We need to get new tires for our car.  The originals were Michelin Energy Saver A/S - P205/60R16 91V.  The ones I am looking at are Michelin Primacy MXV4 205/60R16 92V. The load rating on the replacements would be slightly different but higher so I assume this is ok.  From reading, it seems that I just don't want to get a lower load rating. 

What I generally do is to go tire rack, and read up on their reviews of tires for my car, they usually have comparisons of similar tires, and tell you what the tradeoffs are.

I already went to tirerack.com and it was helpful but this still doesn't answer my question about the various load ratings.  

Edited October 30, 201312 yr by shellylh

Shelly, there really is no risk associated with using tires with a heavier load rating.  It might mean that they'll be more expensive (since it's a good feature), but really it just gives you more headroom in terms of towing capacity.  

 

The most important rating to me is the tread wear rating, and for standard tires on standard cars (as opposed to race tires for race cars), the higher the number the better.  There is some variance from company to company, because each manufacturer is allowed to establish their own baseline performance, but the rating ranges are typically 100 to 600 (although there technically is no upper limit).  Effectively, a tire with a 200 tread wear rating will last twice as long as a tire by the same manufacturer with a 100 rating.  Ratings of 400 and higher are definitely "good" tires in terms of their expected lifetime performance/mileage.  The only downside to high tread wear ratings is the slightly higher stopping distance.  The higher the tread wear rating, the harder the tire, thus the less sticky and thus the lower the friction coefficient. You might enjoy the math... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treadwear_rating

Anyway, the higher load rating on the tire you're considering is definitely a good thing.  But at least check the tread wear rating to see how it compares to the originals that you're replacing.  Michelin to Michelin means that those ratings will be directly comparable.

There are other measures besides the load rating and tread wear rating that tires are rated on, like the temperature range and speed rating (which is alphabetical), but I've never found these to be particularly important unless you're planning to drive a lot in the desert or over 113 miles per hour.  You can run a 102 mph rated tire at 140 mph, but you wouldn't want to do it for long!
 

Edited October 30, 201312 yr by Wmcmanus

We need to get new tires for our car.  The originals were Michelin Energy Saver A/S - P205/60R16 91V.  The ones I am looking at are Michelin Primacy MXV4 205/60R16 92V. The load rating on the replacements would be slightly different but higher so I assume this is ok.  From reading, it seems that I just don't want to get a lower load rating.

My last set of tires on the G35x were the Michelin Primacy MXV4 225/55-17. When new they were fairly decent on snow, and quite good/sticky on wet & dry pavement for fast and spirited driving through the mountain passes and curves. For the first two summers they were also very quiet, and didn't squeal through hard turns. As they wore down they got noisier with normal driving, and started to squeal when pushed hard.

Because I was so hard on them, after the first winter I had to switch some winter tires, since my teenage kids would also drive the car and I didn't want them to have an accident. I still had about 5/32 when I took them off a couple of months ago (about 30k miles) and replaced them because wet performance was starting to suffer too. But I've saved them in case I get my son started with autocross next summer.

I replaced them with Continental Extreme Contact DWS, which are more aggressive for winter driving and have a softer sidewall for quieter and smoother ride, but they don't feel quite as "planted" due to sidewall flex. They are still very sticky for hard summer driving, and extremely good in the wet. We'll see how they do in snow tomorrow.

PS: a good budget winter tire is the General Altimax Arctic, which are about $100 cheaper than Blizzak WS7, and last longer. We've had these on the Subaru Impreza, G35x, and RAV4. On the low power cars without fast driving they'll last a good 4 seasons.

I too am badly in need of new tires.  The rear of my car has issues staying planted: last winter was bad and even over the summer I could easily break it free on the current Hankook v12 summer tires.  Need to figure out what to get, assuming winter and summer wheels as opposed to all seasons.

In the market next spring. Agree on the Tire Rack, and heavier load rating being ok.

I drive so little now, that I never run out of miles or wear. My tire guy told me to replace them at 6 years either way, as they wear out based on age, too. But I think he's trying to sell me tires. I looked at them closely, at the time, and they looked perfectly fine. Until now, as I'm starting to see very slight signs of cracks here and there. Time to replace them, I guess.

I was really happy with the Yokohama YK580 tires I put on my old Santa Fe. 

I love the snow tire suggestion for shelly in houston, btw.

Who suggested that?

 

Colin? I think he was thinking for himself, if that's who you were referring to ...

Better safe than sorry... 

Yeah, get some Blizzaks Shelly!

 

I have not been too impressed with the Michelins that came stock on any of our Hondas, other than the set on my 2011 seems pretty good. Usually they were good the first winter but then traction really fell off. As Wayne notes, the higher the mileage rating, the harder the tread compound to achieve that mileage rating. I once bought a set of Michelins (can't remember what model they were) with a 60K or 70K mileage rating. I got rid of them at around 30K because the traction sucked so bad I couldn't stand them anymore.

 

We have put Yokohama Avids on as replacements on my wife and son's cars, and have been happy with them so far. We normally get tires from Discount Tire (with the warranty, which has paid for itself with a couple of nail punctures). I might try Tire Rack for my next set however.

Who suggested that?

 

Colin? I think he was thinking for himself, if that's who you were referring to ...

Larry

I love the snow tire suggestion for shelly in houston, btw.

 

 

It did snow here a couple of years ago but yeah, I'm probably not going to spend a lot of time researching winter tires.  

 

 

Thanks for all the suggestions.  I had never heard of Yokohama tires before.  I'll have to look into them.  I assume that this will be the last pair of tires we put on the car.  It is a 2004 Honda Accord EX V6 which only has ~40,000 miles on it but we will probably want a new car in a few years (when all the little plasticky bits start falling off).  

 

Wayne:  The treadwear on these is better than the ones we have, it is rated at 620.  

Edited October 30, 201312 yr by shellylh

I'd recommend Kumho tires.  Good tires, inexpensive, reliable.  You don't really drive enough, and that car isn't really demanding on it's tires, so you don't need a whole lot.  Their general touring tires are well regarded, especially for the price.  And, as an added bonus, they have great snow traction

Reading more about tires, I am wondering if we should get summer tires insteda of all season. It doesn't really snow here but we usually get a lot of rain (when we are jot in a drought).

I'd recommend Kumho tires.  Good tires, inexpensive, reliable.  You don't really drive enough, and that car isn't really demanding on it's tires, so you don't need a whole lot.  Their general touring tires are well regarded, especially for the price.  And, as an added bonus, they have great snow traction

I'd agree. I had a set of Kumhos on one of my Accords, and my boss uses them and likes them as well. Also take a look at Dunlops. I had some A60s on the old Accord and liked them (well, until they delaminated or something, but they had a lot of miles on them and were shot anyhow when that happened). My wife's car is the same as yours Shelly (2004 EX-L V6), and the Yokohamas have been good on it.

Hubby want to stick with Michelin (and not go with some brand that he hasn't heard of) and since it is technically his car, we're going to have to do that.  I've gone ahead and made an appt with Discount Tire to get the Primacy MXV4 put on this afternoon.   Hopefully it'll be an improvement over our current tires. 

Larry

Ah! Sorry, I, um, overlooked his post...

And yeah, guess you have to go with hubby's wishes. But I agree, the are much better values than Michelin, in my experience. I've had Kumho, Dunlop, and Nokia that I've liked better than Michelin for the price.

cellphones for wheels, woot

 

I run nokians on my pilot right now.  I'm debating on putting kumhos on it next, since it now has 160k miles

Are these other tires actually better than the Michelin Primacy or are the just a better deal.  Hubby would just rather pay a bit more to get a brand that he "trusts" as long as it is a good tire.   It seems like the Kumho tires are a lot cheaper than Michelin tires.  Also, I don't have so much time to search around for different tires right now. 

I don't think Michelin are the best tires out there, and have my share of dissatisfaction with several of the OEM sets on our Hondas. Michelins are also very expensive, but don't seem to bring much (if anything) to the table for the additional $$.

 

Take a look at the Primacy reviews on Tire Rack and compare them to those of other tires you might consider.

Edited October 30, 201312 yr by Pars

Pilot Super Sports rule.

 

They don't have them in my size. 

Pilot Super Sports rule.

Max Performance summer tire, not so hot here for all year use. And at $220 a pop (on closeout) on a size for my Honda, they had better rule