The C needs new shoes!

I'm curious as to why at the likes of Big O Tires, Amazon, and TireRack where one can enter vehicle info, the Michelin Saver A/S 175/65R15 are shown as not being compatible with the Prius C.

 

Indeed on the costliness, but it looks like you get more mileage out of the Michelins in comparison to some of the cheaper options.

 

The sun doesn't rise and set on Michelin. They're good tires, that's all. We had Michelins with a 120,000 km treadlife warranty: the wear bars had become a a solid bar by 60,000 km. To their credit, Michelin reimbursed our next purchase by 50%. But a lot of people wouldn't bother, or lose the needed documentation.

 

I realize up to perhaps half of a tire's fate can be relegated to the throwing of dice, but my direct experience with the Bridgestone EOMs is enough to steer me away for the time being (and the small cross-section of reviews I read concerning premature wear).

 

I'm at 36k miles on my OEM 400s and still have probably 10k miles left on them.

 

A tire store rep recommended tire rotations every 3 months due to the added weight of the battery. Malarkey or could ~500o-mile rotations be contributing to my lower tire lifespan?

 

@vinnie97 depending on where the wear is, it may be due to over- or under-inflated tires; if the wear is evenly distributed then that's not the case but if it's mainly on the edge of the tire they're under-inflated and if it's in the middle they're over-inflated. Don't know if that's relevant to you but worth mentioning.

 

Keep in mind, all this labour is for a disposable item, ie: the tires. Really seems overkill: even once a year would suffice.

 

^I'm inclined to agree. As it turns out, the tires wore in relatively evenly....they were just OEM pieces of garbage. I'm expecting much more from the Energy Saver A/S.

 

30k miles and still rolling on factory tires is actually good... not great, but not bad either. For the average driver that is 2.5 years.

 

It varies for sure based on the reports in this thread alone. They got me to 2 months shy of 3 years.

 

and 29k+ miles. Or at least that's what you said on page 1, either way, that's a lot for factory tires.

 

That's correct, just under 29,400 when they were sent off to be reincarnated. I'm also in a high desert clime, which may have played a role in their premature aging.

 

If you rotate tires it ruins all of them evenly. Put new tires on front and don't rotate. Front tires always wear out before rears. Front does all the driving steering regeneration and most braking. My experience from driving front drive cars for over 30 years.

 

Yeah Savers are not cheap, esp in 175/65R15 size. Costco has them for $99 after Michelin rebate.

Another way to look at it: Energy Savers good for ~3% MPG-wise over EP422, so you'll be saving ~.6gal/1,000mi. That's about ~30gal over 50k, or 15$/tire at 2$/gal. The diff btw E422 and Saver ~18$, so with fuel savings they about the same. Get 60K out of them or gas goes up and Michelin is a better deal.

 

I paid a boatload through tirerack (no Michelin rebate was offered), but at least I got a $15 Ebates bonus incoming. :|

 

When it's time to replace mine, my choice is narrowed to following three: Michelin Saver A/S (Costco, 99$), General RT43 (tire rack, $67, $12.5 ship) and Nokian eNTYRE (tires-easy, $92, free ship).

RT43 is cheap, lasts and good handling. eNTYRE more expensive but last longer and handles well. Both better than Saver in wet and snow. RT43 and eNTYRE are non-LRR but roll better than many so-called LRR. The only prob eNTYRE doesn't come in 175/65R15, have to go to 185/60.

 

Thanks for the info...if I still have my 2012 when it's time to replace tires again, I'll have to keep those in the short list.

 

There are also EP422. Not my cup of tea (had on suv) but others like them. Def not getting another fuel max