Why Michelin? Thinking about spending a bit more..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: JoeFromPA
I've always read that Michelin's construction techniques are typically the best in the industry insofar as balancing, integrity of the tire carcass, etc.

So I guess my question is: To those educated in these things, any reasons for or against this way of thinking?

I can't provide reasons, but I can lend support: Look at virtually every single successful hypercar made in the past 10 years. Almost all of them use Michelin Pilot Sports: the McLaren Mercedes SLR, the Koenigsegg, the Porsche Carrera GT, the Bugatti Veyron, the Pagani Zonda... The only notable exception AFAIK is the Enzo Ferrari, but that's because of Ferrari's close relationship with Bridgestone at the time of the car's development.

Michelins are also among the top choices of cars one rung down the ladder from those, competing only with the very top tires from Bridgestone and Pirelli for fitments on Ferraris, high-end Porsches, and the like.

If you want a good all season tire, you should look at the Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position. I had it on my old car, and a friend of mine is running it on his own '06 Civic Si, both year-round, and both with extremely favorable results (to put it lightly). However, if you're looking at a similar Michelin tire, I wouldn't steer you away.

I can also assure you, for what my experience is worth, that the top tires are expensive for a reason. They will out-grip, out-handle, out-ride, and out-last the cheaper ones almost every time; the only exception is when a cheap tire does one or two things very well (e.g. grip), in which case it does other things very poorly (e.g. ride quality, noise). If you're thinking of stepping up to a well-reviewed tire from a great company, you won't be disappointed.


The tires for hyper cars are not chosen for coping with icy hills in Pennsylvania. Much tire rating depends on the goals of whoever is rating the tire. I think one of the best tire choices I ever made was when I bought my first set of radials in 1966. I went with Perellis over Michlins. I buy tires knowing I have to get around in all kinds of weather, not to play around when the roads are smooth and dry.
 
You missed the point. I was answering his question about Michelin's reputation for quality tire construction. Seasonal suitability is a different issue, and I would have addressed that differently.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I think the Yoko H4S is comparable to the Pilot, and yes, I've had them too.

Read some of the TR staff tests, the Mich has fallen off the top of the heap.


I don't even look at the Yokos, because I had a set of V4S on my wife's 2003 Saturn Ion in 205/55/16.

Complete and utter junk, and I know it had to be a a tire problem or a car problem. But the car had no alignment issues, the tires were kept properly inflated, and the car was driven conservatively.

After 10,000 miles, the tires became very loud and I thought they might be scalloped based upon their "WAHHHHahhhhhhWAHHHHahhhh" sound when braking from 20mph or so. They were pretty much useless in snow....as in, the worst all-seasons I've ever driven on a FWD car in the snow. Which includes General Exclaim UHP, which isn't really supposed to be an all-season.

By about 20,000 miles, they were pretty much down worn to the point where I no longer tried to justify not replacing them.

A set of Kumho Ecsta ASX went on immediately after, and they transformed the car. Quiet, exceptionally smooth, and the Ion's steering became actually half-decent for the first time in it's life.

Yokohama pretty much lost me as a customer after that. I would actually buy the Kumho for my Civic SI but tirerack had a sale 3 months ago for ~$48 per tire in my size in the Kumho ASX and now I refuse to pay $88 per tire knowing that I missed the sale :)

Joe
 
Yeah, they are raved about but my ownership experience was very unsatisfactory. To give a comment on a similar tire, my experience with BFGoodrich traction t/a's is one of the best of my life....even moreso if the tire size is 195 or narrower.

At 205+ width, they lose a solid center rib and lose some stability and gain some noise. Still an incredible tire there. I put them on a 95 volvo 850 turbo and literally I was unstoppable in snow. 8", packed snow with ice, unplowed drifts...didn't matter. The volvo was a tank. And it could actually brake in those conditions with a degree of confidence. Similar with both wet traction AND hydroplaning (since they are very different). They were a tad stiff, but they wore fantastic for their overall characteristics.

Anyhooo...I'm a tire nut. I want to find a tire on my Civic SI that will satisfy me like the BFGs did on the volvo, or the Bridgestone A/T REVO did on my 97 Jeep Wrangler....

Never bought michelin before, but hoping it or something similar will provide what I'm looking for....

Pirelli is coming out with a revised version of the P Zero Nero M+S, with alot more siping and thick tread blocks.
 
Back to the OP, I'd consider the S-Drives if in your size and say to READ ALL the staff tests.
 
Joe, BFGoodrich tires have been owned by Michelin for about 20 years. In the US they're both run by MNA, Inc (Michelin North America).
So I guess you have owned tires made by Michelin just not tires sold under the Michelin brand name.
 
If you are looking for the best highway ride, you should also consider changing to size 215/50r17 Michelin Primacy MXV4.
Same outside diameter, and cheaper.
I have MXV4 and they are quiet and smooth on a good highway.
A good tire will be better on I-95 in middle PA, but won't make any difference on pot-hole patched I-95 in NYC.
The other part of buying a tire is where you get it installed. Ask if they do the "Hunter 1 weight method"
If they don't know what that is, you are in the wrong place.
(see the hunter wheel balance web site for full explanation)
Michelin does "balance" very well, I only needed 1 balance weight on 2 of the wheels.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Well, at lest someone who actually had the Yokos is commenting on them.


I was a fan of the AVS DB for aggressive driving. soft, soft, grippy rubber. Loads of fun, even when cold outside. 15,000 mile treadlife, so not in his interest, but great for on-the-edge driving. And they were CHEAP.

M
 
I vote for the Michelins. We have almost 70,000 miles on the factory Michelins on the Tacoma. In fact they barely look worn. This is with the factory balance, and rotation only 4 times. We will replace them in the next 12-24 months due to safety concerns for the age of the tread. That will bring the tire life to about 85,000 miles, 7-8 years. Ironically, this will coincide with our first brake job on the vehicle. This is also a vehicle that is used as a truck, and abused.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Amkeer
I vote for the Michelins. We have almost 70,000 miles on the factory Michelins on the Tacoma. In fact they barely look worn. This is with the factory balance, and rotation only 4 times. We will replace them in the next 12-24 months due to safety concerns for the age of the tread. That will bring the tire life to about 85,000 miles, 7-8 years. Ironically, this will coincide with our first brake job on the vehicle. This is also a vehicle that is used as a truck, and abused.

Why is long treadlife viewed to be such an important factor?
 
If that was an honest question, I would like to second it because I am interested to see the answer.

If it was a rhetorical question, I agree. Long tread life involves either hard tread compound or a huge amount of tread depth (or both), neither of which is particularly desirable...
 
Short treadlife doesn't guaranty great traction either. When evaluating all factors between similar tires if one has better treadlife, that is the deal maker. If Amkeer is happy with the road manners of the current tires and they have outstanding wear why wouldn't he want the same in his next set? In my case a cheap tire is $140 and rated 360BB, buying a tire rated 500AB for $175 makes sense.
 
Exactly, as mentioned I vote for the Michelins. Great ride! If you are in to tires that wear quicker, you have to balance, and rotate them more, then you may not want to consider Michelins.
 
I have just over 70,000 on my Michelin Energy MXV4 (205/60/16 v rated) on my Honda Accord. It still has over 5/32nds left and all tires are wearing great. Have never had to rebalance th tires and it rides smooth...I only rotat front to back same side...I WILL replace with Michelins again...most likely the Primacy MXV4...
 
Originally Posted By: tom slick
Short treadlife doesn't guaranty great traction either.


VERY true.

I had a set of TOYO Proxies on my Mustang. They lasted about ONE summer, burned off VERY quickly, and gripped no better than the cheap Goodyear tires they replaced that lasted twice as long.
 
I have 6 years and 115,000 miles on a set of Michelin X Radial LT 265/70R16s (2001 F150). Still as smooth and quiet as day one. Best tire I have ever owned.
 
My parents have put nothing but LTX M/S's on their Expedition. I'm likely to buy a set in the next few months, since the Goodyear tires on the Expedition are worn funky thanks to awful alignment that the previous owner never addressed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top