.

It was not my intent to stir up feelings and emotions around this topic – which we know run high. There are many subject matter experts on CL, and the members tend to be more discriminating, discerning and analytical in their reviews than the generic and pedestrian posts found on the tire websites. No need to post opinionated defense of your favorite tire. Instead of opinions and feelings, sharing actual tire wear results (which I haven’t found elsewhere) is something that I’d like other members to provide here as well, so that this community can consider mileage / longevity when choosing to replace their Primacy MXV4 (see title of thread).
As stated, I too have been a long-time Michelin man. Coming from that position, it took a lot for me to admit in a post, and somewhat in awe, the facts and data causing my disappointment with the much-touted Premier, particularly with significantly reduced and premature tread wear. I can’t simply ignore this experience, like I could if Michelin was my only son. I don’t love Michelin that much.

Tire choice is ultimately a personal decision, and there are several factors and criteria that we each rank in importance. Tread wear and mileage is a significant purchase-decision factor for many of us, particularly for an expensive, so-called performance all season tire that is represented by Michelin as a 60K mile tire that replaced the much-coveted Primacy MXV4. The boasted benefits of the Premier (reduced stopping distance on wet roads) appear to come at the cost of reduced mileage / longevity vs. claimed tread wear. For me, that trade-off isn’t worth it.

Again, it would be great if others who have actual mileage on their Premiers would post measurement data / mileage results. Has anyone else replaced their Premiers already? What mileage? How much tread depth remained?

Tom57

This was a preliminary report by CR, released in August 2014 about the time the Michelin Premier was first available in the market. CR did no actual study of the Premier’s tread wear life. It simply restated Michelin’s claim that it was a 60K mile tire – not verified through any CR controlled test.

From the CR report: “To explore this new technology specifically, we compared the stopping distances for tires shaved down to about 5/32”, simulating a tire about 40-percent worn.” If shaving the tread down 3.5/32nds to 5/32nds (from 8.5/32nds new) equals 40% worn, the math translates this way: 40% worn = 3.5 divided by 8.5.; Therefore, 100% would be 8.5/32nds divided by 8.5/32nds! So you’d have to drive Premiers down to 0/32nds according to CR’s calculation to get the full mileage from them. CR’s math is (probably) wrong. But it proves the point about mileage when you start at a reduced tread depth of 8.5/32nds (vs. 10/32nds for the MXV4). At 5/32nds tread depth remaining, the Premier is realistically well-more than half worn even under Michelin’s warranty interpretation.

What is truly significant about this CR preliminary test report is that the Premier actually had worse stopping distances on dry pavement! So, for improved wet stopping distance, not only do the Premiers likely have reduced mileage wear, but also dry stopping distances are farther. For me, I give myself more stopping distance in wet weather – I don’t expect or rely on the tires to allow me to have short distances from the car ahead on wet roads. On dry pavement, I expect tires to perform at their very best, not at a reduced stopping distance, especially a high-performance all-season tire. Also, with the extra siping that emerges on the Premier tire tread as it wears, the rolling resistance must also increase resulting in reduced gas mileage due to drag.

For comparison, here are Michelin’s specs it assigns to the Premier vs. Primacy MXV4:*
Premier: 8.5/32nds tread depth new; 640 UTQG
Primacy: 10/32nds new; 620 UTQG

*The UTQG specs are manufacturer assigned and not very reliable. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete...160210175927:s

Tom57

This is the follow-up March 2015 CR report to the 2014 report on the Premiers.

CR is upfront in the report stating that it places less emphasis on factors such as tread life and rolling resistance in its tire evaluations. That should put CR’s tire ratings in the proper, limited perspective. In a performance all-season tire, I look for a balance of safety-related factors together with value (tread wear longevity and low rolling resistance).

Noteworthy: This CR report (as of March 2015) is still recommending the Primacy MXV4. All it says about the Premier: “The Michelin Premier A/S is the replacement model, and in our preliminary evaluation, it is worth consideration.”

So, what objective data is available since March 2015 on the actual tread wear / longevity of the Premier? Anyone with actual tread depth measurements and mileage please post results.

Tom57

Not relevant? Here I thought I was providing real-world objective data (as opposed to opinions - "I Love All Michelin" "Michelin Is the Best").

The only thing one can say (which I said originally) is my experience with the Premiers getting only 22K miles until worn out was on a FWD Sienna. Fact is, the tires were the beloved yet unproven Michelin Premiers, on a vehicle - and used here up north where temps are cooler which should prolong tire wear (heat wears tires faster).

This thread is nearly 2 years old. Surely by now there's actual tire wear data of the Premier on the LS. I've solicited actual Premier tire wear data, so we can all form conclusions about the Premier based upon real tire wear data / longevity as a factor.

Bob04

I've got about 15K miles on some V-rated Premiers. So far, it's a phenomenal tire in every way. As silent and comfortable as the day I bought them, and very little tire wear. Fantastic handing and braking distance in the wet that feels the same as when new. So far, a true no-compromise tire. I've pushed it hard on back roads, and it easily outperformed my old H-rated MXV4s. No negatives that I can see so far.

Will it stay that way? We will see.

warminwisc

Good job personal experiences on the same car. Just what my neighbor to the south is hoping for. Tom is not looking for support of his position just other experiences. Tom get toMKE pm me many good restaurants in Chicago but a few good spots to the Brew City