CMAX OEM tires are VERY efficient!

[obob]

Noticed today on TireRack that they have two Michelin Energy Saver A/S 225/50-17, one 93V UTQG 480 AA 51psi MAX(tires our cars came with) and 94V UTQG 480 AB 44psi Max for $9 less. I wonder if they are going to discontinue our tires for cheaper ones. :)

 

Paul

 

Maybe the new tire is lighter and more efficient.

[Smiling Jack]

Maybe the new tire is lighter and more efficient.

 

With a lower max pressure, other things being equal, one would guess that the newer tire would have GREATER rolling resistance.

[F8L]

Noticed today on TireRack that they have two Michelin Energy Saver A/S 225/50-17, one 93V UTQG 480 AA 51psi MAX(tires our cars came with) and 94V UTQG 480 AB 44psi Max for $9 less. I wonder if they are going to discontinue our tires for cheaper ones. :)

 

Paul

 

You are likely seeing the difference between the OE version of the tire and the aftermarket version. The OE version is designed to specs required by Ford. The aftermarket version doesn't have to use those same exact specs so Michelin tweaks the design to fit their criteria which usually means a better performing tire and longer lasting but likely less efficient since they are not held accountable to CAFE standards. There are many other tires out there that exhibit this dual nature, the Goodyear Assurance  Fuel Max and Bridgestone Ecopia EP422 are notable.

[ptjones]

I just put 4 Perelli run flats on my cmax energi...wanted to have a little more piece of mind with no spare. Haven't noticed any mileage change. Ride is slightly harder, but so far am very pleased.

Keep us posted on your MPG's. It will be interesting If CMAX'ers try different tires how mileage is affected. At this time I haven't  read anything that says there is a better fuel mileage tire  than Michelin Energy Saver. :)

 

Paul

[fbov]

Noticed today on TireRack that they have two Michelin Energy Saver A/S 225/50-17, one 93V UTQG 480 AA 51psi MAX(tires our cars came with) and 94V UTQG 480 AB 44psi Max for $9 less.

The load rating is different, and it tells the story.

 

Our cars came with P-metric tires; the others are Euro-metric tires. Per Tire Rack, they differ in load rating at pressure, only, but not like they were the same tire - Euro-metric 225/50-17 has 44 lb. higher load capacity at 7 psi lower inflation pressure! That implies a heavier tire carcass and associated higher rolling resistance, at the same inflation pressures.

 

Conversely, Tire Rack says they used the euro-metric tires for their "Lean and Green" tire comparison, so our tires may be even lower rolling resistance then they found...

 

HAve fun,

Frank, who'd just getting used to Summer Tires!!

[plus 3 golfer]

From Michelin, below are the specs for the two Energy Saver A/S tires for the C-Max.  The P225/50R17 93V tire (OE on C-Max) weighs 22.2 pounds with a temperature rating of A  while the 225/50R17 94V weighs 21.6 pounds and has a temperature rating of B.   

 

Also note the designations under the availability of the tires.  Costco only shows the 94V for $182.99 on their website.  Since I take many long trips at sustained high speeds at high ambient temperatures, I always buy tires with an A temperature rating (even though a C rating tire would likely be okay). 

 

[obob]

From Michelin, below are the specs for the two Energy Saver A/S tires for the C-Max.  The P225/50R17 93V tire (OE on C-Max) weighs 22.2 pounds with a temperature rating of A  while the 225/50R17 94V weighs 21.6 pounds and has a temperature rating of B.   

 

Also note the designations under the availability of the tires.  Costco only shows the 94V for $182.99 on their website.  Since I take many long trips at sustained high speeds at high ambient temperatures, I always buy tires with an A temperature rating (even though a C rating tire would likely be okay). 

 

I just tried to ask Michelin what is going on here but I could not get this website to work.  Perhaps someone else can - I am using Linux.

 

http://www.michelin.com/corporate/EN/contact

[SnowStorm]

I just sent a request - will let you know what I hear.

 

Apr 23, 7:35 PM  Still no answer.

Edited April 23, 2014 by SnowStorm

[ptjones]

I'm replacing my tires today with the original 93V Michelin tires at 50psi. My tires have 65k miles and could have gone to 70k, but I'm doing alot of cross country driving with 4/32" tread I didn't feel safe going any lower. I'm having alignment checked, but have even wear inside to outside and front to back. I think it is safe to recommend 50psi given my experience and the Michelin's max cold temp psi of 51psi. I believe total is going to be around $750 at FORD. :) 

 

Paul

[obob]

Not sure if this has been posted but here is a rundown of Michelin tires that might fit the C-Max

 

http://www.michelinman.com/tire-selector/category/passenger-car-minivan

 

I personally favor the Defender, giving up a bit of fuel efficiency and comfort for handling, breaking and treadlife.  (and perhaps also giving up some winter traction.)

Edited July 8, 2014 by obob

[obob]

I'm replacing my tires today with the original 93V Michelin tires at 50psi. My tires have 65k miles and could have gone to 70k, but I'm doing alot of cross country driving with 4/32" tread I didn't feel safe going any lower. I'm having alignment checked, but have even wear inside to outside and front to back. I think it is safe to recommend 50psi given my experience and the Michelin's max cold temp psi of 51psi. I believe total is going to be around $750 at FORD. :)

 

Paul

 

65K is great.  How many times did you rotate the tires?

 

Thanks.

 

By the way, somewhere I posted a link to an article that says that the max tire pressure is for max load, not the pressure the tire become unsafe.  That pressure is much higher.

[Smiling Jack]

I'm replacing my tires today with the original 93V Michelin tires at 50psi. My tires have 65k miles and could have gone to 70k, but I'm doing alot of cross country driving with 4/32" tread I didn't feel safe going any lower. I'm having alignment checked, but have even wear inside to outside and front to back. I think it is safe to recommend 50psi given my experience and the Michelin's max cold temp psi of 51psi. I believe total is going to be around $750 at FORD. :)

 

Paul

 

 

Paul,

 

Very nice tire life!  Thanks for mentioning the pressures.  What are your rotation habits?

 

I have also done about 70 k on Michelins on other cars, usually with tire pressure a bit above the door jamb sticker values and with MINIMAL tire rotations (maybe twice in the life of the tires), I usually do a rotation only when I observe a noticablly greater wear on the fronts, and I always rotate strictly front to back.  If i see any wear difference right to left (and I rarely do), I figure I need an alignment.

 

By the way, I see by the picture in your signature block that you have the front license plate mounted higher than the stock position.  you can see that I have mine lower than the most commonstock position.  I think that the common stock position breaks the lines of the grille outline and spoils the "Aston Martin" styling.  I like thee look of yours as well.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Smiling Jack

[Marc Smith]

jack,

 

how did you mount your tag lower.  my tag is high like pauls,  and I think it looks better low..

[Smiling Jack]

jack,

 

how did you mount your tag lower.  my tag is high like pauls,  and I think it looks better low..

 

Quite easily done.

 

I have posted the details.  I will find that post and provide the link.

[Marc Smith]

thanks 

 

sorry for hijack,  back to your regular discussion...

[Smiling Jack]

jack,

 

how did you mount your tag lower.  my tag is high like pauls,  and I think it looks better low..

 

 

From my post on the Energi forum:

 

It was actrually much easier than I expected, extremely simple, actually.

 

The stock front license mount is attached with 3 pop rivets.  These must be drilled out.  I went to the dealer's parts department and bought 3 replacement rivets, partly to see what I was getting into, partly to see what size hole to drill (1/4 inch diameter will do), partly for possible use in my new mounting, and partly as a hedge in case I needed to revert to the original configuration.

 

With the rivets out, I decided to replace the rivets with screws.  I found some black  rubber grommet nuts just about the right size. Actually they were a bit oversize.  I could have drilled the holes out a bit larger, but (still hedging) I decided to shave the grommets down.  (Having it to do over, I would enlarge the holes.)  I pressed the grommet nuts into all 3 original rivet holes and fitted them with machine screws and washers.  At this point I had a removable, replaceable, mount for the original position.

 

The stock unit mounts in three places.  The two top places are secured to black plastic between the horizontal chrome grille strips.  The lower centered one is secured to the body paint colored bumper cover.  To make the mounting in the lower posirion, I simply turned the mount upside down, retaining the single fastening location.  I then secured the new bottom two fastening locations to the lower grille slate with (releasable) nylon tie-wraps.  Prior to tightening down, I lined the (new) bottom edge of the mount with a rubber piece I made by splitting a length of automotive vacuum hose.  I hoped this would both prevent shifting an protect the paint from being marred. 

 

I simply left the two upper black grommet nuts in place.  They are hardly visible.  Actually they are less visible than the holes.

 

Actually,

Jack

[ptjones]

65K is great.  How many times did you rotate the tires?

 

Thanks.

 

By the way, somewhere I posted a link to an article that says that the max tire pressure is for max load, not the pressure the tire become unsafe.  That pressure is much higher.

 

Paul,

 

Very nice tire life!  Thanks for mentioning the pressures.  What are your rotation habits?

 

I have also done about 70 k on Michelins on other cars, usually with tire pressure a bit above the door jamb sticker values and with MINIMAL tire rotations (maybe twice in the life of the tires), I usually do a rotation only when I observe a noticablly greater wear on the fronts, and I always rotate strictly front to back.  If i see any wear difference right to left (and I rarely do), I figure I need an alignment.

 

By the way, I see by the picture in your signature block that you have the front license plate mounted higher than the stock position.  you can see that I have mine lower than the most commonstock position.  I think that the common stock position breaks the lines of the grille outline and spoils the "Aston Martin" styling.  I like thee look of yours as well.

I rotated my tires every oil change and tire pressure gave even wear for 65K.  I actually don't have a front license plate, but showed how it would be mounted on the cover. :)

 

Paul

[plus 3 golfer]

Paul, I'd be interested in your alignment check. Will this be your first alignment check?  Recently (last several tanks) I thought my car was not always tracking as well as it had in the past. When on the freeways, the car seemed to "drift more" and the steering wheel seemed ever so slightly off from "neutral" position.  There was no abnormal tire wear, but when I took the car in for the 14S04 recall last Wed., I had them check / do the alignment ($99 for alignment). The left rear toe was found to be at the edge of spec. at -0.01* (spec. is -0.01* to 0.39*) and the total rear toe in was below acceptable at 0.10* (spec. is 0.18* to 0.58*).  So, after adjusting the left rear toe in, the total toe came in at 0.31*.  The trust angle changed from -0.06* to +0.04* (spec -0.50* to 0.50*).  Although not out of spec., the tech also increased the front toe in on both sides.  Now after the alignment, I don't notice any tracking issues.

 

I've 27 k miles on my tires with tread wear at 7/32" rear and 8/32 front (as reported by dealer). My measurements about 7.5/32" front and just under 8/32 rear or about 13 k miles / 1/32" wear rate average.   So, I also expect to get around 65 k+ miles before I change them as I generally change at about 3-4 / 32" tread depth also.   My rotation schedule (for all new tires) is at 5 k miles and then 10 k miles thereafter.   I run 45 psi.  Modern tires should run virtually flat (no abnormal tread wear) for a wide range of inflation pressures above recommended.

[ptjones]

Paul, I'd be interested in your alignment check. Will this be your first alignment check?  Recently (last several tanks) I thought my car was not always tracking as well as it had in the past. When on the freeways, the car seemed to "drift more" and the steering wheel seemed ever so slightly off from "neutral" position.  There was no abnormal tire wear, but when I took the car in for the 14S04 recall last Wed., I had them check / do the alignment ($99 for alignment). The left rear toe was found to be at the edge of spec. at -0.01* (spec. is -0.01* to 0.39*) and the total rear toe in was below acceptable at 0.10* (spec. is 0.18* to 0.58*).  So, after adjusting the left rear toe in, the total toe came in at 0.31*.  The trust angle changed from -0.06* to +0.04* (spec -0.50* to 0.50*).  Although not out of spec., the tech also increased the front toe in on both sides.  Now after the alignment, I don't notice any tracking issues.

 

I've 27 k miles on my tires with tread wear at 7/32" rear and 8/32 front (as reported by dealer). My measurements about 7.5/32" front and just under 8/32 rear or about 13 k miles / 1/32" wear rate average.   So, I also expect to get around 65 k+ miles before I change them as I generally change at about 3-4 / 32" tread depth also.   My rotation schedule (for all new tires) is at 5 k miles and then 10 k miles thereafter.   I run 45 psi.  Modern tires should run virtually flat (no abnormal tread wear) for a wide range of inflation pressures above recommended.

My alignment was within spec. , but I had my alignment done at 25K when I noticed my tires feathering and making alot of noise. The Dealer had to replace an actual suspension part because you can't adjust the rear suspension. I had to reverse rotation of tires to wear down the feathering which took probably 20K at least.  Now having new tires on my car I'm still have alot of noise coming from the back of the car, so It's going back tomorrow morning to look at the bearings. I've been to my Dealer so many times that I get EV+ now! LOL :)

 

Paul

[ptjones]

Well it turns out I have had a bad left rear bearing for a long time and had it replaced yesterday and now my car is quieter now. YA! :)

 

Paul

[Zathrus]

Well it turns out I have had a bad left rear bearing for a long time and had it replaced yesterday and now my car is quieter now. YA! :)

 

Paul

 

Did the bad bearing make noise?  I ask because I am hearing a sound from rear axle when coasting with window down. It's making a shhh.....shhh....shhh....shhh sound that varies with speed. Not sure if it is bearing or brake rub noise that I am hearing. Thanks.

[ptjones]

Did the bad bearing make noise?  I ask because I am hearing a sound from rear axle when coasting with window down. It's making a shhh.....shhh....shhh....shhh sound that varies with speed. Not sure if it is bearing or brake rub noise that I am hearing. Thanks.

Yes it did and it sounded more like a grinding sound that changed pitch with speed. I would have it looked at, don't think it would be brakes, maybe bearings or tires. Good Luck :)

 

Paul

[salsaguy]

Darrel, what you would suggest/recommend I get for my Passat SEL Premium when its time. Im on 21k mile now on my stock OEM Hankooks, which suck with their road noise and not the greatest feel and performance. Id like to get better fuel economy but still want good cornering and handling in All weather even though it doesn't rain here in So. Cal very much. You can PM if you want instead of posting here.

 

Thanks for doing the research on this. Tire selection is an important decision that unfortunately doesn't get the amount of in depth research it deserves. The process should also factor in the most common types of weather hazards faced by the region you reside.

 

I plan to go with these tires if anything happens to the current set.

 

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=138

 

Fuel economy is a factor but not my primary consideration in shopping for new tires. I have installed the Primacy MXM4 on my previous Jetta TDI and my current Passat TDI and they have performed well in various driving conditions. About 2 years ago we had a foot of snow in the DFW area and I was able to navigate the roads in my Jetta without too much drama. Although not equipped with LRR from the factory there has been no notable degradation of FE and big gains in wet/dry stopping and handling.

 

Primary I look for a balance of the best performing tire with the lowest rolling resistance. The money saved on fuel could quickly be offset by an avoidable accident if your tires had a little extra stopping power or handling capability. My region also tends to get sudden downpours leaving hydroplaning causing water on the roads so you need to properly prepare to avoid those situations.

[salsaguy]

those Conti PureContacts with EcoPlus tech look very good for me after reading up on them......

 

Given your need for a tire with excellent wet traction, good fuel economy and good steering feel I would say check out the PureContact. I had them for awhile but I didn't like how rough they felt. It turns out most of the rough ride was due to them being an XL tire in my size (205/50/17). I switched them out for the Primacy MXM4 again in a smaller non-XL size and the ride was a little better but steering response was more vague. It also seemed like mpg went down slightly with the MXM4. Both tires had less than 1,000 miles on them during the testing.

If the PureContact lasts the full 70,000 miles or close to it then you'll be doing well economically speaking. As will any high tread wear LRR tire I would not expect a ton of launch traction so expect a bit of spin with all of that TDi torque. :)

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=166

[obob]

Given your need for a tire with excellent wet traction, good fuel economy and good steering feel I would say check out the PureContact. I had them for awhile but I didn't like how rough they felt. It turns out most of the rough ride was due to them being an XL tire in my size (205/50/17). I switched them out for the Primacy MXM4 again in a smaller non-XL size and the ride was a little better but steering response was more vague. It also seemed like mpg went down slightly with the MXM4. Both tires had less than 1,000 miles on them during the testing.

 

If the PureContact lasts the full 70,000 miles or close to it then you'll be doing well economically speaking. As will any high tread wear LRR tire I would not expect a ton of launch traction so expect a bit of spin with all of that TDi torque. :)

 

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=166

 

I didn't realize that the LLR could save so much money.  Those PureContacts are looking good to me now.  

 

Though by the time I need tires I will be able to take advantage of other people's experience here.

Edited July 15, 2014 by obob