Stock Tires?

They are one of 3 OE tires available. I've never owned them but they get poor reviews from owners at TireRack.com. They should be decent for fuel economy. The good news is they probably won't last long so you can upgrade to a better tire soon. Treadwear rating is 260. That is very low.

Tire Search Results

Just do a lot of research on tires before you buy or you risk losing mpg! My vote is for the Michelin Energy Saver A/S 205/60/16.

 

They are stock and are an expensive tire to replace. The tires are decent and are wearing well on my car. I would keep them until they wear out and then change for Michelins which are also supplied on the v in some areas. The Bridgestones had me worried at first (same company brought us the infamous Firestone 500 radials) plus I had a blowout the first week, but now I have 34k on them and others are getting way more miles from them. The Goodyears on earlier Prii were wearing out at 20k. Ride and noise are acceptable, but the Michelins would be better in those aspects. Michelins are also known for holding their balance and getting 100k even with infrequent rotations. Get your 5k rotations and save your dollars for something else.

 

Bridgestones are terrible tires. Yours are OEM tires (per Tire Rack). The same Bridgestones came as OEM tires on our '12 Camry hybrid. I'd previously rented a TCH with Michelins. The salesman at the dealership where we bought our car said they couldn't swap the Bridgestones for Michelins because all the new Camrys on their lot had Bridgestones. Their parts department didn't even carry Michelins. When I drove the new TCH home, the ride on the Bridgestones was nothing close to the smooth ride we'd experienced with the Michelins on the rental car. The Bridgestones' tread-wear rating was also terrible -- the Turanza's rating is a paltry 260. The OEM Michelin tire for the v2 is rated 460. But do yourself a favor: dump the Bridgestones and buy a set of Michelin Primacy MXV4 Grand Touring tires (tread-wear rating 620). That's what I put on our TCH. I'm not sorry and you won't be either.

 

You are generalizing too much. That's like saying because you rode in a Chevette that a Corvette is terrible.

Bridgestone makes a great tire for the money. What you are commenting on is a tire that was made by Bridgestone but to the auto manufacturer specifications.

FWIW, the Primacy MXV4 is a great tire despite being an old design but it is not super fuel efficient. The Energy Saver A/S is MUCH more efficient. The MXV4 actually faired well in the latest TireRack test but it did take second place to a Bridgestone tire.

Tire Test Results : Testing Grand Touring All-Season Tires

 

I'd say if you have $800 to spend then throw away those Bridgestones which could last you 100k which others have already gotten. Or if that $800 is burning a hole in your pocket, consider an upgraded speaker system, a tint job, and have some money left over for gas.

 

I don't think he should dump them. The tires are not that bad.

 

I drive 180 miles round trip 5 days a week for work. I had those tires on my 2013 Prius c. I had them for 72,000 miles before I changed them. We both know the car isn't the greatest in the snow, but i don't think the tires have anything to do with that. It is just a lite car with not much clearance. If they weren't so expensive I would've bought them again. I now have a Falken tire and they seem to make my car move a lot on the highways. Wish I had the Turzanas back on.

 

Update: Had 105k on the Bridgestones when I replaced them with Michelins from Costco. They still had legal tread, rode decently and never needed to be balanced. The Michelins improved cornering at speed slightly (although the Bridgestones were speed rated v which some Michelins [Sam's Club] are not) and the new Michelins have noticeably lower road noise. The ride and mileage did not change enough to see a difference.

 

Good to know!

 

I know this is an old thread, but timely for me. Like the OP, I bought my first Prius, a 2013 Prius v 3 with very low miles (6,000). Just went out to the garage to see what the tires were: Bridgestone Turzana EL400; Treadwear 260; P205/60/R16 91V. I would say handling, comfort, wear, etc. are okay but, again, first Prius. I will admit that I got some hydroplaning a couple of weeks ago, but other than that no complaints. Just passed 80,000 miles on factory tires. Also, original brakes. Mechanic says I have 50% left on the brakes. Tires not so much. Not down to the wear bars yet, but I see some cracking in the grooves and on the sidewalls. The little weeny spare has never been on the ground. I'm reading some of these posts for advice on what to replace them with.

BOTTOM LINE: Not bad for "terrible tires" with "poor reviews".

 

Down to the wear bars should not be your only consideration for when you replace tires.

Measure in 3 places across the width of the tire. The lowest depth is the one you use in comparing tread depth. You can find the original tread depth in the "specs" area for each tire at Tire Rack. Their site has videos showing how you can measure using a coin and what the recommended tread depths are and how they affect handling. Or you can buy a "professional" tread-depth gauge from most auto parts stores for around $3.

You could read their tests or I'll cheat and just give you the results. The difference between a new tire and one worn down to 2/32 (legal limit in many states) in a test on a water soaked surface was an almost doubling of stopping distance! 4/32 deep tires took about 50% longer to stop than new tires.

New - 195 feet

4/32 - 290 feet

2/32 - 378 feet

Even more startling to me is that on a 2/32 tire, in stopping tests in the wet from 70MPH the new tire would have stopped the car where the worn tire would only have slowed the car to 55MPH!!!! 4/32 would only have slowed the car to 45!!!!

They don't cite skidpad tests but the same issues that affect stopping distance would affect your staying on the road as you round the curve in the very wet. The tire needs the depth in order to evacuate the water beneath the tread and get the tire "rubber" into contact with the pavement. If it rides up on the water, it is like driving on ball bearings. I recall driving behind a car once and seeing it hit a puddle just as it came to a bridge and then going off like a pinball bouncing off the sides of the bridge. When I stopped, sure enough balding tires.

Depth does matter in the wet.

In the dry, depth is not nearly as important as long as the depth is consistent.

 

That's great info. I've never seen that test before... very eye opening.

Thanks for posting!

 

Sep 2016
I am compelled by this thread's conversation to write about tread wear ratings (TWR) and to add to this year 2013 tread.

First, TWR do not correspond to different brands only within the brand.
(Although one brand saying 200 and the other 400 is telling us something).

As for a 400 TWR, you give up braking ability for mileage.

Then there is environmental temperature...summer only, all season, snow belt areas.
That's another conversation.

That's your decision, yet I sure would like to brake with 200 TW and be 20 shorter distance than braking with a 400 TW with perhaps avoiding an accident.

Lastly, side wall thickness is a major contributor to ride quality.
Run flat tires typically have very thick/ stiff sidewalls to give them that RF technology and the ride quality is adjusted through suspension options.
I can only guess as to the side wall thickness/ ride quality difference between brands for a Prius tire as I am not doing a short term or back to back comparison test utilizing the same vehicle.

With that said, one can make their own decision comparing cost and mileage warranty and TWR and consumer feedbacks as to which tire fits their needs.

Again, I was compelled to add to this thread

Have fun.