Evaluating value: $10 per 100 UTQG?

[Brons2]

I've been looking online at tires. I am looking for a T rated 205/60R16 tire for my 2007 Kia Rondo LX I4. This will be to replace the factory Kumho Solus KH16. The Kumhos were fine, but they had only a 440 UTQG rating and are on track to get about 45,000 miles or so.

I decided that a potentially good metric for evaluating treadwear life is to compare the tire's UTQG to the price. I've been looking at tires that offered 100 UTQG for every $10 spent. I've found a few that do offer this.

What do you guys think of this value metric?

 

[Steve S]

But then you could be looking for a quiet tire or one that grips really good on the track or in wet weather or that has lower rolling resistance etc. but at cost per mile it could work.

 

[ewetho]

Considering that one manufacturers 400 is another 300 or 600 that metric means little.

 

[HTSS_TR]

For the S and T speed rated 15-16" tires, the $10 per 100 UTQG is pretty much applied to some brand name tires. For speed rate of H, V, Z and higher or 17" or larger the cost going up to $15 or more per 100 UTQG.

For your 205/60-16 size, Kumho Solus KR22 is right on the $10 per 100 UTQG. It is $78 at Tirerack and UTQG is 800 A A.

 

[IndyIan]

I'm not sure the wear ratings really mean that much once they are over 400 or so. They are supposed to but does anyone actually get 90,000 or 100,000 miles out of a tire that still has any wet traction near the end?
My 560 rated tires on the tracker aren't even close to half done wear wise, with around 75k miles on them, but they are terrible in the wet or snow.
Would 800 UTQG tires be any better at this point? I don't think so.

 

[daves87rs]

Hydroedges. Problem solved!

 

[Brons2]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
For the S and T speed rated 15-16" tires, the $10 per 100 UTQG is pretty much applied to some brand name tires. For speed rate of H, V, Z and higher or 17" or larger the cost going up to $15 or more per 100 UTQG.

For your 205/60-16 size, Kumho Solus KR22 is right on the $10 per 100 UTQG. It is $78 at Tirerack and UTQG is 800 A A.


Yeah, I've been watching and waiting for the KR22 to become available. It's one of the Kumho recommended tires for my vehicle and it's supposed to be low rolling resistance.

For some reason though this vehicle came with H rated tires and TireRack only wants to show me those if I put in my vehicle. OK, so what gives...this is a 4 cylinder Rondo, a 3700 lb vehicle. T rated is to 118 and I can't see this vehicle ever going 100, much less 118. On a windy day this vehicle gets blown around going the speed limit on the freeway

But anyways so I put in my tire size instead. haha.

 

[Brons2]

Originally Posted By: daves87rs
Hydroedges. Problem solved!


Michelin makes excellent quality tires. But they are expensive, and I don't think they're a good value on a Rondo, which is decidedly a non-performance vehicle.

If I had a higher performance car I might think otherwise.

I do like Michelin tires on my bicycle

 

[FordFocus]

T-rated tires should be fine for this vehicle

 

[HTSS_TR]

Both traction and temp of KR22 are A rated, but speed is only T. Usually if both traction and temp are A's then speed rate should be H or higher.

 

[eljefino]

Though you may not exceed the lower speed rating of cheaper tires, the suspension is tuned for the stiffer sidewalls of the H rated.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Brons2
.......For some reason though this vehicle came with H rated tires and TireRack only wants to show me those if I put in my vehicle. OK, so what gives......


Here's what gives:

The recent incident with Firestone and Ford pointed out a flaw in the speed rating system - and that was that the speed rating was conducted in a room that was 77°F, and many places have temperatures much higher than that.

There are many ways to deal with that. Many vehicle manufacturers choose to go to a higher speed ratinh - and that's the way I think is best.

Put another way, during the investigation, it was discovered that the top 5 returns for tire failures was (more or less in order): Arizona, California, Texas, Nevada, Florida. Obviously this is the desert southwest (except for FL).

This was followed up with a survey by NHTSA of removed tires in Phoenix. One of the results was that H and higher speed rated tires were almost never removed for a separation while there were plenty of samples of S and T rated tires.

So if you live in AZ, CA, TX, NV, and FL, I think it would be a prudent to go with H speed rated tires - and frankly, given the cost differential, I'd recommend everyone use H speed rated tires.

 

[fdcg27]

The Hydroedge is not a performance tire.
It is a long wearing family car type of tire, and would work well on your Rondo.
While the initial cost might be greater, the cost per mile would likely end up about the same.
I've had okay experience with Kumhos, but the last two sets of tires I've bought have been Michelins.
Worth the money, in my experience.

 

[PandaBear]

The more important question is, what do you want to trade UTQG for? price? traction? fuel economy?

If you just want to save money, you are going to lose traction to get more UTQG and IMO it isn't worth it. A 400-440 UTQG tire usually last me 50-60k miles and by that time the rubber sidewall is about to crack, or the nail / road hazard do it in and had to be replaced.

So while a 800 UTQG premium (i.e. Michelin) would be a great deal in theory, they tends to not get their money worth before worn out.

I'd stick with a tire between 360-500 UTQG range.

 

[Brons2]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
The Hydroedge is not a performance tire.
It is a long wearing family car type of tire, and would work well on your Rondo.
While the initial cost might be greater, the cost per mile would likely end up about the same.
I've had okay experience with Kumhos, but the last two sets of tires I've bought have been Michelins.
Worth the money, in my experience.


I am aware of the tire, but it would not be my first choice in Michelins. I am not going to put a tire with a B temperature rating on my vehicle. I live in Austin, Texas.

Plus they do not carry 205/60R16 at Tire Rack, not sure if that means they don't make it or Tire Rack doesn't carry it. The plus zero sizes are a major compromise for the most part.

I'm pretty happy with my current Kumho tires, and the eco Solus KR22 are only a few dollars more each. I think they're worth a try.

 

[occupant]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer


Here's what gives...*snip*...put another way, during the investigation, it was discovered that the top 5 returns for tire failures was (more or less in order): Arizona, California, Texas, Nevada, Florida. Obviously this is the desert southwest (except for FL).

This was followed up with a survey by NHTSA of removed tires in Phoenix. One of the results was that H and higher speed rated tires were almost never removed for a separation while there were plenty of samples of S and T rated tires.

So if you live in AZ, CA, TX, NV, and FL, I think it would be a prudent to go with H speed rated tires - and frankly, given the cost differential, I'd recommend everyone use H speed rated tires.


That makes darn good sense. TireRack sells Kumho KH16's in both H and V speed ratings for the same price ($78). AVID TRZ's are $84, Kumho Ectsa Platinums are $87, BFGoodrich Advantage T/A's are $90, and Yokohama AVID ENVigors are $92. Sadly, this means I can't get AVID Touring-S that I originally wanted for $72 (they are T rated), but there's plenty of good tires with H or V speed ratings for not much more.

 

[Neil Womack]

The members of this site teach me a great deal!

 

[Hokiefyd]

For what it's worth, I almost always get ABOUT 100x the UTQG treadwear rating, in miles. So, for a tire with a 740 UTQG rating, I'd expect to get around 74,000 miles out of it.

The Michelin X Radials on our T&C are rated 740. Right now, they have almost 30,000 miles, and are down to around 7/32" of tread. That's right at 10,000 miles per 1/32" of tread wear. If they wear consistently, they'll be at 80,000 miles at the 2/32" tread depth level, but I typically replace my tires at the 3-4/32" level...which would be 60-70k. So it's in the ballpark.