Primacy MXV4 - questions about size 215/60/16

[Joe1]

I'm considering the Primacy MXV4 in size 215/60/16 for my '05 Forester. The tire is available in T,H and V speed ratings for this size.

As I compared the specs, I noticed the following for the three speed ratings:

T: UTQG tread wear - 500 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 9.5/32 -- weight: 22lbs

H: UTQG tread wear - 500 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 9/32 -- weight: 23 lbs

V: UTQG tread wear - 620 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 11/32 -- weight: 24 lbs


I would have expected the T rated tire to have the best treadwear rating. I am confused as to why the tread depths vary between speed ratings. In this size all three are designated "Green" and "LRR" and I suspect this is because some of the popular hybrids use the same size.

Does anybody have a logical answer to the above?


My first choice was the H rated, but I am thinking about paying a bit more for the V rated to take advantage of the deeper tread and potential longer wear. Does the extra pound of weight per tire matter much for fuel economy?

 

[Bebop367]

I had the H rated same size on 05 Camry. Got approx. 45k+ out of them. Good tire. Car came with V rated. It did lose a little handling (not that a Camry handles)going to the H rated.

Have the V rated different size on 10 Avalon now. Handle good, ride great and seems to be wear better. I like the V better but it could be the different size and car.

I would check what speed rated came on you Forester and not go below that for sure.

Good luck

 

[supton]

What speed rating did your Forester come with? Also, what weight is it?

My '11 Camry takes this size, but apparently in the V rating from the factory. At least according to Tirerack. But it wound up with H rated tires. Now, I think the alignment is fine, but all the same the tires are at 4-5/32's after 28kmiles.

I think my Camry is heavier, and might be harder on tires in general; but in my case it appears that going down in speed rating may lead to reduced tire life. YMMV.

 

[JOD]

I'm not surprised at the wear results--more tire is going to equal longer wear. From the looks of it, the compound is probably the same on all 3--that's what the UTQG reflect. The difference in speed rating can have minimal impact in wear, depending on how it's achieved. The T-rated tire will have fractionally higher wear due to more hysteresis, but it's .5mm thicker to compensate (so it's equal to the H-rated tire). So, the rating make sense.

The extra weight won't matter--you're talking about 8 pounds in a system that weights thousands of pounds. All else equal, lighter tires generally have lower Crr (due to less losses from hysteresis). However, all else isn't equal, since the tires are of different speed ratings. So, it' s a bit of a guess on FE. My guess is that the H-rated tire would offer fractionally better fuel economy.

The other factor is "how much do you drive", and will you be able to take full advantage of the tread life. I've gotten >120K out of the 9/32". But, I'm able to do that before the tires have sidewall rot. Depending on where you live, how much you drive and when you plan on selling the car, you may not need all of that tread life. So, you should probably factor that into your decision.

Any way you go, they're great tires!

 

[99Saturn]

Here's something I found on a Michelin's Site:
Quote:
Speed Ratings Refer to More Than Just Speed

Speed ratings make a difference not only in regards to speed, but in regards to ride comfort, wear and cornering ability. Typically, the higher the speed rating, the better the grip and stopping power, but the lower the tread life. You can always increase the speed rating of the tires on your vehicle for improved performance, but can never decrease it without reducing the vehicle top speed to that of the lower speed rating selected.

http://www.michelinman.com/tires-101/tire-basics/about-tires/tire-speed-ratings-and-tread-life.page

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Joe1
I'm considering the Primacy MXV4 in size 215/60/16 for my '05 Forester. The tire is available in T,H and V speed ratings for this size.

As I compared the specs, I noticed the following for the three speed ratings:

T: UTQG tread wear - 500 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 9.5/32 -- weight: 22lbs

H: UTQG tread wear - 500 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 9/32 -- weight: 23 lbs

V: UTQG tread wear - 620 - trac: A -- temp: A .. tread depth: 11/32 -- weight: 24 lbs


I would have expected the T rated tire to have the best treadwear rating. I am confused as to why the tread depths vary between speed ratings. In this size all three are designated "Green" and "LRR" and I suspect this is because some of the popular hybrids use the same size.

Does anybody have a logical answer to the above?


My first choice was the H rated, but I am thinking about paying a bit more for the V rated to take advantage of the deeper tread and potential longer wear. Does the extra pound of weight per tire matter much for fuel economy?



First, I think we are dealing with some OE tires here. That would explain the difference in the ratings and the tread depth. That also means that everything you think about how these tires ought to be rated is out the window.

I suspect the V rated tire is an aftermarket because of the tread depth and the UTQG treadwear rating.

And while the weight isn't the real issue for fuel economy, the difference in tread compound might be. I would guess that the V rated tire is going to hurt fuel economy more than the others.

And just so you know, you may or may not experience some loss of fuel economy just by changing tires. it depends on what you got on there now.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: 99Saturn
.......Questions on the UTQG treadwear ratings. Aren't manufacturers allowed to pick a "reference tire" as they see fit?........


Not exactly.

There is a standard reference tire that is supposed to be used - BUT - the standard reference tire only fits certain vehicles, which means they can't always conduct the test using that reference tire.

To get around this, another tire could be referenced - and that would be referenced back to the standard reference tire. This - and that fact that treadwear testing can be quite variable - can lead to some opportunities for creative math. Not to mention that the rules state that the rating can't be OVERstated.

 

[coastalguy]

I finally sprung for a set of Michelins after not having good luck with them on other cars years ago as far as tread life and snow traction. I have the H rated MXV4's 215 60R 16 on my 05 Camry SE 4cyl and they are great. After it's original set of Bridgestones
and 2 sets of Yokohama these have made this car much more driveable in the snow, can go up hills with a couple of inches of snow I could not climb before. According to the knowledgeable mgr at our local Discount tire "Michelin has really stepped up". I studied both the tire rack and Michelin web sites before making my decision. 18,000 miles so far no appreciable wear. Great handling and can be balanced for 0 vibration on the highway up to 85mph! Best you can do I think in an all season for snow traction. I understand the Yokohama 580 is also a great tire for a little less $ but I don't think you can beat the newer Michelins.

yes I'm in Colorado coastalguy because I'm in the U.S. Coast guard Auxiliary.
Happy Holidays to all

 

[supton]

So, in 90k you have gone through the OEM set, 2 sets of Yokohama tires and now 18k on these MXV4's? Around 24k each to wear out those prior sets? Just curious.

 

[coastalguy]

1st set of Bridgestones were takin off @ 17,000 after a flat
and a great deal on Yoko YK420s which lasted 37k. Then 35k on a set of Yoko H4S directional tires which were useless in the snow.
Put on the current MXV4s at 89K car now has 107K.
Also was that 2011 std trans Camry hard for you to find, no longer in production after 2011!

 

[supton]

Ah, gotcha, got fooled by your sig line.

Ours was hard to find; had to drive down the road... It had been sitting on the lot for a bit; I know as I had contemplated it as a replacement for the Jetta for a bit, but could never justify it (boy did I wish I had a year later!). I suspect the dealer "had" to receive it, probably came with some more desirable vehicles; we got it in some August promo thing IIRC, with a good APR (but was unprepared for the F&I guy, so it wasn't as great of a deal as you might thing).

Not a bad vehicle; I know many like other vehicles but really it's been a great highway hauler and mommy-mobile for us. Hope to drive to 10 years / 200k+.

 

[Joe1]

Thanks for all of the feedback.

I have narrowed it down to the V rated primacy or V rated Turanza Serenity as both are available from Costco.

Should I get the Bridgestones now as they are $ 70 off on coupon or wait for the Michelin coupon to surface at Costco in another month or so.

 

[glock19]

Originally Posted By: Joe1

Thanks for all of the feedback.

I have narrowed it down to the V rated primacy or V rated Turanza Serenity as both are available from Costco.

Should I get the Bridgestones now as they are $ 70 off on coupon or wait for the Michelin coupon to surface at Costco in another month or so.




Of course I can't make the decision for you but I have Bridgestone Turanza EL400's on my Subaru right now and I can't wait to get back to MXV4's. I had the MXV4's on my Volvo and I know they were worth every penny.