Originally Posted By: mechanicx
The problem with trying to make a comparison is one brand's tire may be a low rolling resistance in one size while another brand isn't.
This is true, though I think the comparison is valid if the tires are marketed towards the same segment, and are competitors. Objective testing like this gives consumers the tools, if they even know they exist, to make that choice. Is the increase in performance of one tire "worth it" over the other tire. Or is the lower cost of one tire "worth it" over the safety benefit of another tire.
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Also the tire tests don't always keep with the changes made to the tire. This test was the Michelin Primacy MXM4 and while the Primacy in both MXM and MXV seem to test well in wet braking, unless it is a recent test of the same size, exact model, speed rating etc of the tire you're buying the test results might not be completely applicable especially where the difference was small.
Absolutely another valid point. So many of these tires are "OEM spec" tires. The Goodyear ComforTred Touring is not an OEM tire on anything of which I am aware, so its relative performance (compared with other tires) should be somewhat consistent across different sizes.
The Goodyear Assurance ComforTred Touring was also tested by Consumer Reports. I won't post the link because you can't see the results if you're not a subscriber anyway (and if you are a subscriber, you know where on the website you can see this), but it was tested among 21 other V-rated performance all-season tires. It finished 8th, a decent showing. But its performance in CR's test was somewhat consistent with its performance in Tire Rack's test. That is, it was good in ride and noise comfort, and good in snow traction, but was only average in dry and wet performance metrics.
I personally am a safety-conscious tire buyer above all else. I'll absolutely pay more for a tire that will perform better in the conditions in which I drive. If that comes at a cost of noise or ride comfort, that's okay with me. If better braking performance means my wife being able to stop the car before she hits the one that pulled out in front of her, there are no cost savings that will justify that to me.
There are no right or wrong answers, as long as the consumer is aware of the tradeoffs likely being made (regardless of tire choice). We all know that no tire does everything.
The problem with trying to make a comparison is one brand's tire may be a low rolling resistance in one size while another brand isn't.
This is true, though I think the comparison is valid if the tires are marketed towards the same segment, and are competitors. Objective testing like this gives consumers the tools, if they even know they exist, to make that choice. Is the increase in performance of one tire "worth it" over the other tire. Or is the lower cost of one tire "worth it" over the safety benefit of another tire.
Originally Posted By: mechanicx
Also the tire tests don't always keep with the changes made to the tire. This test was the Michelin Primacy MXM4 and while the Primacy in both MXM and MXV seem to test well in wet braking, unless it is a recent test of the same size, exact model, speed rating etc of the tire you're buying the test results might not be completely applicable especially where the difference was small.
Absolutely another valid point. So many of these tires are "OEM spec" tires. The Goodyear ComforTred Touring is not an OEM tire on anything of which I am aware, so its relative performance (compared with other tires) should be somewhat consistent across different sizes.
The Goodyear Assurance ComforTred Touring was also tested by Consumer Reports. I won't post the link because you can't see the results if you're not a subscriber anyway (and if you are a subscriber, you know where on the website you can see this), but it was tested among 21 other V-rated performance all-season tires. It finished 8th, a decent showing. But its performance in CR's test was somewhat consistent with its performance in Tire Rack's test. That is, it was good in ride and noise comfort, and good in snow traction, but was only average in dry and wet performance metrics.
I personally am a safety-conscious tire buyer above all else. I'll absolutely pay more for a tire that will perform better in the conditions in which I drive. If that comes at a cost of noise or ride comfort, that's okay with me. If better braking performance means my wife being able to stop the car before she hits the one that pulled out in front of her, there are no cost savings that will justify that to me.
There are no right or wrong answers, as long as the consumer is aware of the tradeoffs likely being made (regardless of tire choice). We all know that no tire does everything.
