Yakuza70

Time to get new tires. I definitely need new tires before the rainy season as my OEM Michelins were slipping and sliding in the rain a few months ago. Luckily, it probably won't rain until September/October here in Northern California so I have some time to decide.

I've been researching tires on tirerack as well as reading various forums. I've narrowed down my choice of tires to:

Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position and Yokohama ADVAN S4.

Advantages of the RE960AS:
40,000 mile warranty
Less expensive $155 each

Concerns/Questons about the RE960AS:
I had Bridgestone RE92s on my '02 Maxima and they were horrible. That kind of left a bad taste in my mouth for the Bridgestone brand.
Some have said that their gas mileage has decreased (as much as 2 mpg) when they switched to these tires. With gas prices so high, especially here in Northern California, that is a major factor.

Advantages of Yokohama ADVAN S4:
Higher rating on tirerack when compared to the Pole Positions.
I've had various Yokomaha tires on three previous cars and they were very good.

Concerns/Questions about the Yokohamas:
No warranty.
More expensive - $187 each

Anyone have any direct experience with these tires? I'm really concerned about the decrease in gas mileage on the Bridgestones. If true, why would this happen? Thoughts? Opinions?

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

I'm definitely not a big fan of Bridgestone tires, and haven’t been for years, so I installed the Yokohama S.4 245/45-17 tires last week, and find that the handling is crisp, the ride quality superb, and no road noise.

A couple of items to keep in mind when comparing the two, you'll find the Yokohama tire has a wider section width, and a tread width 1/2" wider than the Bridgestone's. When I questioned the rep at Tire Rack to the validity of the specs, his reply was that customers have been complaining that the Bridgestone’s are made smaller. In fact, the tread width of the Bridgestone 245 is smaller that most any 235 tire.

Yokohama tires come with a 30 day money back guarantee, and most tire warranties for tread life I find, are just a "come on" as any warranty claim is based on the list price of the tire, and not the price paid.

slawek65

I have Yokohama Advan S4 on my RL (I know it's not TL ) and I am very happy with them from day one.

D Luis Faber

Turbonut! I have the same situation. I bought a used 04 TL and the Falcons on it had much wear after less than 10,000 miles. I rotated the fronts after just 5,500 miles and they had less than 2/16th to the wear bar on the front, and 4/16th on the rears. I did rotate. I am taking a 5,000 plus mile trip in the next few months and do not feel confortable with the Falcons, and their rain handling with such little thread, and it going down so fast. I like the reports on the Bridgestone 960 pole tires but like you don't like the report on drop in mileage. I do not hot rod the TL, and want a better tire. Keep me posted on your replies.

calgary2800

Do you mean Falkens? I had the Falken brand before and my experince was the same as yours? They dont last long at all. My last set were the ST-115 and I traded them in at discount tires for 135 bucks, I think the manager just did it for me since I have been a previous customer. No one buys used Falken tires.

Anyway, with the trade in money I bought Michelin Pilot Exalto A/s and have been happy with them. Road noise could stand a little improvement and that is it. The steering response and road feel is top notch.

avs007

I don't know....

I just got a set of RE960AS on both my TL and my G35, and so far, I like them a lot. I compared the tire side-by-side with the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S that I took off, and yes, I noticed the treadwidth was a little narrower. But honestly, whose going to take a ruler out and measure your tread width? As long as I can still take the corners at the same speed I did before, it's fine with me.

As far as the warranty... You shouln't be paying more than list price, so I don't know why that's an issue. Even if you were, some warranty is better than no warranty.

My Pilot Sport All/Season went bald after 20,000 miles. If my bridgestones go bald in 20,000 miles, I'll get half the list price back. Better than shelling out another 300 for each tire.

As far as the Yokohamas. On tire rack's review, people have said that the "mileage reported" for the RE960AS is quite low, to get an accurate reading... THe mileage reported for the Yokohamas is even lower. I ran a few different yokohama tires before, and I swore never again. They are awesome for the first 10,000 miles, but then they turn to crap, as they get noisy as hell, and easily susceptible to hydroplaning. At least the ones I've used.

avs007

I would take those reports with a grain of salt. I got the RE960AS installed on 3 of my cars, and I haven't noticed a change in fuel economy on any of my cars. Perhaps these guys were "testing the tires", because they were skeptical of their performance, and burned more gas in the process.

PErhaps the tire-shop didn't inflate them correctly... On mine, they accidently only inflated one of my tires to 24psi.

Also, when saying it suffers a drop in fuel economy... Compared to which tires? The stock tires? I can tell you the improvement in handling/performance between the stock Pilot MX tires and the RE960AS is orders of magnitude. Perhaps better traction = less economy. But either way, my wife drives the TL most of the time, and she said she hasn't noticed any difference in fuel economy.

leedogg

i absolutely love my 960AS poles. Fantastic ride, quiet as hell, and they have excellent grip. I've taken onramps and offramps at 40+ (testing out my progress sway bar) and they just hug the road. Great performance in the rain as well.

avs007

40+? I took onramps and offramps at 40+ with the stock tires and suspension (Just giving your crap )

But yes, I love my 960AS too. After I break in the tires, I'll let you know how they grip compared to the Pilot Sport A/S I used to run. So far I can tell you they are quieter.

I'm still a little spooked from when the stability control almost killed me when I was just running a pair of RE960s on the back and the Pilot Sport A/S on the front... (Took an easy 45mph sweeper, and the stability control sent me into a spin )

But now that I have 4 RE960, I took that same curve at 70

LuvMyTSX

I have the Pole Positions on my TSX as well, and I like them. Also a lot cheaper than $200 each for the OEM Michelins. My only complaint is a drop in gas mileage of about 3-4 mpg. Kinda sucks, because I was getting 26-27 mpg in "suburban" driving (no highway), now I'm getting about 22-23.

TLin05

We have the same tires! Had the 245/45-17 S4s mounted yesterday, and am extremely pleased so far. Response is excellent, and the ride and noise levels are a major improvement (some of this no doubt results from the fact that the tires are new with a lot more tread depth).

The incrementally larger size looks "just right" on the factory wheels to me, and offers a bit more rim protection than stock MXMs. Knowing the way Honda/Acuras are set up, the speedometer & odometer are probably MORE accurate now.

I've had very good experience with Yokohamas on other cars. The OEM Michelins were OK but ridiculously expensive to buy as replacements. I have no experience with any performance-oriented Bridgestones, but must admit that all the negative reports about OEM all-season Bridgestones on TLs biased me against that brand.

avs007

That's a little harsh tho...

That's like me saying that based on the OEM Michelin Energy MXV4+ tires, Michelin must suck as a brand, even though I think the Pilot Sport and PS2 Cup tires are awesome tires.

Or that the OEM Goodyear Eagle RS-A tires such, so all Goodyear tires must suck.

etc, etc.

TLin05

Sorry, but I did not say Bridgestone tires "suck."

By "admitting to" a bias, I was not advocating the biased position, but rather confessing to less than 100% impartiality on the subject. My great past experience with Yokos, plus a litany of complaints (and Acura warranty remedies) against a W-speed rated "performance all season" Bridgestone tire slanted my perspective on the Yokohama vs. Bridgestone question.

avs007

My point was that you shouldn't dismiss a tire made by a company, based on your disliking one particular model of tire. The EL-42 and RE960AS are not the same class of tire.

The Michelin Pilot MXM tires for example. Didn't get very good reviews for wet traction, however the Pilot Sport All/Season got very good marks for wet traction.

The EL-42 is not even classified as a performance tire. It's classified as a standard touring all season. The RE960AS is classified as an Ultra-High Performance All Season. Passing judgement on the RE960 based on the EL42 is nonsense.

It's like saying that because I don't like the Honda Civic, I'm not going to bother test driving a TL. Or saying that based on the performance of the Malibu, I'm not considering a Z06 Corvette.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Sorry, I disagree, as a bad experience with a specific product will turn people away from the entire line. If you have a lot of trouble with a TL would you buy a RL? If you had numerous problems with the Civic, would you purchase an Accord? Certainly not, you'd turn to a different product. Years ago I purchased Bridgestone RE71's for my RX7 Turbo, and swore I'd never have Bridgestone's again, but then I purchased Bridgestone Dueler's for our Grand Cherokee, and now I know I'll never own any Bridgestone tire again!
I told my wife that if Alzheimer’s sets in and I ever consider Bridgestone tires in the future, just shoot me.

This is not to say that the entire line is not quality, but I've had my fill of the lineup, as it's entirely too costly to experiment, and at least Yokohama gives a 30 day money back guarantee if not satisfied, and yes, the Bridgestone tires are much smaller and to some it definitely makes a difference as I like the largest footprint possible.

avs007

I didn't know you were basing your judgement from multiple tires, I thought you were just talking about the crappy EL-42. With that being the case, you are entitled to hate bridgestone (What kinds of problems you have with those other ones? Just curious)

I feel the same way about products, but I usually give companies the benafit of the doubt and will try once after being burned, but never a third time... In fact, our 2GTL had a bunch of problems. Most I could deal with, but the tranny blowing up, and the way the dealer handled it, was enough to make me never want to own an Acura again. But I decided to get a 3G TL anyways, and figured if I have problems I'm not buying Acura ever again... Luckily, the 3G TL has been a delight...

avs007

Not that it matters, but if you get your tires from Americas Tire Company or Discount Tire, they offer a 30 day money back gaurantee on every tire they sell.

Turbonut

iTrader: (1)

Good point, but probably not many people will return a tire during the 30-day period, but at least the offer is on the table.

The RE71's on the RX-7 Turbo were so hard, we felt as though we were on the proverbial horse drawn wagon, along with the lack of traction. Only had them on for a few weeks before going to Dunlop’s, and have had Toyo's for the last 6 years. Actually don't use the car too much anymore as it stays in the garage-22,000 miles since 2000.

We found the same with the Dueler's as they took a perfectly fine Grand Cherokee Limited and gave it an extremely harsh ride, a lot of road noise and finally replaced them with GY's last year.

TLin05

My first photo attempt so please bear with me... sorry if it's too large. My freshly washed '05 MT-6 with the S4s. Nice rim protection and overall look IMO. I am not real keen on the "dubs with rim protectors" look, and these ride and handle better on most real-world roads. Yes, car is bone stock except the new tires and the GM Friction Modified transmission fluid. 26 months old, almost 29K miles and I couldn't be happier with the vehicle.

lowgrowl

My car is completely stock. The body roll is not really that bad, but the michelins fold over and wobble easily. Do the yokohamas have a stiffer feel and firmer sidewalls?

ChicagoBurbs

Those YOKO's look really good on the stock wheels! I recently ordered a tire/wheel package from Tire Rack (18X8" rims), originally requested CONTI's, but called back and asked them which is the tire they recommend, and hands down they say the S4's. Also, like you I really like the traditional looking tire bulge over the rim protectors (which I think are really a joke, and protect nothing). Thanks for your post.

BTW your '05 is lookin' good!

TLin05

Thanks! I'm very pleased with these tires so far, but since they still only have less than 200 miles on them I don't think I can make a definitive comment on handling (they're still a little slippery -- not broken in yet). The ride comfort and noise level are big improvements though!

For Lowgrowl: I have to admit I never really found the Michelins "wobbly." I know what you mean, because I have driven other cars (usually rentals ) that give this sensation. You may have already tried this, but if not... try bumping up the tire pressure. Mine is a 6-MT, which calls for 35PSI in front, but any TL will handle better with a few extra PSI in the front tires. I normally run 37 front, 34 rear.

frenchnew

I will add my

Bought 4 Yoko's Advan S4 235/45R17 today at my Acura delearship for $1102.43CDN. (Tires, Installation & the local government commision-Taxes included)

First impression (less then 100 miles travelled) very quiet compared to the Michelin Pilot HM MXM4, softer ride.

The car does not follow the ruts(Spelling?) on the road anymore. This was bad with the Michelin since day 1 (April 18, 2005)

Can't wait to see how they will behave in the rain.

Tried to buy some Bridgestone RE960 but was told that they are out of stock and Bridgestone Canada does not know when they will be available.

TLin05

Had a terrific drive on winding, scenic Hwy 33 in WV today, taking my Son to summer camp. With just over 500 miles on the tires now, on the return trip I took some of the (posted 25-35 MPH) curves as fast as I could with my very patient wife in the car, and never heard so much as a whimper from the tires. Very impressive performance!

Tecciztecatl

Well, I have had the Potenza Pole 245/40/18 for a few thousand miles now for 6MT w/ aspec susp. and here’s my impression compared to the Pirelli PZero Neros.

They ride like my 17s, very smooth, quiet, good in the rain – more like a luxury ride. My only problem with them is that they feel spongy when I take a tight corner at higher speeds. I almost feel like I am going to drift out of the curve when compared to the PZeros, which put me on a rail!

These tires are great for the average driver and give you a very smooth ride, yet for the spirited folks, I would keep looking, I took the advice from the tirerack reviews … which is the average Joe. My buddy has the Potenzas on his TSX and said the same thing about the spongy feel.

Overall I like them, but need more bite!

ndabunka

I didn't read the entire thread due to length but did see the OP's issues with lower fuel economy. I assume that he read about that on one of the reviews. On thing to keep in mind is that often people are also changing the wheels (and sizes) when posting their "results" on those tire "review" boards. This change in wheel size if more often the factor behind lost fuel economy. Now, even having said that, there are a group of tires that are designed to be "low rolling resistance" tires and these are normally used on Hybrid vehicles (like the Toyota Highlander Hybrid I own). Such tires are designed MUCH differently than a "high performance" tire like most of us would put on a TL. One of the factors that helps a performance car 'stick" to the road in corner's is the adhesion capabilities of the tires (both wet and dry conditions). That adhesion is counter to good fuel economy so you pretty much have to make a choice. Which is more important to you, good performance (acceleration, cornering, braking, etc) or better fuel economy and go from there...