I bought a new 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid in July of same year. It came with MICHELIN? Energy? Saver tires. I got 36K miles from the factory original set, worn out. 2/32 wear left. I replaced the tires with a set of Bridgestone Dueler A/T REVO 235-17. I have had the vehicle alignment checked, road loaded the tires at the install and have had them balanced every 5K± to date (3rd time). I just had them balanced and rotated at 14,689 mi a little early, and find even wear on all the tires, all are at 6/32 left from the 11/32 when new. At that rate the tires will be worn out by the time I get to 25K or so. I have used the very same tires on my 89 Ford Ranger 4X4 and 97 Bravada AWD with milage life of 60K plus on both. Is there an issue with the power regeneration systems the hybrid uses causing exessive tire wear? The tire are wearing perfectly evenly, not signs of anything other than low miles. Any ideas on what may be my problem. The dealer had noted the rapid wear and say he will honor the tire with a factory prorate.
Regenerative braking is not any harder on the tires than standard braking. Braking is braking.
If the tires are wearing evenly it’s not an alignment issue.
Perhaps the composition of the tires is different than it was a few years ago.
Are your driving habits and environment the same?
I agree. That they are “even wear” does not suggest to me that the car is at fault. Having them balanced every 5K miles seems a bit excessive. I’ve had tires go 50+K miles on the original installation. If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. Driving habits IMO are the biggest culprit of poor tire wear.
This rapid tire wear is very puzzling to me since the only thing that is different about my driving is the vehicle (Toyota Highlander vice the Olds Bravada) and the specific set of tires on the vehicles. My driving habits are actually more conservative due to me trying to optimize the mileage on the hybrid. I also installed a new set of the same tires on my Bravada at the time. The Bravada vehicle spent the summer in the shop and then some storage since I only use the Bravada in the worst of winters. It is a Real AWD- like a snow mobile in the snow. I currently have less than 2K mile on then Bravada tires since I had them mounted. The Highlander Hybrid has another down side to it. NOT an off road vehicle. This I found out after I bought it. :O( The AWD disables if it gets stuck in sand or one wheel in a ditch. I had to get a farmer with real 4X4 to extract me. The bottom line is I am still wondering why the tires are wearing so fast. It must be the particular rubber compound??? I will be driving the Bravada this winter so I will compare the two set of the same tires on my two vehicles. Thanks ECR
My only guess would be the weight of the vehicle itself wearing out the tires prematurely.
When a vehicle wears out its tires prematurely, no matter what brand of tire is used, and if the tire wear is even across the tread, that points to a situation where the car is “undershod”–e.g.–the vehicle manufacturer has specified a tire size that is not sufficient for the weight of the vehicle.
This is likely related to every manufacturer’s effort to cut costs to the bone. If Toyota had specified the proper size tire for the vehicle, it might have actually cost them a few hundred thousand dollars extra per 100,000 vehicles.
It’s all about the bottom line.
I did a quick check a few minutes ago and the Ranger(1990 is the earliest listed) weighs about 3500lbs, the Bravada weighs just under 5k, while the Highlander weighs OVER 5k pounds.
The AWD/4WD Highlander Hybrid weighs in at 4762 pounds per Toyota. The 97 Bravada is about 4200 pounds and the Ranger is just a bit over 3200 pounds. I think your estimates are little on the heavy side. Newer cars are almost always heavier than cars from even 10-15 years ago.
I was looking at the ext. cab 4x4 for the weight, and it’s what I posted, the single cab S trim is just under 3200. looking again at the Olds, it’s just under 4100 curb weight, same as the base Highlander hybrid fwd, just over 4200 for the 4/awd versions. I also see where I messed up, I looked at the gross weight, thinking it was the curb weight.
I has to be the composition.
Interestingly, I looked the car up on TireRack and the standard tire size shown on the hybrid 2D is a 225mm section width rather than a 235mm, the latter being optional. 235mm would seem sufficent for a vehicle that size. What’s the speed and load ratings of the tires you put on?
Unfortunately, tire wear is not linear, so you will get more miles than your calculation predicts.
Plus, the Revo is an on/off road tire which means it was designed to provide some off road capability and that will adversly affect tire wear.
Overall it sounds like you are going to get fairly comparable miles out of the tires factoring in the intended applications of the 2 you are comparing.
Only a theory, my brother has a similar age Highlander Hybrid and he loves the torque of the powerful electric motor. Without realizing it you might just be making quicker starts with the hybrid than with the other conventional cars you own.
The electric motor provides much more torque from virtually 0 rpm and it is kind of fun to feel that surge of power on takeoff. It is also going to show up as faster tire wear as it is the rubber on the road providing the traction.