Continental TrueContact Disappointment

[Falken]

Morning guys,

On Friday I switched my tires from Continental TrueContact that have been giving me a steady 7.5L/100km.

I put on my Winter tires, the Yokohama IG-20s.

Tread depth is still very deep on the IG-20s, tire pressure I always keep the same, around 40psi (the Fit doesn't handle well at 32psi).

My fuel economy immediately leaped, and is holding steady at 6.6L/100km. I reset my MPG gauge as soon as I put the Winters on to compare.

So I am left feeling like the TrueContacts aren't really LRR if they are All Season and are beaten handily by WINTER tires.

I think they are just like any other "Value" tire at this point.

I am a bit disappointed because I know this car and it's economy extremely well.

Oh well I guess...

On the other hand, great job YOKOHAMA!

My next set of All Seasons will be Yokohama I guess.... Great company, always loved the IG-20s.

 

[Astro14]

I think your test is inaccurate. Your trip computer over a short run is not a valid comparison. Too many variables that could affect the result: city/highway, temp, wind velocity/direction, etc...

You don't have the consistency of data to make a determination yet.

 

[Falken]

I play with the MPG gauge a lot, for 5 years... Even used to manually calculate and compare to the MPG gauge.

I reset the MPG gauge every fill up.

This is pretty much 100% Apples to Apples. Only the tires changed.

I could be wrong (hopefully) as we are comparing a Winter tire to a LRR All-Season!

I really hope you're right Astro, really disappointed...

 

[IndyIan]

I just put my yoko IG52C's on the Focus this weekend and they claim to be a LRR tire. I think they are atleast as good as the 5-6/32 cheapie all seasons I run in the summer for my usual coasts down the hills. Who knows, maybe yokohama was trying for a LRR tire in the IG-20?
My mileage doesn't change really with the IG52C as they are slightly bigger in circumference which puts the odometer off a bit.

 

[CapriRacer]

First, everyone should be aware that the term "LRR" is a RELATIVE term. It means better fuel economy compared to other tires with similar wear and traction characteristics.

The tire in question has a UTQG rating of 800AB - which is just about as high as it gets. While it might get better fuel economy compared to other tires with high treadwear ratings, it is NOT going to be as good a tires specifically designed for fuel economy (which will wear poorly!)

Further, it is quite possible for this tire to consume more fuel than a half worn winter tire (Don't forget, as tires wear, the fuel economy goes up!)

 

[camrydriver111]

I'm not sure I believe you can go from 7.5l/100 km to 6.6l/100 km just by changing tires.

 

[JHZR2]

Lower AC use or something like that could play in a lot.

I was surprised to see in a formal government rolling resistance ranking test from Germany (as I recall) a few years back, the snow tires actually did quite well in the rr category, at least some did...

 

[HerrStig]

OCD

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
OCD


You're just now noticing that characteristic in the folks here?

 

[Falken]

HerrStig, I agree OCD 100%, won't deny it.

JHZR2, I rarely use the AC, my habits haven't changed.

Capriracer, I agree with everything you said, it really makes sense to me the way you clearly wrote it out, didn't think of some of those points.

I was just really surprised, puting on the chunky Winter tires that have fantastic FE numbers.

I have to say, the grip and performance of the Continental TrueContacts is superb, so maybe FE isn't such a big deal.

I will like to try some of the orange peel Yokohama high UTG LRR tires when the time comes though, I only avoided them because people have said the grip isn't the best in the rain.

 

[Brybo86]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
(Don't forget, as tires wear, the fuel economy goes up!)

this

but we r talking about a 4.3mpg US change.... 100% not possible due to tire change alone

 

[69GTX]

A brand new, 800 rated all season tire gets 13% less mpg than a winter tire? Is there a difference in the diameter/weight/width/grip of these new tires vs. the winter ones? I wouldn't think that only 3-4 days of driving is enough data to come to a solid conclusion. 10-20 deg variations in ambient temperatures over the past week could account for a significant difference.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: Brybo86
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
(Don't forget, as tires wear, the fuel economy goes up!)

this

but we r talking about a 4.3mpg US change.... 100% not possible due to tire change alone


This is about the time winter blend gas comes out, too. Which often reduces fuel economy

 

[ford46guy]

I have those tires and they don't really increase or decrease fuel economy. The MGM gets 22.1 before and after, according the cool dash computer.

They aren't bad tires, but I was too cheap to by Michelins for the car.

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: Brybo86
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
(Don't forget, as tires wear, the fuel economy goes up!)

this

but we r talking about a 4.3mpg US change.... 100% not possible due to tire change alone


This is about the time winter blend gas comes out, too. Which often reduces fuel economy


This is what I was thinking is likely adding to it...

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Whats the circumference difference? IS this a -2 snow tire? ( 14" rims? If so, 40psig on a -2 is going to be rolling on the centre third of the tyre only

My winter force gave me about 1/2 mpg less than the OE that came, on my old ( nuclear glowing irradiated) fit - don't recall if they were b'stones on 16" mags ...

 

[HerrStig]

WInter fuel has butane in it which helps with starting carbed cars and is cheaper than the less likely to boil off summer components. It's not used in summer fuel, so called, because it boils off too easily.

 

[Falken]

They are both 185/65R/15. Both have roughly the same tread depth, the Yokohama a bit less than the TrueContacts.

Again, I am familiar enough with this car, my driving cycle etc. that it boiled down to the tires. I reset the MPG meter right after changing the tires, drove to NDG, and was getting that low number (6.6L/100km).

When I fill up for gas I reset it... Same drive after a reset I would get, at best, 7.5L/100km with the TrueContacts.

I don't feel it is really possible along with the rest of you guys so it is a head scratcher.

I will post my FE number next Friday, if it is still under 7L/100km I'll have to just say it is the tires.

With the TrueContacts, dipping below 7.5L/100km never happens in my drive cycle.

I have read that really LRR tires wear out quickly, so maybe if Yokohama built them as an efficient tire, they succeeded big time with a Winter tire.

 

[69GTX]

Originally Posted By: Falken
They are both 185/65R/15. Both have roughly the same tread depth, the Yokohama a bit less than the TrueContacts....


Even with the same listed "sizing" they can be different. When I was looking at tires for my '99 SS last year I was surprised at the "actual" diameter and weight differences within that same tire size.

 

[Falken]

Guys, the increased FE is holding strong, even had to use the AC this morning on the way to work, windows fogged.

My conclusion is we have very bad roads in Montreal. Yokohama puts out a quality tire, and the softer compound allows it to absorb rough roads better.

The TrueContacts are an amazing tire, you don't compromise anything with them as far as performance goes, the only thing as mentioned by members is you give up FE for the hight UTG wear rating.

Very happy with the TrueContacts, I just needed help understanding some technical stuff as I think I was lacking a bit of knowledge as to the "web" of tradeoffs like engine oils.

Take some from here, loose some there.

All in all, the TrueContacts are excellent without being scary on wet roads, so I can live with that.

Thanks guys