205/50/16 Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max

[vwli]

I am thinking getting new tires for my Fit Sport. For current Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max tires owner, please comment on the followings:
- pressure used
- MPG improvement
- nosie
- ride comfort
- traction
- tread life

Thanks in advance

[cab0053]

looking in the tire section is a good idea. It took me 10 seconds to find this information.

[mike2100]

+1 reason for further site reorganization

[specboy]

+2 ^^

OP, You'll want to add cost of the tire to the list. What's the cost of the goodyears? (IIRC, I think they are pricier than many other tires - by a substantial amount) The money you will save on economy will probably be negated by the difference in tire cost.

~SB

[fmcfad01]

Horay for Marketing!!!!!

Do Not Want

[Tork]

It seems like only a couple people here have them.
Your best bet would be go to tire rack and read the reviews.
They also have a test of various MPG tires. The Bridgestone Ecopia did better than the Fuel Max, the Ecopia is also available in 195/55/16 for $99 I think.
Going up to 205/50's may negate the MPG savings, not sure

The eco tires do improve MPG!. That is where all the tire R & D has been put and not really a sacrifice in performance anymore either. Not a lot of sizes in the Michelin Energy Saver/Bridgestone Ecopia because Europe and Asia have been gobbling up just about all of the production runs.

a cool vid YouTube - Michelin Energy Saver

When Round and Black Becomes Lean and Green

[specboy]

a Quick Search of Tirerack alternate sizes shows all season tires as low as $69/tire and summers as low as $59. If the economical tires will cost you $99, are you really going to save $120 or $160 worth of gas? At 2.50/gal, you'd need to improve 2mpg over the stock 16" wheels (based upon my calculations of 38mpg - my current average, over 50K miles - expected life of tires) just in order to break even. For those of us running dedicated snows in the winter, it'll take a lot longer to break even... (50K miles on a set of tires is about 8 years for me). All of this and you lose performance over dedicated summers or high performance all seasons.

Unless you are putting insane miles on a set of tires, I'd say the Fuel Max and other tires of the same type are not going to save you much money, if any.

~SB

[Tork]

Originally Posted by specboy

......... At 2.50/gal, you'd need to improve 2mpg over the stock 16" wheels (based upon my calculations of 38mpg - my current average, over 50K miles.........

~SB

Yes typical MPG improvement for the Eco tires is 5% over an OE tire!
And remember OE tire choices are made in part for decent MPG so with some tire choices you can lose 1 or 2 MPG.
It is not only right there to read in the Tire Rack test but in some European tests you can google. Plus with the dollar dropping we are probably looking at $3 a gal gas not very far off.

[JDMxGE8]

Want to increase MPG? Ease up on the hard driving. Getting lighter wheels will help too.

[txmatt]

Originally Posted by specboy

a Quick Search of Tirerack alternate sizes shows all season tires as low as $69/tire and summers as low as $59. If the economical tires will cost you $99, are you really going to save $120 or $160 worth of gas? At 2.50/gal, you'd need to improve 2mpg over the stock 16" wheels (based upon my calculations of 38mpg - my current average, over 50K miles - expected life of tires) just in order to break even. For those of us running dedicated snows in the winter, it'll take a lot longer to break even... (50K miles on a set of tires is about 8 years for me). All of this and you lose performance over dedicated summers or high performance all seasons.

Unless you are putting insane miles on a set of tires, I'd say the Fuel Max and other tires of the same type are not going to save you much money, if any.

~SB

This assumes every purchase decision is solely a payback period analysis. What is the payback period on sticky summer tires, or a NAV system, or an automatic transmission? I'd argue there are benefits of using less gas/oil that go far beyond the savings at the pump for one individual.

[runbikerun]

I decided to buy the Fuel Max tire. My goal was to be able to run a 205/16 and not hurt my mpg in comparison to the stock Dunlop 185s. So far so good. It is a bad time to test for mpg with the cold days but I am getting similar mileage to my stocks. I posted some time back about the feel of the Fuel Max at highway speeds. I think what I at the time thought was a weird feel was me just getting used to a new size tire. They are not sportscar tires at all but they make the car smoother and do seem to corner better than the stocks. My handling results are going to also be slightly skewed as I bought some 16 by 7 wheels and this seemed to really improve the handling of the 205s.
As for the cost of the tires. As I said, I wanted to accomplish two things that don't go together well(mpg and performance). I think for the $100ea cost I succeeded.
I hope this helps.

[specboy]

Originally Posted by txmatt

This assumes every purchase decision is solely a payback period analysis. What is the payback period on sticky summer tires, or a NAV system, or an automatic transmission? I'd argue there are benefits of using less gas/oil that go far beyond the savings at the pump for one individual.

I chose this position based upon MPG which is primarily about Cost Savings for most people. Of course there are an infinite number of other positions that can be taken (such as being green - I live in VT... we're green as it gets). For those that are green, the fuelmax may be the best tire out there and have the smallest carbon footprint while on your car but who really knows about the production footprint it leaves. It's kind of like buying a prius over an insight. The prius will net you (and mother earth) more "greenerocity" (new word alert) but at a premium over the insight. who knows how much more (or less) green the insight production process actually is (over the prius) as there may be more payback to mother earth to buying a less fuel efficient insight.

Cost is what people know right now and is the BIG thing on people's minds.... if I was on greenerocity.com (ooh.. ooh... gotta get that domain), it might be different.

~SB

[vwli]

I did not mention cost because the Goodyear Fuel Max 205/50-16 is roughly the same price as OEM Bridgestone Turanza.

[Virtual]

Originally Posted by specboy

if I was on greenerocity.com (ooh.. ooh... gotta get that domain), it might be different.

~SB

Coming Soon...

[specboy]

Originally Posted by vwli

I did not mention cost because the Goodyear Fuel Max 205/50-16 is roughly the same price as OEM Bridgestone Turanza.

Most people won't opt to pick up OEM replacement tires primarily due to cost. The turanzas are mediocre all seasons and seemingly are being sold mainly to auto Manufacturers ( I see alot of them on new cars). My Altima 3.5SE had Turanzas (albeit different model) and they were adequate at best. The OEM tires on my Integra GS-R were Michelin XGT-V4s and were they AWFUL! Cost $155/tire for 15" wheels. Like Most OEM tires, they were insanely expensive. I bought Dunlop Direzzas for the summer and winterforce Snows for the winter and the combined cost was $140/wheel shipped and installed.

Originally Posted by Virtual

Too late.

Coming Soon...

oh damn... my hopes and dreams have been washed away. somehow, some way, I'll make it through this...

~SB

[Tork]

Originally Posted by txmatt

This assumes every purchase decision is solely a payback period analysis. What is the payback period on sticky summer tires, or a NAV system, or an automatic transmission? I'd argue there are benefits of using less gas/oil that go far beyond the savings at the pump for one individual.

Exactly, you bought a Fit and not a Chevy Aveo also, i.e. you had zero interest in going bargain basement. + to me it is not about being green, it is about sending less $$ some of which will end up in a part of the world where people would like to see us dead.

Originally Posted by runbikerun

I decided to buy the Fuel Max tire. My goal was to be able to run a 205/16 and not hurt my mpg in comparison to the stock Dunlop 185s. So far so good.

Good choice! I mean it does fit in with the whole theme of what the FIT is all about.

[cab0053]

Originally Posted by specboy

winterforce Snows for the winter and the combined cost was $140/wheel shipped and installed.

I freaking love winterforces. I get them $450 installed otd though... 195/60/15 and 205/70/15

[Chad T]

I'm kind of interested in the Fuel Max because they are really light. The stock tires only weigh 16 lbs each. Most regular tires in the size i want to switch to (195/60/15) are around 20 lbs. The Fuel Max are 17. Adding 4 lbs per tire will definitely sap some power in the Fit.

[vwli]

My primary concern is road noise. I find the stock Bridgestone Turanza tires noisy even I did the sound deadening on the doors and trunk area. Any recommendation for 205/50-16 which will be more quiet?

[Aviator902S]

Originally Posted by vwli

My primary concern is road noise. I find the stock Bridgestone Turanza tires noisy even I did the sound deadening on the doors and trunk area. Any recommendation for 205/50-16 which will be more quiet?

I'm running Kumho 205-50-16s on my stock rims, having destroyed three of the four stock Dunlop 185-55-16s when I hit a very wide pot hole on a 4-lane highway at 70 mph in Nova Scotia.

I've noticed the car seems a little quieter than stock, and the odometer is still accurate. No noticeable change in fuel economy, and no fitment or clearance issues. Handling seems marginally better on dry pavement. Probably worse in slippery conditions, which is why I've also purchased a set of steelie rims with 15-inch snows mounted on them for winter.