So i don't understand why acura would pick the Michelin tires they did. They are listed on tirerack.com at over $700 for the set. Yet the Bridgestone Potenza RE970as Pole Position are at $560 for the set and are rated the best tire at that size for all season tires... Obviously i understand there is going to be a bulk discount, but really?

For those curious..
Factory Tire Ratings and Cost

Has anybody replaced the factory tires yet? I plan to shortly, but was curious if others have already.

 

Well they usually put grand touring tires on a lot of their vehicles and they did very well in their test against three other brands of this style, Bridgestone being one of them.

The Bridgestone Potenza Pole Position RE970 are classified as Ultra High Performance All Season and I don't think that is what they had in mind for that ILX. I would probably look at something else down the road myself but that will be after the Oem are ready to be replaced.

 

Are the Bridgestones a compromise on ride quality and road noise though? OEMs factory a lot when making a tire decision, including margins on replacing tires as well as manufacturer incentives for buying in bulk

 

Not at all.

 

I'd take online user reviews with a grain of salt. The average layperson (and myself included) doesn't know much about tire tech; likewise, they've probably only experienced driving on 3, maybe 4, sets of tires so their frame of reference isn't comprehensive by any means. What this means is that they're likely not going to rate the tires on a completely objective scale and the rankings between tires are certainly not relative.

Here's an analogy, most people think BOSE makes great sounding products. Most audiophiles, however, know that if it's got no highs and no lows, then it's gotta be BOSE.

 

They still are two different classes of tires. The Bridgestone are Ultra High Performance All Season and the Michelins are Grand Touring All Season and in Tire Racks test comparison they beat the equivalent Bridgestone. The Michelin to compare against the Bridgestone 970 is the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S Plus.

I think spdandpwr's points come into play as Michelin has pretty much been the tire of choice for Acura from their beginning.

Also of note the survey results quite often differ from the actual testing comparisons done by tire rack. Not saying the surveys are wrong but they involve many different vehicles that they are used on and price point quite often comes into play.

When Tire Rack does a test comparison they are mounted on the same model vehicle which can give a better overall comparison of the tires involved imo and as I said above our tires overall did better in their comparison test with 3 other tires. It doesn't mean they are the best but I believe most manufacturers do something similar for their vehicles as I am sure economics of bulk buying are important to them as spdandpwr said.

 

I guess what I am upset about is I have less than 1000 miles on my car, and the tires howl like they are 33" Swampers. As the weather gets cold and it has rained a few times, I can feel the tires slip around the corner of my street. Once snow is in the picture, I honestly don't feel like these tires are going to cut it.

In my honest opinion, the fact they are in two different classes mean nothing (respectfully). So they have a contract with Michelin, why not put the best tire they can at least from Michelin.

Sadly I don't understand why they continue to run into price issues. The motors came from a previously designed Civic. The chassis came from a previously designed Civic. I'm just curious where all the $30,000 was spent.

 

Sorry, just trying to clarify your original question but you don't appear to have understood what I was saying. I don't find these Michelins to be that noisy myself and we are way past 1000 miles but maybe I have the stereo louder.

As far as winter goes I never run all seasons in winter unless they were Nokian WRG2 All season tires, I run winter tires and I am purchasing some in the next week or so once I have done all of my research and price comparisons.


If you didn't think your car was worth $30,000.00, why did you get it?

 

To the point about price: The price of all cars is inflating...you have cars like the honda CR-V creeping up to 30+k, the Toyota land cruiser is nearly 80k. The problem is cars are expensive to produce and the only way to counteract that is to create universal platforms / models i.e. what VW does with it's Jetta/Bora and what Honda is doing with the new Accord. The ILX isn't privy to this because its a specific model to North American models, which also meant it had its own R&D costs associated with it.

There's an efficiency of scale when you're creating one car that can be sold in virtually every market. And, if the car meets US safety and EU gas consumption requirements, it usually is able to be sold anywhere in the world. Plus, you spend less money on R&D when nearly every model is the same across countries. To be honest, I'm not sure why car brands elect to serve up different offerings based on geographic regions...sure I can see selling more small cars where there is a demand for them, but putting unique features into the civic and not making them available universally makes little sense. That would be tantamount to coke changing its recipe for every country it sells its product in.

 

http://www.carnewschina.com/2012/07/...come-to-china/

Acura is targeting the ILX for international market distribution. Coupled with the fact that it still shares basic underpinnings with the Civic, the R&D costs should have been less than a ground up launch.

If the Verano, which is a good comparison because of its Chevy Cruze base, can sell for thousands less, I think there is a valid point to question the cost of the ILX. Don't get me wrong, I love this car. Only posing a question to the educated masses.

Sorry to jump off topic...