Was a bit surprised by a few of them .
https://www.consumerreports.org/tir...tires-can-save-you-money-at-pump-a1547901110/
https://www.consumerreports.org/tir...tires-can-save-you-money-at-pump-a1547901110/
Consumer Reports : Low-Rolling resistance tires rated
- Thread starter odie
- Start date
My car has one of the tire listed on the chart. The difference is... not very obvious. Tire pressure and weather probably affect more than low rolling resistance.
But glad to know it is indeed "low resistance", confirmed I get what I paid for!
But glad to know it is indeed "low resistance", confirmed I get what I paid for!
5-10 mpg difference on first gen Honda Insights using the original Bridgestone Potenza tires vs. conventional models, but after 30,000 miles they are worn out and not exactly cheap to replace. The numbers don't always make sense when regular tires are half the cost, but if maximizing mpg numbers is your thing, you buy them anyway.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2021
- Messages
- 824
I appreciate CR as much as the next guy and have been a member for many years. But this article had the opposite effect on me. With that little difference in mpg, there is really no reason to consider rolling resistance as a factor when choosing tires. I also think they should have weighed the tires; that might account for much of the difference in mpg but no way to tell.
while rolling resistance is an interesting characteristic of a tire, good fuel economy comes from the way you drive your vehicle mainly. i have a small fast awd car and i have very good mpg numbers when i want. i always have high performance summer tires and my fuel economy is very good. much better than manufacturer's claim with the cheap stock tires. i prefer to have sticky tires. braking distances are much shorter, traction is better, handling is better, objects and vehicle avoidance is better. safety and handling to me is more important. i want my car to stick to the road and stop quickly.
Seems like the O.E.M. CONTINENTAL Pro Contact TX( H ) would let the car ( 6 speed auto ) coast longer to stops and less when replaced with the RT43 ( H ) . Maybe it's because they're new and have more sipes than the Pro Contact TX . The TX were good performing tire . The RT43 feel to help soften the ride . Maybe wear will help with the resistance ( if any ) .
My experience with LRR tires(or I should say) tires that were supposed to help with MPG even if not labeled LRR, is that there is little to no difference in my everydayness of driving. Nothing that I can put my finger on as my fuel economy is jumpy. Meaning, within 1-3 mpg difference between one tank of fuel to the next regardless of tires.
My driving isn't the exact same each & everyday. I will take the same roads out of my driveway but then it's a different direction from there. I may travel locally to visit, shop etc. Or I may jump on the hiwy for 20-25 miles or more, or jump from one on-ramp to the next off-ramp. And then it signal light to signal light from there or turn-to-turn side street to side street. It is really difficult to get a good handle on my exact fuel economy.
The only real consistent fuel economy that I can determine is when e.g., on the hiwy for 4-6 hours on a straight, flat stretch of hiwy and checking my fuel economy from tank to tank.
My driving isn't the exact same each & everyday. I will take the same roads out of my driveway but then it's a different direction from there. I may travel locally to visit, shop etc. Or I may jump on the hiwy for 20-25 miles or more, or jump from one on-ramp to the next off-ramp. And then it signal light to signal light from there or turn-to-turn side street to side street. It is really difficult to get a good handle on my exact fuel economy.
The only real consistent fuel economy that I can determine is when e.g., on the hiwy for 4-6 hours on a straight, flat stretch of hiwy and checking my fuel economy from tank to tank.
Last edited:
So many variables when considering fuel economy. Tires may be one but priority for me has to be the price to performance ratio. Performance being road holding and drive characteristics along with longevity.
In winter I use snow/winter tires. Many that have never used them debate their necessity, even in northern States. Pretty certain their rolling resistance is more than similar sized all-seasons. Would I consider giving them up to save the cost of a fuel gallons? Never - safety first!
In winter I use snow/winter tires. Many that have never used them debate their necessity, even in northern States. Pretty certain their rolling resistance is more than similar sized all-seasons. Would I consider giving them up to save the cost of a fuel gallons? Never - safety first!
I dont buy a car or tire w/MPGs in mind.
Tire rack had a test a few years ago. The Michelin Energy Saver got about 7% better than the GY Comfort Tread. Check out the test, pay your money, and take your choice.
I'm surprised that they didn't include in the article, a brief mention that proper tire inflation also reduces rolling resistance, and thus safes fuel, thus saves money.
Pretty sure that if CR tested these tires on a dynamometer, they would have had the forethought to make sure the air pressure was correct.
Maybe I misunderstand your post though, since proper inflation has a significant impact on rolling resistance.
I am disappointed by the article by not noting if any of these "top selections" are run flat tires.
My question is, is there a run flat that also has low rolling resistance? Or where how do they compare to the top choices.
I'm not doubting CR testing discipline. I am saying that they should have taken the opportunity to remind their subscribers that saving fuel can be as simple as maintaining proper air pressure in their tires.
Decades ago, when the federal mandated 55 mph speed limit expired, there was a lot of debate about the fuel that would be wasted. One of the leading auto magazines ran an article on the subject. Based upon data they collected, they showed that more fuel could be saved if all American drivers kept their tires properly inflated, than what would be saved by driving 55 mph vs 75 mph.
Also, another thing that I have noticed in my research of LRR tires compared to non-LRR tires is their cost.
Whatever we may save in fuel is often offset by the cost of LRR tires compared to the non-LRR tires. To me, it's only a breakeven point at the end of the LRR tire life.
Whatever we may save in fuel is often offset by the cost of LRR tires compared to the non-LRR tires. To me, it's only a breakeven point at the end of the LRR tire life.
And invariably LRR tyres have reduced grip levels compared to the best. That might actually help with fuel consumption too as you don't want to drive agressively on these.
Today, I turned off the AC on the highway, it's not hot anyway. I run it mostly to dry the air when it's rainy. Instant 8% drop in fuel consumption
Today, I turned off the AC on the highway, it's not hot anyway. I run it mostly to dry the air when it's rainy. Instant 8% drop in fuel consumption
Also, the Hankook kinergy 4s2 is considered a high RR tyre in europe? It's third on the list? The RR is considered it's main weakness IIRC.
https://www.tyrereviews.com/Tyre/Hankook/Kinergy-4S2.htm
https://www.tyrereviews.com/Tyre/Hankook/Kinergy-4S2.htm
