Good, fuel efficient tire?

[Ryland]

tires, other then snow tires and track tires have wear life numbers and traction ratings, the temperature ratings are what normally suffer with LRR tires, not the traction, some of the really light weight LRR that came stock on some cars also have shorter wear life number.
If you are worried about the temperature rating the best thing you can do is keep the tire pressure up to the proper temp as under inflated tires build up heat faster and according to the owners manuals I've read and the studies that have been done, higher inflation is better for traction when at risk of hydroplaning as well.

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted by Ryland

........tires, other then snow tires and track tires have wear life numbers and traction ratings, the temperature ratings are what normally suffer with LRR tires, not the traction, some of the really light weight LRR that came stock on some cars also have shorter wear life number.
If you are worried about the temperature rating the best thing you can do is keep the tire pressure up to the proper temp as under inflated tires build up heat faster and according to the owners manuals I've read and the studies that have been done, higher inflation is better for traction when at risk of hydroplaning as well.

OK, it might be time for my lecture on UTQG Temperature ratings.

First, is that the term "Temperature Rating" is a misnomer. Fundamentally it is a speed rating - and has a relatively minor affect on rolling resistance. However, vehicles where fuel economy is a primary design feature also do not have high speed capabilities, so you will usually find that LRR tires have S and T speed ratings.

Just be aware of the fact that rolling resistance, traction (especially wet traction), and treadwear are tradeoffs when it comes to tread compounds. Don't expect extremely high wear or traction with a LRR tire.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by CapriRacer

Don't expect extremely high wear or traction with a LRR tire.

...exactly my earlier 'tongue-in-cheek' reference to which do you want--one extreme (mpg) or the other extreme (handling/braking)?

[cfg83]

KCF3712 -

For comparison shopping I go to tirerack.com as follows :

1 - Go to the "Select by Size" in the right column.
2 - Input the tire size you want to see.
3 - Go to the bottom of the right column. You will see this menu :

Low Rolling Resistant 
---------------------
(*) Include LRR Tires
( ) Do Not Include LRR Tires
( ) Show ONLY LRR Tires

4 - Select the "Show ONLY LRR Tires".

This will narrow the field down to LRR tires. This won't show ALL LRR tires, it will only show you the LRR tires that tirerack sells.

CarloSW2

[gone-ot]

...FWIW, the OEM Goodyear Eagles on my Vibe don't even have 21K-miles yet, and I'm already "looking" to see what's available in LRR in anticipation of "when" replacement is needed.

...sorta doing my "homework" in advance of the test time.

[mathewperry]

Michelin is a good option. It is important to note that Studies conducted on fuel efficient tires with better rolling resistance have shown that the fuel efficient tires are just as safe and effective as any other kind of tire.

[euromodder]

Originally Posted by mathewperry

Michelin is a good option.

If you're after a LRR tyre and are prepared to trade off on (wet) handling and braking.

It is important to note that Studies conducted on fuel efficient tires with better rolling resistance have shown that the fuel efficient tires are just as safe and effective as any other kind of tire.

I don't know which studies you're referring to, but tests done by European consumer/driver groups (like ADAC.de) point in the opposite direction.

The best LRR tyres suffer deficiencies in handling or braking, especially in the wet. In the dry they're usually OK.
(Michelin Energy Saver / Goodyear Efficientgrip)

Tyres that handle well despite the claim they are LRR tyres, don't offer better fuel economy. (Pirelli, Continental Ecocontact3, ...)


I'm running Michelin Energy Savers, and while they do lower fuel consumption (by 7% , see my Wiki entry) , it comes at the cost of deteriorated wet handling and braking.
They're not lowly S or T rated tyres either, but have W speed index !

[Formula413]

I've been looking at the Michelin Hydroedge with Green X tires for my HCH. They are one of the most, if not the most, expensive tire available, but the reviews seem almost too good to be true. They have been rated the best or near the best in every aspect of performance. It seems counter-intuitive that a tire with such a high UTQG rating could also provide good grip, since in theory that means they would be relatively hard. I like the idea of a LRR tire, and the tread design seems like it would provide great wet performance. But I like the tight handling of the Civic and I don't want to hamper it with tires with poor dry performance.

Michelin HydroEdge with Green X

[grwulff@gmail.com]

What can you get in 225-50-16?

[Formula413]

Update: I've been running the Michelin Hydro-Edge tires on my car for about a year now and I have to say that I would not recommend them. Since the first concern of most people reading this would be fuel economy I'll start there. Fuel economy has been slightly but noticeably lower ever since I started using them. I can't say for sure how much of the change came from the fact that the tires they replaced were nearing the end of their useful life and thus had less tread and presumably less weight. But then those tires were also not billed as LRR tires. They were Bridgestone Insignias, and overall were the worst tires I have ever driven on. But they did get more MPG. Both tires have been run at the same pressure (35psi). When I had the old tires my average fell right around 51 mpg, and with the Michelins it has gone down to about 49. I recently made a trip that was almost all highway and back roads and got 55.3 mpg. On previous similar trips with the old tires I was able to consistently hit 57.5 mpg. That's a 4% difference. Next time I will try a good quality regular all season tire, I'm curious to see how that will compare.

As to the general performance of the tire, it's pretty good overall but I feel it doesn't live up to the hefty price tag. If I hadn't gotten a $75 rebate on the set I would be very disappointed. In fairness they are much better than the Bridgestones in almost every aspect of performance. Road noise is slightly higher than normal, and at times very noticeable. Ride quality is good. Dry traction is good, wet traction is excellent (as you would expect) and snow traction is good for an all season tire. Handling is ok but some tread squirm is very noticeable, in a rapid lane change for example. One of their big selling points is their expected lifespan: They are rated for 90,000 miles, and mine show little sign of wear with about 14,000 miles. Of course that just means I will have to wait that much longer to try something different.