I did not know that Michelin made such a tire.
Specially made for Toyota?
Understandable that car manufacturers would want a tire which gives the customer a softer ride at the expense of longevity. Customer will not know until purchased and tires have worn out.
I also did not know that I must purchase a special socket to remove the oil filter casing and remove the filter element. Even more of a mess than changing the screw-on metal oil filter when on my back in the gutter.
40k out OEM tires is actually quite good. As a very general rule of thumb on most mid-sized sedans without sporting pretentions. 30k-40k is about what you’ll end up with most of the time. On high performance cars, tires generally don’t last as long, I get about 25k-30k out of a set on my Mustang. Though the Bridgestones I have on there now look like they might make a it little past the 30k mark. But they are relatively brick-like with a UTOG treadwear rating of 400. By far the hardest tire I’ve ever had on this car.
Thank you, all.
I did not know.
Since most of the driving is on highways and interstates, I expected less wear/higher mileage.
Wish that I could find a highway tread for better fuel economy.
Seems that all tires are M&S.
We have an Expedition with very aggressive snow tires for blizzards when the highways and Interstates are closed.
OK a couple of items:
Yes, siping increases rolling resistance but not enough to worry about.
Read here about OE tires: http://www.barrystiretech.com/oetires.html
Short version: OE tires are designed to the vehicle manufacturers specs - and typically those emphasize fuel economy - and they get that by sacrificing treadwear and/or traction.
ALL - let me say that again - ALL tires that come on new vehicles are specially made to the vehicle manufacturers specs - no exceptions. They are NOT like the tire that you usually get from the local tire shop - except to say, you can buy the OE tire there.
Every tire is a compromise between traction and minimizing rolling resistance, while also maximizing tread life.
I have several pairs of outdoor boots for rough terrain. Once I used my winter snow and ice boots to do a mountain trail hike with no snow anywhere.
At the end of 15 miles there was considerable wear on the ribbed soles, mainly designed for ice and snow surfaces. Live and learn.
When buying tires, you can’t have it all. Some tires perform this multi-function better that others.
I would second what Docnick said. If you want great handling and grip, you’re going to sacrifice treadwear rating somewhat. If you want economy and tires to last forever, expect them to not ride all that great and slide a bit. For Robert, since he does drive at high speeds, I would recommend a speed rated tire with a softer, stickier rubber compound, wear and economy be damned, as it might save his life or the life of someone else someday if he has to do a high-speed braking or avoidance manoeuvre.
Perhaps not a perfect analogy, but maybe you can look at tires like you do a bar of soap: If you want a soap that gives you a great lather and cleans without a lot of scrubbing, it’s going to wear down fast and be used up quickly. If you want a bar of soap that lasts forever, don’t expect to get much lather out of it.
High speeds on vacant, flat, dry Interstate highways does not increase tire wear, correct?
Actually, yes it does, especially on the driving wheels. Stick you hand out the window and feel how hard the wind pushes against your hand while going 70. Now imagine how much wind force is on your entire car. If you double your speed, that wind force quadruples. The driving wheels have to provide the tractive effort to overcome that wind drag.
Using my motorcycle for commuting, I noticed my rear tire lasting measurably longer when I stopped using the freeway and used the low speed limit side roads to get to work.
“… High speeds on vacant, flat, dry Interstate highways does not increase tire wear, correct? …”
Well, sort of.
If you directly compare vacant, flat, dry interstate highways with the opposite (crowded, hilly, wet surface streets), then you can get a mix of things depending on which of those dominates.
Crowded shouldn’t matter unless you change lanes frequently and frequently use the brake (both of which would increase wear), but going slower is directionally better for wear.
Hilly is worse for wear, wet is better for wear, and surface streets don’t matter - other than the fact that surface streets usually involve more frequent turns, which is worse for wear.
So it’s a mixed bag and you can get a variety of result, BUT generally using the interstates results in a straighter drive and that is better for tire wear.
@CapriRacer - so how about 60 mph on an interstate vs. 80 mph? Is there more wear/mile at 80 mph?
Capri, that isn’t the whole story. Car manufacturers get the performance data from the tire manufacturer and create a “specification control drawing” of their own that “locks in” the specifications for future purchases. They then purchase to the spec control drawing. That allows the car manufacturer to go to approved vendors for future procurement. Once an alternative is tested and approved, that manufacturer’s name and tire specs are added to the car manufacturer’s spec control drawing. If That, my friend, is standard design practice in all manufacturing industries.
There are exceptions. Bugatti worked with Michelin in the design of tires for the Veyron. Bugatti told Michelin what they wanted (what the tires would be subjected to) and Michelin designed tires to come as close to the goals as possible. Once the tires were tested and approved by Bugattti, Bugattti created a “source control drawing”. The tires having been custom designed and manufactured to meet extreme specs, they cost $38,000 a set.
Can’t answer the question yet.
michelinman.com does NOT even know that name of tire.
Must’ve been for Toyota exclusively of came from an outlet like Costco, Walmart, PepBoys or others for whom Michelin produces tire names that Michelin does not sell.
I wanted to see the tire warranty mileage, as that is our best clue as to the overall . ( ex; Michelin Energy Saver A/S warranty mileage is 65k so expect to get an average 75k )
Robert, first of all, I see your problem and that 45 psi. 45 psi is way too high for that tire on your car. The 51 psi on the tire is the maximum pressure allowed to seat the bead, it has nothing to do with the recommended tire pressure for that car. You are wearing out the center of your tires faster than you should.
Your car has a label (placard) showing the recommended tire pressure which I believe is 32 psi for the 215/55-17 tire. I usually go about 3 psi above when airing up the tires and that gives me about 3 months before the tire pressure drops below the recommended pressure. The slightly higher pressure will reduce heat build up in the tires for your high speed runs. I will usually go 4 psi higher if I am doing a road trip.
It has been my experience with various brands of tires that Michelin is the most sensitive to tire pressure for longevity. If you are off by more than a few pounds, they wear out much faster than other brands that are under/over inflated. The seem to like 32 to 36 psi for long tread life for the OEM size tire.
BTW, I think your OEM tires for the Camry are either the Bridgestone Turanza EL400 or the Michelin MXM4 Energy Saver or MXV4, both now discontinued with the Premier as the recommend replacement for the Michelins. I would not recommend that Turanza EL400 at all, but the higher end Turanza’s might be OK.
I haven’t seen the Michelin X Green tires for sale for several years now, they were replaced by the Defender. I can’t see how they got on a 2015 vehicle.
Robert, first of all, I see your problem and that 45 psi. 45 psi is way too high for that tire on your car.
He’s been told that WAY TOO MANY times int this forum. He refuses to listen to engineers and physicists…but instead places his faith in the GED tire store manager.
^
+1
I have given up on attempting to give advice to him.
I’ve gotten over 100k miles on each of several sets of tires, he’s getting 36k. If he thinks 45 psi is right, then he can keep buying new tires and wonder why.
Texases asked: “… so how about 60 mph on an interstate vs. 80 mph? Is there more wear/mile at 80 mph? …”
Yes, higher speeds cause more rapid wear - BUT - the difference is fairly small. There are much larger differences for other parameters - such as alignment.
the same mountain bike said: “… Car manufacturers get the performance data from the tire manufacturer and create a “specification control drawing” of their own that “locks in” the specifications for future purchases. They then purchase to the spec control drawing. That allows the car manufacturer to go to approved vendors for future procurement. Once an alternative is tested and approved, that manufacturer’s name and tire specs are added to the car manufacturer’s spec control drawing. If That, my friend, is standard design practice in all manufacturing industries…”
Not exactly. With some rare exceptions (and the Veyron would be one of those), the tire specifications come FIRST. The vehicle manufacturers have a HUGE database of tire performance and usually they are working to move from where they currently are to a place a small distance away - such as improving the rolling resistance by 10%, but maintaining the wear and grip levels. They write their specs based on that.
The tire manufacturers respond to those specs - and if they think the specs are unreasonable, they will say so. Usually, it is a matter of taking an existing tire and tweaking it, but the whole qualification process is usually a 2 year proposition, given that there is a lot of testing that needs to take place.
The end result is what you’ve called the “specification control drawing”. GM uses a TPC number (Tire Performance Criteria) for this purpose, but that spec isn’t locked in until AFTER the tires are thoroughly tested. Sometimes these get modified to conform to what has been discovered in the qualification process.
And just so you know, I used to be the liaison to Ford for such things. The entire office I worked out of was devoted to this process and all the vehicle manufacturers did it pretty much the same way with only the details being different. The office was located in Detroit (for obvious reasons), and was the contact point for ALL the vehicle manufacturers.
To reiterate, OE tires are designed to the vehicle manufacturers specs, not the other way around. ALL OE tires are unique to themselves - and sometimes you will find the same brand, size, and model tire being supplied to different vehicle manufacturer - AND those are different within that as well. I’ve seen as many as 5 different tires being made with the same size, brand, and model name, but each one was different in some way. (It made for some very interesting conversations!)
It took the automotive industry longer than many others to realize the cost savings for commonality. I remember the days of having nearly every size fastener used in a car and when the transition occurred where I only needed a 10mm to take apart almost every piece of the interior of the car for example. It seems strange then that they would still be doing something similar with tires decades later. It would seem counter-intuitive that requiring minor tweaks to the tire design would yield such competitive advantage that it outweighs the financial benefit of leveraging volume costing…