New Tire Tests from Tirerack.com

Did you see a fuel mileage improvement/decline with the Michelins?

 

From the Yokohama Avid S33D's, I saw about a 2-4 MPG increase. Granted, there could be other factors at play in that, but I'd be surprised considering how short my typical drive is.

 

USB - where did you purchase these? I'm actually having trouble finding a tire shop that will order Continentals for me! I'm giving up on the Michelin Energy Saver A/S. Seems they'll never be back for sale!

 

I got them from Tirerack for $74 each. After shipping (no tax) 4 came out to $335. Prius loaded all 4 tires up and got them installed locally.

 

Got it. Thanks much.

 

OK... the Continental Pro Contacts are on order and will be installed tomorrow. Fingers crossed. I can't wait to get real tires on the car! For the record, they'll be installed for $573 total - but that was only after I complained that their initial price ($130 per tire) was $50 per tire more than TireRack.

I just gave up on Michelin.

 

Can't wait for your impression. Which tires are being replaced?

 

50k mile Integrity's. They've always been bad, and didn't get better with age.

 

Adding Aug 18, 2011 tirerack test 205/55/16 to the mix gives us the following ranking (higher on the list uses less fuel). The math is very rough so I went to round numbers on the percent comparisons.

Bridgestone Ecopia EP422 + 1%
Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max* ---
Continental ProContact w/EcoPlus* -0.75%
Yokoham AVID TRZ -0.75%
Kumho eco Solus HM KR22# -1.5%
Michelin HydroEdge Green X** -1.5%
Hankook Optimo H727*** -2.5%
Goodyear Assurance TripleTred All-Season## -4.5%
General Altimax HP**** -5%

see quoted section for explanations of notations after tire names.

Especially noticable is that in two seperate tests this year the Continental ProContact w/EcoPlus and Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max were in the same test. In one test the spread in fuel consumption was less than 0.4% in the other test the spread was over 1%. I can't see any explanation in the two tests as to why the variance in fuel consumption so for now I'm just adusting the Continental ProContact w/EcoPlus but maybe I should have adjusted the Assurance Fuel Max instead or in addition to. Hard to say without more data.

 

Well, I've got 50 miles under my belt now (hey, I don't drive much!) on the Continental Eco Plus tires. One thing that surprises me is how the reviewers all say how quiet it is (It won that category in the latest test that Justin just posted) - and while they are slightly quieter than the stock Integrities that I replaced, it isn't a startling difference by any means. Where they shine is in control of the car. The steering is now more precise and confident. I'm certainly seeing no gas mileage difference - a combination of not having many miles AND the fact that the difference in RR is probably statistically insignificant from the stock tires.

Conclusion so far: I'm happy with them.

 

DD,

Integrity tires were pretty quiet already. They have terrible wet traction.

I came from Nokian i3s. They got very loud as they worn out.

Have you taken it out on the highway?

 

Oh... you know... illegally worn. The insides were smooth by the time I finally got 'er done. It still cracks me up when I hear people telling me how I'll wear the middle of the tread more with over-inflation like I run. It has NEVER happened. I always wear the edges faster.

Depending on the weather, I may get 2k before six months.

Yes, I can confirm that! Any stripe on the road becomes a chirp fest.

that's really the only place I drive a motor vehicle. If I'm not on the highway, I might as well be riding my bike. They're definitely smoother, more comfortable tires - though how much of that is attributed to just having thicker tread is the question. Comparing worn out tires to new tires - even of the same make and model - isn't quite fair. The Integrities definitely got louder as I wore them out. I haven't used the new ones on wet yet - but not much could be worse than those Integreties. The handling is so far the place where they shine - in my limited experience with them.

I'm quite happy with the purchase.

 

> Regardless, these are MUCH better and safer tires so I'm happy you bought them.

As am I! And I thank you and USB and all the other contributors to these kinds of threads. It still amazes me that we have trouble finding LRR tires. LRR should be the default, and folks should have to search high and low for draggy tires if they really want them!

 

Thank you for being another sane voice as to higher pressure and (lack of) uneven tire wear.

Part of the "harder to find" LRR tires is that tires that are just on the edge of "LRR" aren't marked as such. Take these examples

Michelin Primacy MXV4 (Green X at some sizes but not all, the ones that aren't Green X are still pretty darn good)

Yokohama AVID TRZ not marked LRR but basically the same fuel economy as as the Continental ProContact w/EcoPlus you bought.

Hankook Optimo H727 not marked as LRR but still a darn good tire and good RR.

Yokohama AVID ENVigor not marked LRR but marketed as having good RR. Unknown exactly where it fits in this spectrum.

there are probably others I didn't list that aren't LRR but are close to it.

Life would be so much easier if rolling resistance were reported in a mandatory fashion like load factor/tread wear/traction/temperature are.

 

My pleasure. I strive for sane, and often miss the mark.

Amen, brother. We need to start reporting the important stuff. Same way we should start charging at the pump what gasoline actually costs us, and in the same way that it is good to have MPG staring at us in the face as we drive - showing the efficiency numbers on tires would certainly help matters.