Jump to content

Custom Search




Welcome to the C-MAX Hybrid Forum


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to the C-MAX Hybrid Forum. You must register to create topics or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Here's some member benefits:
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create photo albums and post images. . .more!
Click here to create an account now
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Get you C-MAX Hybrid Registered in the official Ford Authorized Registry. More here.


Photo
- - - - -

Best tires for the C-Max??

Tires suggestions/recommendations

  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

#141 ONLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,516 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 20 November 2017 - 11:02 AM

The fronts wear out some faster than the backs, but crisscross rotating the tires does the job. I got 64k mi. on first set, 60k mi. second set, they weren't worn out, but I was going on long trips in the snow so I wasn't going to take a chance. I have almost 50k mi. on third set and easily make 60+k mi. :)  BTW these were OEM Michelin's.

 

Paul    









Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#142 OFFLINE   fbov

fbov

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 1,401 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationRochester, NY
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max Hybrid

Posted 21 November 2017 - 12:33 AM

... I plan to buy her a matched set of snow/rain tires ...

Is she in Denver, too? Michelin's got a new design, Crosscliimate+, that claims good all-season tire wear, but carries the "3-peak snowflake" symbol found on snow tires. We bought a set for the wife's car, but so far, they're really good warm weather performance tires. Give it a month and I'll let you know about the snow performance. Not cheap...

Frank


  • ptjones likes this

#143 ONLINE   obob

obob

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 674 posts
  • Region:Decline
  • LocationUS
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-MAX SE

Posted 12 January 2018 - 03:36 PM

About 4k miles ago (8 weeks ago), I put on my 3rd set of tires.  My previous sets of tires (Original Michelin Energy Saver and Ecopia 422 Plus) both began getting "noisy" at 25 - 30 k miles.  The Michelins were so noisy at 40+ k miles that I changed them after coming home from a long road trip at around 48 k miles even though they would have likely gone 60k+ miles.  The Ecopia weren't quite as noisy as the Michelins at 40 k miles but I decided to change them at 42 k miles as I was planning several longer road trips including moving back to AZ.  The Ecopias would have easily reached 50 - 60 k miles based on treadwear.

 

So, my thought process was do I spend around $180 per tire for Michelins, $160 for Ecopias, or try something less expensive knowing that I'd like take a hit in FE but perhaps improve performance.  BTW, my estimation is that my FE took a hit of about 2-3 % with the Ecopias over the Michelins (say 1 mpg at 40 mpg).  IMO, the issue with the noisy tires is due to the "unadjustable" camber causing excessive rear inner tire wear and some feathering and cupping. 

 

After much research, I bought the General AltiMAX RT43.  IMO after nearly 4 k miles of driving, the General's are hands down better than the Michelins and Ecopias with respect to performance, noise and ride comfort (especially if you like a stiffer feeling tire).  The drawback with the General's is FE.  I'd say that the Generals are 2-3 % worse than the Ecopias and 4-6% worse than the Michelins (2 mpg at 40 mpg).  I know that those that value FE more than performance won't be able to live with the FE hit over the Michelins.  But the performance of the Generals, IMO, runs circles around the Michelins. BTW, I'm running 45-46 psi in the Generals as they are a lot firmer feeling tire than the Michelins.  I ran about 48 psi in the Michelins and Ecopias. 

 

IMO, the worst case scenario for me would be that I would use about 100 gallons more gas with the Generals than the Michelins or spend an extra say $225 in fuel.  But the Generals are only about $110 a tire.  Even after the $70 rebates for the Michelins, the Generals and Michelins should cost about the same over the life of the tire.  

 

I'll let the reader go to TireRack and read their test report on the General.  I've attached several snips showing a comparison of the three tires from TireRack.  Time will tell how the noise issue progresses with the Generals.

attachicon.gifCompare Tires 1.JPGattachicon.gifCompare Tires 2.JPGattachicon.gifCompare Tires 3.JPG

 

I see from your attachments that you got the 98V load version rather than the 94T version.  I figure that has something to do with the stiffer feeling.  The 98V has max pressure of 51.  The 94V has max pressure of 44.     I am leaning toward the 98V tires like you have. (They are only like 5 more dollars each.)  Any thoughts ?  Thanks.

 

 

 

Perhaps the fact that you run 50+ psi lessens the inside tread wear and feathering. 

 

 

 

I strongly agree.  My first 12K miles  (first rotation) did far more damage than the next 28K miles.  I did a reverse mount at 12K.  I started to use 48-50 lbs in the tires around 8K.  (I have stopped rotating the tires for evening the tires out for is too noisy for me.  I am also concerned the vibration may exasperate the transmission bearing problem - though only a suspicion.)  I still have plenty of tread on the back but the noise is bothersome.

 

I may move the OEM Michelins to the back and get the RT43s for the front.  Perhaps that way my mileage hit will be half yours.

 

 

 

By the way.  I have been following the vulnerability of computer processors, with Intel processors being especially vulnerable.  I don't recall ever seeing the word "mitigate" so frequently.   (rather than fix)

 

Mitigate seems to apply so well to this camber cupping thing.


Edited by obob, 12 January 2018 - 03:50 PM.

  • Plus 3 Golfer likes this

#144 ONLINE   Plus 3 Golfer

Plus 3 Golfer

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 1,934 posts
  • Region:Decline
  • Location"Valley of the Sun" - AZ
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013

Posted 12 January 2018 - 08:20 PM

I see from your attachments that you got the 98V load version rather than the 94T version.  I figure that has something to do with the stiffer feeling.  The 98V has max pressure of 51.  The 94V has max pressure of 44.     I am leaning toward the 98V tires like you have. (They are only like 5 more dollars each.)  Any thoughts ?  Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

I strongly agree.  My first 12K miles  (first rotation) did far more damage than the next 28K miles.  I did a reverse mount at 12K.  I started to use 48-50 lbs in the tires around 8K.  (I have stopped rotating the tires for evening the tires out for is too noisy for me.  I am also concerned the vibration may exasperate the transmission bearing problem - though only a suspicion.)  I still have plenty of tread on the back but the noise is bothersome.

 

I may move the OEM Michelins to the back and get the RT43s for the front.  Perhaps that way my mileage hit will be half yours.

 

 

 

By the way.  I have been following the vulnerability of computer processors, with Intel processors being especially vulnerable.  I don't recall ever seeing the word "mitigate" so frequently.   (rather than fix)

 

Mitigate seems to apply so well to this camber cupping thing.

I got the 98V for the speed rating as we do a lot of interstate driving at 75 - 80 + mph with the car heavily loaded wirh stuff. 

 

I recently had the tires rotated at about 8400 miles.  Tread depth was virtually the same in each grove across a tire.  The backs (which are now on the front) measured a shade over 9/32" deep while the fronts (now on the back) measure a shade under 9/32".  So, based on 1/32" tread wear per 8k miles, I could get around the mileage rating of 65k miles if I run them down near the wear bars and the tires stay quiet.  But I usually begin looking for tires at about 3.5/32" tread depth or when the tires become too noisy.

 

Now that I have been back in the Phoenix area for 4+ months, it's very apparent that my FE with the Altimax tires is around 5-6% lower than the Michelins. But with a price difference of around $300 a set including sales tax, one can buy a lot of fuel to offset the FE hit of the Altimax tires.  And, like I said before, the Altimax IMO is simply a better performing tire than the Michelin.  FE isn't everything. :)


  • obob likes this

#145 OFFLINE   SnowStorm

SnowStorm

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 872 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationVirginia
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max SE

Posted 13 January 2018 - 11:13 AM

So +3, you've got me rethinking my next tire purchase (due soon).  I had thought to continue with the OEM Michelins for FE but would sure like to save the money.  Even with a $70 rebate on Michelin you still come out ahead after 65k miles and a 3 mpg loss (6%).  Now my question: what about the new General G-MAX AS-05?  It is cheaper yet, has 94W rating, 50k warranty, otherwise very similar specs to Altimax but no reviews yet.  Any idea if it might be similar to the Altimax on FE?  I don't push tires very hard - just want lowest over all cost with high quality and performance at least as good as the OEMs.



#146 ONLINE   Plus 3 Golfer

Plus 3 Golfer

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 1,934 posts
  • Region:Decline
  • Location"Valley of the Sun" - AZ
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013

Posted 13 January 2018 - 12:31 PM

So +3, you've got me rethinking my next tire purchase (due soon).  I had thought to continue with the OEM Michelins for FE but would sure like to save the money.  Even with a $70 rebate on Michelin you still come out ahead after 65k miles and a 3 mpg loss (6%).  Now my question: what about the new General G-MAX AS-05?  It is cheaper yet, has 94W rating, 50k warranty, otherwise very similar specs to Altimax but no reviews yet.  Any idea if it might be similar to the Altimax on FE?  I don't push tires very hard - just want lowest over all cost with high quality and performance at least as good as the OEMs.

For me (assuming I'm going to keep the car for the life of the tire) is getting the "best bang" for the $.  At current and projected gas prices, paying significantly more for "green" tires especially when performance is less than alternatives makes little sense to me especially if I can't get the rated mileage due to the noisy tire / camber issue on the C-Max and I always replace tires prior to reaching 2/32".  So, my mileage payback period is shorter in the 40-50 k mile range.  So, the Michelins likely wound never return an economic payback to me.

 

I look at tires like I look at solar PV.  I didn't put solar PV on two previous homes just to be "green."  I added solar because of the simple payback of 3.3 years for the first system and 6.9 years for the second home.  Solar PV makes no economic sense on my current home as payback is around 12 years.  I know there are some that will add PV without regard to economics as there will be those that want the "greenest" tire for their vehicle regardless of economics or performance.

 

Yes, I saw that General has this new tire.  Since I don't need tires, I haven't done any research on it.  General makes a GMax AS-03 (may be similar to the 05) which gets poor ratings by CR for noise and ride quality. Also, rolling resistance is rated fair. The Altimax is rated very good in the noise, ride quality, and RR. So, I'd not buy the AS-05s until reviews and data are available.



#147 OFFLINE   SnowStorm

SnowStorm

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 872 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationVirginia
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max SE

Posted 13 January 2018 - 06:47 PM

No idea where they get the numbers but SullivanTire gives a "Fuel Efficiency Rating" of 10 for the Michelins, 8 for General Altimax and 7 for the General G-Max AS-05.  So expect its better to stay with Altimax over G-Max.  The longer tread warranty more than makes up for the price difference - and the G-Max is asymmetric so I guess it couldn't be reverse mounted (if one ever wanted to).  Then there's the Altimax RT43 (94T version) with 75k warranty and lower price.  I don't plan to go 118 mph and edge wear and noise (cupping) seem to be under control with my adjustable rear camber and frequent rotations.  I'm at 75k on this second set of Michelins (55k warranty) so should be able to get that out of the Altimax 94T version with its 75k warranty.  Have I talked myself into it?  Not sure. 


  • ptjones likes this

#148 ONLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,516 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 14 January 2018 - 10:27 AM

Michelin's Energy Savers have worked fine for me and I'm probably going to get 70k mi on my third set. :)

 

Paul








Custom Search





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Tires, suggestions/recommendations

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy TERMS OF SERVICE ·