As long as we are into the blood letting of OEM tires, the Toyo a20s OEM tires on my wife’s car are atrocious too. Still, there is lot’s of info out there and there maybe reviews and teststo tell you what to expect. The A20s are perfectly safe, quiet and all ready mounted as a summer tire as long as we don’t use them in snow and don’t expect a lot of tread life. That HAS to be worth keeping if you run snow tires and if you live in snow country, it is still worth keeping and buying snow tires instead of new all seasons. I cannot believe any tire today as OEM is unsafe in normal driving conditions including wet weather.
Tires are very directional in this day and age and poor take off does not equate into poor braking or cornering. In fact, some directionality loss in taking off ( it is with wife’s snow tires) may enhance braking and cornering. I would look for tests and reviews on your tires.
All designs of all things are all compromises. That includes tires.
I agree with those who suggest driving the OEM tires until the thread gets low. The one caveat is if you live in a region where it snows and yours are not good in snow. I’d suggest looking at the test rating and consumer feedback sections of Tirerack.com and www.1010tires.com for information on how well your tires perform. If they’re not good in snow or ice, fall might be a good time to replace them. You might even find out that the OEM tires are better tires than you think.
And remember to check to see if you have low rolling resistance or run flat tires. Do the work to understand what you have before making any changes.
“I’m guessing you never had the continentals that came on early 2000s Camrys for example. ANY moisture on the road and they would slip on takeoff. They were checked and cracked beyond belief within two years and hardly any mileage on them. Replaced with Yokohamas and a complete world of difference in every respect.”
I had the same experience with the Continentals on my '06 Matrix.
Suffered through 25k miles of mediocre traction, noise and a strange wear pattern.
Replaced with Yoko Avid Envigor. Far better and 'bout half worn after 27k.
Tires are very directional in this day and age and poor take off does not equate into poor braking or cornering.
Yeah, so? Who cares if there’s a relationship to cornering and braking. Those are not the only safety conditions. When you’re trying to turn left across a busy intersection and because the road has morning dew on it, it’s spinning the tires at almost any throttle position. THAT’S a safety issue where I drive. I could go on about how terrible they were in other regards but that should be enough to make my point.
I have had mixed results with OEM fires. I had good results with the Dunlop tires that came on our 2003 4Runner and I got 55,000 miles out of the Goodyear tires that came with our 2006 Uplander. On the other hand, the Firestone that came on our 2011 were worn out in 35000 miles. I think the OP should just run the tires that came with the car.
I have had mixed results with OEM fires. I had good results with the Dunlop tires that came on our 2003 4Runner and I got 55,000 miles out of the Goodyear tires that came with our 2006 Uplander.
I’ve never had good luck with Dunlap tires. The ones that came on my 05 4runner were shot at 25k miles. The OEM Bridgestone tires on my Pathfinders lasted till 30k miles.
My wifes Accortd came with Michelin and they lasted 70k+ miles. The Michelins that came with my 14 highlander have 25k miles now…and have plenty of tread left.
OEM tires are designed to the vehicle manufacturer’s specs and not to the tire manufacturer’s specs. If one has a problem with an OE tire, blame the vehicle manufacturer. I talk about the process here:
Also, each OE tire is unique and different from any other OE tire - even those with the same name. That’s because each vehicle manufacturer has a different take on what is needed - and there are differences even within the same vehicle make - different management!
So be very careful drawing generalizations about OE tires. Most of the issues are due to the specs.
On a side note: I’ve noticed the tires supplied to Japanese vehicle manufacturers tend to have more traction complaints than tires supplied to European and American vehicle manufacturers. I suspect this has to do with the surface the tires are tested on - and the best information I can obtain is that this traction testing takes place in Japan.
@CapriRacer - If what you say is true, then the vehicle manufacturers need to change their process. EVERY vehicle I’ve owned and my wife owned in the past 35+ years - we’ve always been able to replace the OE tires with off the shelf tires from the same tire manufacturer or a different tire manufacturer that was BETTER then the OE tire in every single category.
I agree with @CapriRacer 100%. The car manufacturer is the biggest driving force in ALL the components that a car uses and tires are no different. They order huge quantities of tires and can Oder up the the tires according to their specs and as cheap as possible. It’s not they they don’t want to have tires that last a long time for example, but their prioities are elsewhere. The auto manufacturer does not have to back the tires…look at the warranty booklet of any new car. It’s the tire manufacturer.
My off road package came with BFG Rugged Trails. What a joke. They “look” like AT tires but are really just all season tires with a very shallow tread. Why ? Because even though most want off road capabilities, they try the new trucks out on the street and want as quiet and smooth ride as possible. They also know that serious off roaders will buy their own tires either way. The car maker holds seminars to give out specs to aftermarket parts makers including tire makers. They work hand in hand to maximize EVERYONE’s profits and give the consumer the after market parts, including tires that best work with their vehicle on all accounts. This difference from OEM is that…the consumer will have to pay for it as an option to get everything they want.
Regardless…use your OEM tires as long and as safely as possible for the best bang for the buck.
I remember well the early 1960s when a good tire was a 4 ply nylon tire. Yet, most new cars came with 2 ply rayon or tirex cord tires. This, was in the days before belted tires or radial tires. The nylon cord tires did “thump” when cold. The argument in favor of the 2 ply tires was that there,wasn’t as much heat generated in the friction between the plies as, with a 4 ply tire. Yet, a lot of new car buyers immediately replaced the OEM tires with 4 ply. I bought an almost new 1965 Rambler with the Goodyear 2 ply back in 1965. I got 35,000 miles from these tires which was good for those days.
" I bought an almost new 1965 Rambler with the Goodyear 2 ply back in 1965. I got 35,000 miles from these tires which was good for those days. "
That was very good for an OEM tire back in those days. My father’s '66 Ford Galaxie 500 came from the factory with BF Goodrich Silvertown tires which were nearly bald by 16k miles. I recall replacing them with Pep Boys Cornell brand tires at ~16.5k miles.
One of the problems in those days was that, in the absence of some of the modern safety standards, OEM tires were–technically–overloaded as soon as there were more than 2 people in the car. That lack of load-bearing capacity surely had something to do with the short tread life of so many of the OEM tires in…the good old days. And, of course car manufacturers’ quest for the cheapest possible tires did not include a requirement for long tread life.
Top rated tires are too expensive. Michelin Premier A/S grand touring tires are $139 each for our Silhouette. There are decent tires available for less than $100. Even those are too expensive for the auto companies. I know they get a volume discount, but for an industry that sweats the pennies, top tires Re not going to happen except on top end cars.
@VDCdriver Consumer Reports noted a lot of cars that had tires that were overloaded without anyone in the car. On my 1965 Rambler when it came time to replace the tires I moved up from 6.95 x 14 to 7.35 x 14 tires.
^
Now that you mention it, @Triedaq, I do recall that.
Those pesky “nanny state” safety regulations should never have been enacted, so that we could have continued to drive new cars with grossly overloaded tires, single circuit brake hydraulic systems, rigid steering columns, sharp objects protruding from the dashboard, etc.
After all, since both of us survived, doesn’t that prove that all of those old designs didn’t kill people?
@VDCdriver I was in high school when Ford adopted some safety features in its,1956 models. The door locks were greatly improved to prevent the doors from opening in an accident. The hub of the steering wheel was recessed below the rim, and the read view mirror,was,designed,to break away and f struck by the driver’s head. Front seat belts, padded sun visor and padded dashboards were options but weren’t selected by many customers. The,power pack option which included dual exhausts and a 4 barrel carburetor for the V8 engine was more popular option than the safety equipment. Chevrolet attracted more customers by advertising power than Ford did by advertising safety. Ford soon switched from emphasizing safety to emphasizing power.
Tom McCahill in his book “What You Should Know About Cars”, published in the early 1960s didn’t have much good to say for the OEM tires and thought it was a good idea to replace the tires right away on many new cars. I think the OEM tires have improved since then.
