Currently, my 2002 Accord (SE Sedan) has Michelin tires (came with purchase of the used vehicle)…no problem(s) with these tires, but I’ve always had great experiences with Continental tires and I’ll need to replace all four within the next 8 months or so…any thoughts? Continental tires are generally a bit less expensive vs Michelin…other recommended brands? Thanks in advance!
Stick with Michelin
I’ll echo @db4690 here. Stick with the Michelins.
I had a bad experience with Continentals. No matter what I did, I could not get those POS tires to roll smoothly. Ended up replacing them with BF Goodys.
There are tons of reviews and testimonials out there about tires, but it’s my belief that tire experiences are almost unique to every driver. What’s important to you may not be important to me, and your driving style may be good for a tire that is horrible for me. Personally I’ve never been happy with anything from Continental. Michelins ride and handle ok, but seem to develop sidewall cracks sooner than others, and they cost too much. Coopers are ok but cost too much for the short treadlife. Goodyear makes some horrible bargain basement tires, but their Assurance and Eagle LS tires are the best out there by far and are my favorites for all my cars.
My thought, if you have been happy with the price, wear, handling, and traction of Continentals why change now? They seem to suit you just fine, stick with what you’re happy with.
I am also a dissatisfied Continental customer.
I had thought that the Contis were…okay…until I upgraded to Michelins.
There is simply no comparison, IMHO.
Yes, Michelins cost more initially, but when you factor in the much longer tread life, they actually cost less in the long run than tires that…theoretically…cost less.
And, when it comes to ride quality, nobody can equal Michelin.
Me, I’d stick w/the big “M”. Their Defender line gets excellent reviews in Consumer Reports. Another idea is you want to change to another brand: New car manufacturers want to provide tires on their cars that are both inexpensive and produce a good, safe ride and produce no tire-related problems that will cause the customer to return after purchase. So go to the new car lots selling econoboxes, Honda, Toyota, Chevy, & Ford and do an inventory on what tires comes with their new cars.
“I’d stick w/the big “M”. Their Defender line gets excellent reviews in Consumer Reports”
I can verify from personal experience that the Michelin Defender is a truly excellent tire.
“New car manufacturers want to provide tires on their cars that are both inexpensive and produce a good, safe ride and produce no tire-related problems that will cause the customer to return after purchase”
Actually what car mfrs are looking for is tires that are CHEAP and that produce good mpg figures. Everything else–traction, tread life, handling–is secondary to their goal of finding cheap tires that also provide good gas mileage. The Michelin Defender produces better gas mileage than the Contis that originally came on my vehicle, but they have the added advantages of…much better ride quality, better handling, lower noise levels, greater resistance to hydroplaning, an incredibly smooth ride, longer tread life, and the ability to “hold” their balancing.
Regarding your statement about mfrs wanting tires that “produce no tire-related problems that will cause customers to return”, I can tell you that the #1 problem/complaint with Subaru Outbacks for about 3 years was…an inability to balance the Continental tires with which these cars were equipped!
My tire balance problem was not as severe as many other Outback owners, but only road force balancing eliminated the problem…which then returned every 10k miles or so, thus requiring road force balancing AGAIN each every year or so. The Continentals required an incredible number of balance weights (one of my tires had 12 of them), and they would just not “hold” the balancing for an extended period of time.
This problem was totally eliminated by ditching those Contis (early, with ~5/32 of the tread remaining) and replacing them with Michelin Defenders. The difference is like night and day in every respect.
I have Goodyear Assurance triple tred on my Camry. They were apparently put on just before I bought it as a used car.
They’re very highly rated by Consumer Reports
Previously, I’ve been very happy with Michelin Symmetry and Harmony. They each lasted several years, wore evenly, and went the distance mileage wise. Those particular Michelins weren’t performance tires, but they were a bargain, in the sense that I got several years and miles out of them
As far as the Contis go, they just don’t seem to last that long. I’m basing that on my professional experience
I also don’t like Goodyear Eagles, but for a different reason. They don’t seem to wear evenly
Read the survey results for the tires you’re considering at tirerack.com. They have an excellent tire ranking system based on user feedback. Almost guaranteed the Michelins will be ranked higher than the
Contis, but go see for yourself. Tirerack.com.
Let’s have it . . .
What are you disagreeing about?
The last set I bought were Generals. Reasonable cost, quiet, and good on snow. Also got Mich on another car and while they are quiet, don’t seem to be as good on snow.
I’d take Michelin over Continental any day of the week. I’m glad someone had a good experience with General tires… Every set I’ve ever had has been garbage.
@db4960 I do not see any flexible whatever, post, is it deleted? or maybe I don’t see all posts for some reason. If you see it and I do not let me know! re OP go with michelin, the extra dollars are worth it!
If you look at my post concerning my Goodyear tires, you’ll see that @FLEXIBLEFLYER disagreed with me
I’m just curious what he disagreed with
By the way, @FLEXIBLEFLYER didn’t post anything. He simply disagreed with me
@db4960 I see that now, drive by troll I suppose, most here will at least say why they disagree. (covering head for disagrees!) roll on bro
My experience with Continental tires was poor and I haven’t owned any since 2002. I’ve had several sets of Michelin tires over the years and they always exceeded my expectations. I’ve bought other brands when I just couldn’t afford the Michelin prices but when I need tires I look first at Michelin and buy them when I can afford them. I wouldn’t buy a Continental tire again even if it was on sale for 60% off.
Isn’t it a bit of an over-generalization to compare entire brands? Each makes quite a few tire lines with different characteristics and price points.
Of course we’re making generalizations, based on our own experiences
But the general consensus seems to be . . . Michelin trumps Continental . . . for various reasons
For a long time now I have just been going to the Tire Rack website, pulling up tires for my vehicles, reading reviews, and checking out the survey results. I use that to decide which tires I want and then get them through a local shop. Since I have been doing that I have had excellent experiences with my tires and have never had to pay as much as one does for Michelins. (I have ended up with the likes of Kumhos and Hankooks)