The Dunlop's that came on the car lasted 30,000 miles tops. Very soft rubber. Every 2006 owner I have seen in my area has had to replace the Dunlop tires around the 25,000 to 30,000 mile mark.

Needless to say, they should have put a better tire on at the factory.

xcaliber
Green Bay, WI

 

Well maybe that newer generation of Dunlops were not so good. Maybe it's a good thing I didn't replace them with new dunlops if they've gone downhill.

 

Guys - you know that "number of miles they'll last" is a very poor criteria for picking out tires, right? They could make tires out of incredibly hard compounds (like some of the 80-100,000 miles tires), but they'll suck every mile of the way. And likely be dangerous also, with minimal dry traction, NO wet traction, and a noisy, harsh ride. Consider the safety-factors, not just the miles.

Zimbop, your Michelin tire tread-width could be wider than on the old Dunlops you replaced. This is how at least *some* of the LRR tires help to achieve the LRR. If yours are a little wider (at the tread), this will likely be a factor in reduced MPG. On the other hand, slightly wider generally results in better overall handling.

 

I don't think anyone here was proposing to judge a tire solely by that criteria. That was the whole trouble with this shopping experience is that there's a ****-poor rating system, mileage wear is the only real info they give you. All the more reason to have a LRR rating system. There's no way to know what the rolling resistance of any of the tires are. That **** green seal report is so old that you can hardly get any of those tires any more, and rated so few tires that you're pretty much left in the dark. And hardly anyone else has done such tests on actual tire models. In fact, the only basic criteria people have proposed to determine LRR is to guestimate by the mileage wear rating under the assumption that they'll be harder tires. And, as expected, it's a poor judge.

 

I agree, Zimbop. It just seemed the conversation was taking a turn towards longevity = quality, which is not the formula. I, too, wish the rating system was MUCH better. There are the basic indicators with the tread-wear, temperature and traction ratings. The last two are very broad, though, and the traction rating of A appears to be quite subjective, based on my experiences.
There should be separate DRY, WET, ICE, SNOW traction ratings that are borne of required uniform testing. There should also be a LRR coefficient number or rating right on the tire, as well. It's still too much of a crap-shoot to selecting a tire that meets your needs and expectations.

 

The reason this rating system sucks is that it's for manufacturers to rate their tires relative to their own tires, not relative to a consistent standard. So when you're comparing michelins to michelins the numbers mean something, when you compare them across brands they are meaningless because each brand is using their own benchmark.

 

I actually had the Michelin Harmony tires as my last set on the car before the HCH-II - it was a '00 Ford Focus ZX3 (hatchback). Loved the car, lasted me over 200k, so no real complaints.

I never did a mileage comparison between the previous tires and these on that car, but I wasn't really considering my mileage as much as I do nowadays, funny how buying a hybrid does that to you.

Still, it does seem a little concerning that not having a LRR tire can impact it so much. So it seems since I'm averaging around 54mpg on my Dunlops right now (my max psi is only 44 on mine, but I just keep them at 40), that I'm looking at 48-49mpg with a regular tire? Seems a bit drastic.

One would think it would behoove Honda and Toyota to possibly make available a list of LRR tires that they recommend. Would be a goodwill gesture of some sort I suppose.

 

I have a set of HTR200 and a winter set. So I have the best of both worlds. I have driven the HTR200 in snow and did ok... but then again I am use to driving in the snow. If the area you live in gets little to no snow, then these are a good tire choice. Plus they are pretty cheap at tirerack.

As for the OEM Dunlops these tires replaced. I didn't like them because in the wet or snow they were all over the place. They did ok in the dry but even there, performance (not that this car is a sport/performance car) was not that great.

 

I have read that Honda only uses LRR on all their models, so that is some indication. Although, sans scouring the lot, I don't know how we'd determine that list.

With renewed emphasis on FE, I can only imagine that LRR will become a marketing tool for tire manufacturers -- Intrducing the Fuzion LRRxxx. The coolest fuel efficient tire ever! ...or something like that.

 

How was your before and after FE with the Sumis?