Thanks for the tip about the Bridgestones. Costco seems to alternate their rebates… One month they’ll have Michelins for $70 off a set of 4, the next, it’ll be the same rebate with Bridgestones. And the Serenity Plus are V rated… sounds like a deal to me. Thanks for all the advice!!!
I’d like to clear up a couple of misconceptions.
The speed rating on a tire is almost directly tied to the construction of the tire and the tread compound and the tread depth have no bearing on it.
However, it is fairly common for tires with higher speed ratings to use more grippy tread compounds - and therefore a lower wear rating. but that is not a 100% thing.
But the reverse is even more true: Tires with low speed ratings almost exclusively use tread compounds with high treadwear ratings - and therefore low grip levels.
And just to make things more complex: There is a 3 way technological triangle for the tread compounds involving treadwear, traction, and rolling resistance (fuel economy). To get better properties in one area, the other areas have to be sacrificed.
That’s why OE tires - tires that come on new vehicles from the factory - frequently perform so poorly. The car manufacturers are extremely interested in fuel economy and specify low rolling resistance values - which means the tires don’t wear and grip well.
1 Like
Thanks again for all the info.
Somebody a while back asked how many miles a year I would drive. Right now, approximately 15k, but I expect that to go down some next year to a more “normal” level.
After looking at the reviews from Tire Rack (both from TR itself and also their customer comments), am also considering the General Altimax RT43.
They are a very decent price, and got high marks both from TR and also CR. They are priced similarly to the Pirelli’s (which also are favored by the folks at TR), but in their review, TR said that the Pirelli’s didn’t do quite as good as the others on wet pavement. TR said they liked the Generals for their all-around performance.
The Serenity Plus is still an option too, but they are more expensive than the Generals. Plus, I like the fact that the Generals are near the top rating (for their class) at CR. For whatever that’s worth…
In that case, Michelin Defenders are lose-lose tires
High price
They’re only T-rated, so not appropriate for many cars out there
High tread wear rating, but you will NEVER get anywhere near that . . . so Michelin is basically a liar, as well
I feel they should be marketed differently . . . with perhaps a 400 tread wear rating. That would be more realistic. And they should be far cheaper
In this case, you do NOT get what you pay for
Not even close
Shame on Michelin 
1 Like
I’d like to add another view to this thread that seems fixated on speed ratings at the expense of other tire qualities. Last year I bought four Douglas XTRA-TRAC II tires for our 09 Cobalt from WM because the tires were inexpensive. Even inexpensive tires must be good because there are hungry lawyers, constantly at the ready to defend us from whatever injustice.
We were in a heavy, some would say a driving rain in the left lane, moving a few mph more than the right lane occupants. Suddenly one of them decided to switch lanes to pass and I had to step very hard on the brakes to avoid a collision. Our Cobalt did not have antilock brakes but the Douglas tires did not slide and I was completely impressed for what the tires did in that extreme condition. They have a 91T speed rating (118 mph) and a tread wear rating of 45k miles but that is ok with me. Tire design is always a compromise between performance characteristics and the next time I need tires I will gladly accept some treadwear rating for excellent wet traction.
1 Like
Well, both my real-world experience and Consumer Reports’ tests differ with your opinion.
I currently have 33,9xx miles on my set of Defenders, and the tread depth is still 8/32" of an inch across the entire width of each tire. Based on that wear rate, I expect to get at least 70k out of them.
In one of their recent tire tests, Consumer Reports questioned the tire wear claims of all of the manufacturers, so they subjected samples of all of their tested tires to 16k of wear in West Texas, followed by measurement of the tread depth. Some of the tested tires did not quite live-up to their manufacturer’s claims, but CR stated that, based on their tests, they projected a probable safe tread life for the Defenders of ~97k miles.
1 Like
OK, it might be time for my lecture on tire wear:
Most tire wear occurs in the cornering mode. Driving straight ahead hardly wears the tires at all. So people who drive in the city generally don’t get as many miles out of tires as those in the country,
When I was testing tires, I had a vehicle that ran between Kansas City and St. Louis - every day. That vehicle got over 100K out of the set. I put the same tire on a local delivery vehicle and it only got 30K.
If that is true, why do tire manufacturers even have treadwear warranties? Because tire dealers want them. It’s a way of easily distinguishing between the makes and models. Will the tires achieve the mileage? Some will.
1 Like
I see the tread wear ratings as a way for the buyer to compare different tires, and no more.
A tire rated 600 should last twice as long as one rated 300.
And that might be 6 minutes vs 3 doing burnouts, or 60k miles vs 30k highway cruising.
Even then, they don’t work very well between brands.
Exactly!
Because there are no universal standards for wear ratings, they are really only useful for comparing different tire models from the same manufacturer.
A 500-rated tire from one manufacturer may actually yield less tread life than one from another manufacturer that is rated “400”.
I disagree with YOUR comment
It’s not my OPINION that Michelin Defenders don’t last long
As I said, we stock Defenders in our warehouse, and I can tell you from my own professional experience, they don’t last long
It is my experience, not my opinion
By the way, Consumer Reports predicts a very long tread life for Defenders
But an extremely high percentage of reviewers on the CR website say otherwise. And what they are saying is in line with what I am saying
Yup . . . CR’s own readers who have Michelin Defenders don’t agree with CR’s treadwear ratings of these tires
1 Like
so, is the same tire bought at Walmart
General Altimax RT43.
the same tire you would get from Tire Rack?
1 Like
That’s fine, but since my tires still have 8/32" tread remaining after almost 34k miles, clearly my personal experience differs from what you have observed.
Perhaps the difference lies in how and where your drivers operate those vehicles, as compared to how and where I operate my vehicle.
As CapriRacer pointed out, urban driving with lots of turns will take a much faster toll on tire treads than suburban/rural driving with fewer turns.
Yes, melott…
The only thing that stopped me from buying them from Tire Rack was the $70+ dollars in shipping… they have free shipping at Amazon, but when I asked if Costco could install them, they said it would be an extra $60 (15 per tire) and no free rotations, no free patches if you need one, etc. etc. I hate to do it (in a way), but thinking about getting the General Altimax RT43’s from Wal-Mart… same price as Amazon, and install is only $12 per tire…
I’m sorry, but the Federal government has a standardized test for all treadwear ratings that compares the tire being tested to an SRTT (Standard Reference Test Tire). The test is run in Texas and every tire manufacturer has to have data from that test.
So the UTQG treadwear ratings ARE comparable between brands - and between different models within that brand.
HOWEVER, there is a lot of variability in the test - AND - the federal government only requires that the UTQG rating not be OVER-stated. Sometimes tire manufacturer will understate a rating to make a higher rated tire look better.
But even then, a tire rated 800 is in the range of twice as good as one rated at 400 regardless of the brands.
Also, the mileage warranties are NOT directly comparable to the UTQG treadwear ratings. These warranties are set by the tire manufacturer and there is no government standard as it what the warranty must be or even if there has to be one (many don’t!)
Thank you…I stand corrected!
Unlike some members of this forum, I am willing to acknowledge when I make a statement in error.
I think we’re all forgetting the other side of the tire wear equation–how the tire is used. Let’s remember that city driving, stop and go, and traffic situations wear tires out much, much faster than cruising on the freeway at 70mph. Every time you make a turn, accelerate briskly from a green light, or stop short in traffic, you eat up your tires.
Then there’s load. A tire on a mid-size sedan that is used by a single commuter on an easy drive to work will get much more life than the same tire on an SUV driven by a spirited 20 year old hauling his football teammates around.
Road surface, ever notice how the car is much smoother and quieter on a stretch of smooth blacktop? Every mile of rough pavement, every jagged pothole, gravel, and debris affect tire life too. I’m not sure what effect chemical deicers have on tread rubber, but I doubt it’s helpful.
asemaster, good point. I’ve often wondered, when the pavement transitions from new asphalt to old concrete, and the noise increases a lot, if there are other issues. Such as increased wear.
Driving on a highway where they have just peeled off the old asphalt and not yet repaved, and are very very rough, must be really bad on tires. And I’ve seen highways that way for a month. Rt 95 south of the Merrimack river is one example