Quietest Tire For RX300?
07-24-05, 08:13 PM
#46
Lexus Champion
TireRack's survey result on CT sure looks impressive. However, you need to factor in the "lighter wallet" effect. When people spend big bucks on tires, they want to feel that they've made great purchase. It may be psychological. Also these people compared their CT against old OEM tires. I have no doubt that CT performs much better than OEM tires, but is it really that good?
I've read the Michelin spec and the Tire Rack survey. Maybe it's your turn to read the CR test result. Go to your local library and check out the Nov 2004 issue. Then see for yourself.
True, CR tested the 235 with 420 wear index, while the 225 has 700 index. That simply means the 225 wears longer, it does not somehow turn a so-so tire into an excellent one.
I've read the Michelin spec and the Tire Rack survey. Maybe it's your turn to read the CR test result. Go to your local library and check out the Nov 2004 issue. Then see for yourself.
True, CR tested the 235 with 420 wear index, while the 225 has 700 index. That simply means the 225 wears longer, it does not somehow turn a so-so tire into an excellent one.
07-24-05, 09:13 PM
#47
Originally Posted by HarrierAWD
TireRack's survey result on CT sure looks impressive. However, you need to factor in the "lighter wallet" effect. When people spend big bucks on tires, they want to feel that they've made great purchase. It may be psychological. Also these people compared their CT against old OEM tires. I have no doubt that CT performs much better than OEM tires, but is it really that good?
I've read the Michelin spec and the Tire Rack survey. Maybe it's your turn to read the CR test result. Go to your local library and check out the Nov 2004 issue. Then see for yourself.
True, CR tested the 235 with 420 wear index, while the 225 has 700 index. That simply means the 225 wears longer, it does not somehow turn a so-so tire into an excellent one.
I've read the Michelin spec and the Tire Rack survey. Maybe it's your turn to read the CR test result. Go to your local library and check out the Nov 2004 issue. Then see for yourself.
True, CR tested the 235 with 420 wear index, while the 225 has 700 index. That simply means the 225 wears longer, it does not somehow turn a so-so tire into an excellent one.
Hey, I've read that report. It didn't tell me anything about the Bridgestone Dueler H/L Alenza, the Bridgestone model I'd want. According to the specs for this tire the tirewear index is 600. See manufacturer specs here. You really can't apply CU's rating opinion for that 684 tire to all Bridgestone tires. In tire sizes that fit my Lexus, the Dueler Alenza is a clear winner across the board. I will be watching the products closely as I near replacing the RS-A's, but if I had to purchase today it would be the Bridgestones.
Last edited by jfelbab; 07-24-05 at 09:18 PM.
07-25-05, 05:45 AM
#48
Lexus Test Driver
I do agree, the Alenza looks like one of the best tires available for the RX. I don't agree with the assumption that a tire with a high wear rating is less sticky and does not perform as well in bad weather conditions. If you look at tire ratings and compare bad weather performance you will see that the tires with the higher wear ratings outperform the lower wear ratings accross the board. I don't know the reason for this. I am not making any assumptions about sticky compound or anything else. Just using the facts available to me. I also think the lighter wallet effect works in reverse. If I purchased cheaper tires I wouldn't expect as much from them and would tend to be more forgiving in my ratings. If I paid top dollar I would expect more from them and be more critical in my ratings.
I plan on sticking with Cross Terrains for my next set only because I had them for almost 60,000 miles now and I know how they perform and how others here have rated their performance. I wouldn't mind seeing a few members get the Alenzas and post their findings. I still have a little time before my next set of Cross Terrains.
I plan on sticking with Cross Terrains for my next set only because I had them for almost 60,000 miles now and I know how they perform and how others here have rated their performance. I wouldn't mind seeing a few members get the Alenzas and post their findings. I still have a little time before my next set of Cross Terrains.
07-27-05, 05:49 AM
#49
Driver School Candidate
I've had the CT's for about 2 years and they have about 35K on them. They are holding up much better than the OEM Bridgestones. As for handling, I guess it's all relative. If I were worried about handling I probably wouldn't be driving an RX300. Nice ride but handling is not one of it's strong suits.
However the price of these tires is among the highest and that may very well be the kicker the next time I replace them. When I purchased the Michelins there weren't as many options as there are now. That said, I am a firm believer in Michelin products. I have purchased them almost exclusively for all of my vehicles. I buy Toyota/Lexus products for there quality and durability, not for the performance, as with the Michelins.
As for the Dunlops? I wouldn't bother.
However the price of these tires is among the highest and that may very well be the kicker the next time I replace them. When I purchased the Michelins there weren't as many options as there are now. That said, I am a firm believer in Michelin products. I have purchased them almost exclusively for all of my vehicles. I buy Toyota/Lexus products for there quality and durability, not for the performance, as with the Michelins.
As for the Dunlops? I wouldn't bother.
07-28-05, 12:16 PM
#50
Driver
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jfelbab
BZZZT! Wrong answer.
Actually the treadwear ratings are directly comparable across manufacturers. They are not numbers assigned by the manufacturer.
The Uniform Tire Quality Grading rating is a quality rating system developed by the American Department of Transportation. It is designed to show the relative performance of passenger tires (but does not apply to winter tires for now)...
Actually the treadwear ratings are directly comparable across manufacturers. They are not numbers assigned by the manufacturer.
The Uniform Tire Quality Grading rating is a quality rating system developed by the American Department of Transportation. It is designed to show the relative performance of passenger tires (but does not apply to winter tires for now)...
The numbers are assigned by the manufacturer. According to NHTSA: "Tire manufacturers test and grade their own tires according to procedures specified in the UTQGS."
I agree, that the INTENT is for them to be UNIFORM (hence the "U" in the name Uniform). However, I am willing to accept the possiblility that this is not strictly the case. I use the ratings as though they were uniform, because I have nothing else to go on--other than personal experience, which is less than scientific.
Here are a few interesting items:
From Discount Tire Direct:
Treadwear:
The treadwear grade is a comparative rating based on the wear of a tire when tested carefully under controlled conditions. For example, a tire graded 400 should have its useful tread last twice as long as a tire graded 200. Another tire manufacturer, however, may grade a comparable design 300, so a grade of 150 would last half as long under their grading scheme. The lesson learned is to not use one manufacturer's grade versus the other, but instead to compare tire grades within a given brand. Actual treadwear performance can vary tremendously according to the tire's real-world use: variations in driving habits, service practices (most importantly air pressure maintenance) and road conditions and climate affect tire life.
From TireRack.com:The treadwear grade is a comparative rating based on the wear of a tire when tested carefully under controlled conditions. For example, a tire graded 400 should have its useful tread last twice as long as a tire graded 200. Another tire manufacturer, however, may grade a comparable design 300, so a grade of 150 would last half as long under their grading scheme. The lesson learned is to not use one manufacturer's grade versus the other, but instead to compare tire grades within a given brand. Actual treadwear performance can vary tremendously according to the tire's real-world use: variations in driving habits, service practices (most importantly air pressure maintenance) and road conditions and climate affect tire life.
The problem with UTQG Treadwear Grades is that they are open to some interpretation on the part of the tire manufacturer because they are assigned after the tire has only experienced a little treadwear as it runs the 7,200 miles. This means that the tire manufacturers need to extrapolate their raw wear data when they are assigning Treadwear Grades, and that their grades can to some extent reflect how conservative or optimistic their marketing department is. Typically, comparing the Treadwear Grades of tire lines within a single brand is somewhat helpful, while attempting to compare the grades between different brands is not as helpful.
(My emphasis added in all cases)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
