I thought that new tires were supposed to last for way more than 27,000 miles ("We would expect at least 50,000 miles from the tires that come with any new vehicle...").

But when I took my 2013 Base Fit in for service today (oil change, engine and cabin air filters, tire rotation), the guys at my Honda dealership told me that they would not even bother rotating my tires because they are so worn down they need replacing ASAP.

That really surprised me, since my Fit has a little less than 27,000 miles, I drive it normally, check tire pressure regularly, and have done every scheduled service on time.

Researching this issue, I came across this website and discovered that many other people report the same issue with Fits (e.g. link1, link2).

~~~~~~~~~~

The tire information panel inside my door says that my model's stock size is 175/65R15 84S size tires for both front and back tires.

I need all season tires that are balanced between traction and gas mileage, hopefully achieving a decent measure of both.

I want them to last much longer than the crap Honda stock tires.

Are all tires these days equally safe (e.g. from blow out hazards)?

I do not want to spend extra money on flashy looks.

~~~~~~~~~~

Given that, what size and brand of tire do you guys recommend?

The Honda service guy recommended Yokohama Avid ENVigor tires, which are sorta available in my Fit's stock size. (I say sorta, because the Size tab in the link above only has 175/65R15 84H and no 175/65R15 84S--what does that H versus S mean, and does it make any difference?)

I have seen people in this forum recommend Michelin. Their Pilot Sport A/S 3 line seems to achieve the balance I desire. Their Energy™ Saver A/S line is another possibility, tho by Michelin's self rating, it has only slightly better gas mileage at the cost of slightly worse handling and much worse wear life.

I have seen some people recommend buying larger than stock size tires (e.g. some of the comments in this recent discussion), which I am not sure about.

~~~~~~~~~~

Finally, where do you guys like to buy new tires from? The last discussion I found specifically on that topic is 2 years old.


Thanks for all feedback that you can offer.

 

My originals were toast at 30K. I'm at 45K on the set of Michelin Energy (summer) tires I replaced them with (75K on the odometer) with at least 10K worth of tread left. They increased my average mpg from 33 to 36 when new for the year my drive was the same (my daily drive is changed so it's hard to say now). Handling and stopping is much better than the stock Dunlops. I did have it aligned when the new tires were mounted.

I would avoid "discount" tire chains as these places tend to damage the car by rushing and inexperienced tire changers. Alignment is important too, don't bother with a place that doesn't do alignments.

I've had good experiences at the local NTB. ymmv

 

AM, I replaced the OEM Dunlops on my base 2012 at 26,000 about six weeks ago. Bought your mentioned Michelin Pilot Sport A/S in stock size 176/65/15. Their performance has been great - adhesion up, stopping distance down. For the first few hundred miles the mpg dropped slightly, then came up to what i had experienced before. I'm a bit of a hypermiler and seeing 40+ regularly even using A/C.
Michelin also makes 185/65/15 sizes in their Defender and Premier lines.
I wanted the Defender but didn't think to try a different width.
All these are equally safe, the H and R designations are speed designations for the tire. Good luck.

 

The stock size is a hard-to-find item for either the Base or Sport models. If you're willing to vary the size a bit, you end up with a much wider range of potential replacements. 185/60-15 and 185/65-15 are really close to the original size in diameter, so you might consider something in these sizes.

The original tires on our 2009 wore out at about the same mileage you've got on yours, and the 2010's are probably due for replacement next spring -- it gets driven a lot less. Ended up going with Pirelli P4 4 Season tires in 185/60 size. They've been a good choice: better cornering & braking, excellent resistance to hydroplaning, and gas mileage has improved slightly as well. They don't have enough miles on them yet to predict treadwear, but they do seem to be wearing quite well, too.

When the 2010 needs new shoes, we'll probably put the same tires on it as well.

 

27K doesn't sound unreasonable for the stock tires. It seems Honda selected them for price more than anything. You can tell how nearly they need replacement yourself (for basically any modern tire) by looking for the wear bars in the tread; if the tread has worn down so that they are even with the top across the tire, it needs to be replaced. In most states with safety inspections, they won't pass a car with tires that are worn to the wear bars.

Relative tire life can often be reasonably judged by the length of a tire's warranty. There are also treadwear ratings stamped on the tires, which are somewhat standardized, but also somewhat variable between manufacturers and best for only rough comparisons.

I got "Delta Esteem" tires when I replaced the factory ones, 185/60R15. These are a sort of private label/house brand tire for some area tire stores; I don't know who actually manufactures them. So far, they've been perfectly adequate and somewhat nicer than the factory tires (quieter, somewhat better winter traction, and longer life), and they didn't break the bank.

185/60R15 tires are a tiny bit smaller diameter than the stock ones, and 195/60R15 tires about the same tiny bit larger. Both have more choices available and work perfectly well on the stock wheels.

 

I have a 2010 Sport and my tires needed replacing at 32K miles. Replaced in the OEM size with Yokohama Avid Ascends-- they also make them in the Base size tire 175 65 R 15--got mine from Discount Tire.

 

I like my Michelin Energy Savers. Hope they'll do okay this winter (fingers crossed).

 

Are those the summer or all season E.S. ? Also how much of gain for F.E. did you see ? Thanks , thinking of these for the base '13 FIT with the 5 speed auto .

 

I highly recommend these also.

 

Everything is premised on the cars.com statement that stock tires should last 50k miles.

But this statement is is just pulled out of their behind. Even in the article they state that people are "disappointed" that their stock tires only lasted 20k miles. So they know they don't last that long.
So why then do they persist this faulty expectation of 50k miles.


Set your expectations for 30k for OEM tires; any OEM tire that doesn't contain a treadlife warranty should be expected to be about 30k for an allseason. If it's a high performance summer tire for sportier cars your expectation should be down to like 10-15k for treadlife.

I'm not sure if this is the first new car you've bought in awhile, but this is pretty much what happens in new cars nowadays. The stock tires are designed to 1) provide the best performance for test drives while 2)being as inexpensive as possible, which means sacrificing longevity.

It's not an "issue" it's just a mismatch of expectations.

 

I have the Hanokook Ventus V2 Concepts. DiscountTireDirect had them for around $65 each after $100 rebate (VISA Card) for the 205/50/16. I've put about 18K miles on them and they will achieve at least double that. my OEM tires lasted about 26K miles and were crap. I have minimal experience with the Hankooks in the snow as I use dedicated snows on separate wheels in the winter.

One thing I don't get is why people say that OEM tires are inexpensive. They Aren't! looking on Tirerack or DTD, the OEM tires are THE most expensive tires you can buy in stock size. in my case the Hankooks I purchased are about $50 cheaper (PER TIRE) than the OEM Bridgestones. I could have almost purchased 2 sets of tires. Wit the Rebate I had , my tires were $240 cheaper for the set of 4 (but in a larger size - 205). I had the same issues on my Integra GS-R. the oem Michelins were about $150/tire and my dunlop Direzzas were about $50 less each. And almost always, the OEM Tires Suck - and everyone knows this.

~SB

 

I find it really strange the single most easily upgraded aspect on a new car isn't an option: better tires. Has anyone ever tried to negotiate this? The last two cars I figured what the hell, they have to be ok. They were crap in both cases (Goodyears and Dunlops).

 

OE tires typically wear quirkier then after market tires. OE tires have a lower treadwear then aftermarket tires which is the main reason for this. That is why manufacturers have the same tire line but different models. The su models will have after market which have mileage warranties and OE which do not.

Treadwear is not standardized between companies. The US government mandates all tire manufacturers to have a UTQG rating. These numbers are only standardized for that manufacturer. So Bridgestones AA traction, A tempurture, and 620 treadwear will be different to Michelins or Hankook and so on's UTQG numbers.

 

2 reasons on this.

1) OE tires are more expensive because they are produced on a limited run to cover the vehicles sold equipped with that tire. These tires are typically picked to match the vehicle manufacturers wants and needs of the vehicle. Sometimes a tire can be specifically made for that vehicle as well.

2) you are comparing Bridgestone and Michelin to Hankook or Dunlop. That is not apples to apples. Bridgestone and Michelin are top tier companies. Hankook and Dunlop are tier 2 companies. They are not in the same levels of quality or performance when you compare like tires.

 

This is dependent on the car you are attempting to buy.

The tires are not supposed to be crap.
Even the most obtuse Sales VP understands it makes no sense to put on tires that are so bad that it turns potential customers off during test drives and losing the sale. Rather the opposite they are putting on tires that still maximize sales BUT at the same time without maximizing price.

But, they also know the audience, and they made the decision that the primary market for the FIT would be OK with the performance of the tire choice they put out there, and would end up losing more money due to increased price by providing either a better tire, or by tire option.
(Go ahead and negotiate this with your dealer if you can sell the tires right off your new car back to them. Everything is negotiable, some will bite. I've heard of people selling the OEM wheels and tires right off the car immediately back to the dealer).



If you bought a more expensive expensive sports car, where performance outweighs cost to the market segment that is going to buy the car, then you will see that the OEM rubber provided should be better.

You will also see the following. Perhaps in one forum people bitch and moan saying their OEM Michelin tire sucks switch to Continental.

Then you go to a different car forum, where they have that exact model Continental tire, and the users there bitch and moan and say switch to the exact Michelin model the other car forum said sucks.

Perhaps they just forget what their car was like new, and any new rubber is going to feel better than their balding, worn out tires.

So.... sometimes the grass is just greener on the other side, and people who bought a tire, end up self-justifying that the tire they paid for is better.

 

Guys: thanks for all of your numerous responses. Much appreciated!

I was thinking that no one was responding to me, because I have never gotten email notification of any of your replies, even tho my preference was set to get instant email notification on subscribed threads, and to always make my posts be subscribed threads. But I guess that that functionality is not working for me for some reason... Anoyone else have that problem on this website?

 

Thanks. "speed designation" was the keywords that I needed to find this webpage which explains what the numbers and letter mean (numbers are the load index, letter is the speed rating).

 

I think that I am going to stick with the stock size.

I also think that I am going to take the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3 tires over the Yokohama Avid ENVigor tires. Reason: the Pilot Sports are a newer tire, and get better ratings (4.7) than the Yokohamas (3.6). Only advantage I see to the Yokohamas is that they are slightly (~$7) cheaper; I'll pay up for better quality instead.

A quick web search found these as the seemingly best prices on the Michelins: discountedwheelwarehouse or tirerack.

If anyone knows where to get a better price, I would love to hear.

Ideal, actually, would be a local store which price matches and is known for doing quality tire installations. Anyone have any recommendations? You guys like Mr. Tire or Tire Barn?

 

You need to be careful to consider the out the door price; cause end of the day you're not installing your own tires, it's the fully mounted price you care about. You need to be careful that trying to save the last dollar for tires but ends up costing you more when you go get it installed.

Tirerack is well known. They're going to partner with your local installer anyway, but mounting prices still vary on your local installer. I haven't heard of the other places you mentioned.

Anything is up to negotiation you need to call around.
Also your time is important; you may save $10, but perhaps it's at a shop that 30miles away from you and needs your car for 6hours.

 

The "R" does not indicate speed rating in a tire. It stands for "Radial". The "H" indicates the speed of this tire.

Ex) 205/50R15 86V, the 86 would be the load index and the V indicates the vehicle speed (tire will be go for 149 mph).