khomo to michlin energy saver swap

[matt36415]

Originally Posted by Baltothewolf

Well, when I went from my 185/65R14 to 165/65R14 I went up 8mpg on the low side, and 15 on the high side. Tires make a huge, huge difference in mileage. Weight and RR I think play the biggest role, more so then actual tire size.

Edit: An example today, round trip going to work, on a good day when I hit all green lights I used get 51mpg max. Today, I got 54.7 and I wasn't even trying, hit most red lights and stopped to get something to eat.

Do you realise that your change in tyres means your speedo now reads 4% too fast - and therfore 4% more distance than you are really going. So you may not really have the improvement you think from the smaller tyres. Enter the 2 sizes into a tyre comparison site and you will see that your new tyres get less distance per rotation

[TimV]

On my SUV i swapped the worn out stock tires to anotcher brand of tires. Exacly same size, cause of the troubles i would have otherwise by the annual carinspection.

Gained something like 5mpg!

In europe all tires need to have this label:


So it is easy to look at when choosing the right tire for your ride.

[moonmonkey]

so now with over 42000 miles on the energy saver a/s tires i have continued to experience a slight increase in mpg over the kumos that were on my prius when i bought it. i am pretty sure the tread is only about 30% gone. so ,so far so good, good wet and dry traction ,not bad noise or comfort, ill check back in in another 10-15k.

[moonmonkey]

at 52k miles the tires are great! they look about 1/2 done on tread depth,, i have not rotated them in 20k miles and still no wobble ,no hop,, just smooth running. great tires!! if my car doesnt wear out first ill buy another set one day.
188 on car.

[Daox]

MoonMonkey that is awesome. How do they handle rain? I'd ask about snow but I see you're in Florida.

I so wish we had this here:

Originally Posted by TimV

In europe all tires need to have this label:


So it is easy to look at when choosing the right tire for your ride.

[Ecky]

I'm on the fence about RE92's vs Energy Savers. The Michelins definitely last a lot longer, and though they're more expensive they're cheaper per mile, fuel economy difference is negligible for me but others report the RE92's as marginally better. The Michelins seem to be more noisy on my car. Handling difference isn't something I've noticed.

[moonmonkey]

sorry for the super long delay doax ,,but they are great in the rain and dry. i have no complaints about them. other than the cost to purchase.

[sallen]

Just my $0.02

I've run 8 (2 sets) of Energy Savers over 8000 miles and agree there was no 3-4% increase in MPG (even when corrected for size as they were narrower but a taller aspect than the tyres they replaced).

In my application tyre noise was much worse, and dry grip terrrible - even compared with the ditch-finders I had on before. That said, the ES's were 20mm narrower and the loss of grip was more progressive than the wider no-brand tyres.

I also must say they are very durable (the tread anyway). Of the 8 tyres I ran they died in the following ways:

5x deep cracking with significant tread left (they seem to crack with age rather than wear down);
1x popped a cord and went egg-shaped (much vibration happened);
2x survived and were on the car when I sold it.

They also have the benefit of being OEM equipment on lots of cars in Europe, so are cheap to find - usually on steel wheels when the owner has changed to some aftermarket alloys.

[moonmonkey]

got almost 70,000 on my energy saver a/s tires ,,they are still great! i think i can squeak another 10k or so out of them, they have worn evenly even with being rotated only 3 times during their life, will buy another set for sure!!