Having previously owned the RT43 on my 2008 Fit, I'll give this review.

If you enjoy your car AT ALL...do not buy them.

Worst tires I've ever driven on.

 

You should see improvements on gas in a few thousand miles.

Keep in mind that on any new tire your mileage will decrease. There is a few reasons to this. A tire is at its highest for fuel efficiency near bald. It is as low rolling resistance as possible. So this is one reason your mileage will "decrease". Your new tire has a higher tread which has "block squirm". As you drive the tire goes through its heat cycles making the blocks firm up increasing the mileage. The Bridgestone is a extremely high LLR tire increasing your MPG's though technology. So give it a moment and watch your MPG increase.

 

We have the 422s' on the '11 base FIT and they're wearing very well for 3 years of use . They start at 10/32s' and they show 8/32s' . Keep them at 34 > 36 p.s.i.. Got them for under $60 each . We put Blizzak WS60s' on for the winter .

 

Just got the RT 43s' for the '13 base FIT and will likely run them all winter and beyond . If they don't perform that well in snow , might get some snows .

 

Blizzak are killer for winter. Good choice.

Having only worn the Ecopia's down 2/32 in the last few years is great. That tells me you are on top of doing your rotations. Good job hahaha . I actually work for Bridgestone so I see a lot in the tire industry in general.

 

just got some conti DWS and my mpg went down about 2-3mpg

 

What tires did you have before and how worn were they when you put the new tires on?

 

Primary most important is your tire pressure. The higher , up to 45 psig, the better mpg. Pressures as low as 30 psig can cut mpg by 10%.
Second, the weight of the tire is the attribute that affects mpg. The heavier the tire the less mpg. Going wider or greater diameter is guaranteed to cut mpg even if you increase tire pressure.
Bald tires are the most performance attribute unless its raining. tread squirm is not so important unless youre driving at highperformance levels. the change in tire diameter as it hits the road is much the effect of tire pressure than tread compound. but not insignificant.
Most low rotating resistance tires are merely harder compound treads which reduces cornering and accuracy; if you don't drive on the edge they are good choices.

 

This is not entirely true Manhut. If we are talking OE size to OE size stock pressure is best to achieve optimal overall performance (handling, wear, mpg).

Putting pressures higher result in a small contact patch which then results to higher mpg (less friction), but you wear your center section of the tire faster and unevenly.

Bald tires perform their best for mpg because they have the least rolling resistance due to no block squirm. So yes block squirm is a significant factor in mpg.

Not all LRR tires are harder compounds. For example the Bridgestone Ecopia has a softer tire casing then many other Eco tires.

 

as an old retired tire engineer let me assure you that tread squirm has little to do with mpg compared to pressure and weight. The real difference in tire tread designs are not so much squirm as the ability to resist 'squashing' as the rim compresses against the pavement as the tire rolls. Its the reduction in squashing that contributes to less rolling resistance rather than squirm. Narrower tires help because there's less water to push out of the way same as for snow. Stiffer sidewalls reduce squashing as a result of higher psi.
The only reason bald tires have a measureable difference is the loss in weight and diameter of the tire but in the rain really have higher rolling resistance because of the 'bunched up' water in front of the tire at the pavement because it won't drain away which tread grooves provide and virtually no wet cornering. Adding tire pressure up to 45 psi will noticeably increase mpg and doesn't significantly wearout the center of the tread unless you drive slowly. It does decrease the contact patch but stffens the sidewall so it keeps more of the tread in contact with the road. Its why showroomn stock racers use 40 to 45 psig and all LLR tires I know tested have measureably lower cornering resistance. I never found one to exceed 0.83 where most tires exceed 0.85 g. I'd rather have a 0.9 g tire at 40 psi any day and easily verified ny lap times in the rain on track.
Naturally there is a limit on pressure that varies with each tire so 45 psig may be typical but not precise.
And squirm has a lot to do with cornering which is why dry race tires have little, if any, tread grooves. However, the rain ones do. Compare Hoosiers. In a sraight line grooves help even on dry race tires. Even then both dry and wet race tires push a little 'ridge' of rubber as they squash unless they are Indy tires..

 

Ive said it before and I will say it again for those who lost it in the post numbers.

Factory default tire pressure is 80% driving comfort.

Why Honda thinks its okay to increase wear and tear in favor of comfort on a budget car, I do not know.

All I know is you probably will not FEEL the difference of an added 4psi or so, but your car's tires will notice it. they will feel better around corners, they will get slightly better traction in rain and snow, and will keep the car a bit more sturdy.

You cannot go wrong.

 

Had the original oem tires, had about 62k miles and averages 33mpg a tank

 

Well as I agree with some of the thing you say i am not talking about rain or snow just simply the fact of LRR and mpg gains. The information I state comes from years of working for Bridgestone tire corporation (as I still do) and my direct contact with the tire engineers. I also have an engineering degree so that is just so of my background.

I don't know your experience with tire engineers and designs but I can tell you that a tire at higher then OE psi specs will wear a tire center. If you exceed the psi 4 psi or higher it can drastically wear the center tread. It has been tested and proven. The load index is increased and the tire patch as stated before is small which puts more pressure to that patch.

Just because the psi is raised as racers do it to prevent roll over on the tire and maximize grip. This also depends on camber on the vehicle as it will effect ho the tire wears from road race or autoX. Again we are talking how a tire overall affects fuel efficiency.

Again on block squirm. I witness this time and time again with my of my clients customers in the field especially on hybrid vehicles. I can replace a vehicle with the exact OE tire and their will be a mpg decrease in the first few thousand miles. This is because of block squirm as the tire has not gone through its heat cycle and is at its softest rubber from the factory. after a rotation the vehicle typically returns to its mpg seen at that tread depth (not bald). Tire technology has changes so much over the years. For example Bridgestone has spent over a billion dollars on compound development. They spent over a billion a year in R&D to make their LRR the best in the industry. There is a compromise when trying to achieve LRR, grip, wet traction, dry traction, etc. This has been one of the toughest things engineers face these days.

 

As you read what I have wrote in the past few comments what you are experiencing is normal. Your mileage will return as the tires go through a heat cycle. I suggest keeping the stock psi as recommend by Honda or at least what you were setting it at.

Its good that you went with the OE tire since they are very fuel efficient tires. Typically they have a higher rolling resistance then after market.

 

I glanced through the comments and saw nobody really mentioned heavier rotating weight i.e. heavier rims. I went from the base stock 15s with the stock tires "165" to 17s with "215" tire width. It wasn't until I was having a conversation with my dad, that he mentioned the simple fact of more rubber on the road (about 30% more) obviously means more force required to move it off the road. I think my next set of tires will be 195 (if they'll fit on a 7.5" rim) or 205 and see if that helps. Obviously there's a huge market for lightweight rims but it's interesting that if guys are taking it to the extreme, that there aren't lightweight rotors for the same reason. The biggest thing that helped me from the slump of 30mpg to get back to about 34... Slowing down for 75-80mph on freeways to 65.

 

reducing the weight of wheels does increase the resistance to changing the rate of rotation of the wheels but considerably less than the effect of the weight of the tires. Since the weight of the wheels typically has a mass at about a radius of 7 to 8" from the axle centerline and tires typically about 12 " from the centerline obviously the weight of the tire counts almost twice as much ass the wheel. Its all about torgue; the greater the weight the further the radius the harder it is to turn. or unturn. Add to that the typical weight of tires is 18 to 22 pounds while the weight of wheels is 9 to 17 pounds and quickly you can see the weight of the tires is far more important than the weight of the wheels. Decreasing the wheel weight belongs to comptitors on track or autocross running for the roses. Thats not to say wheel weight isn't imortant, just don't overdo it
Now to the other point: as the width of tires increase the weight also increases and as just pointed out thats not good. But you can offset theincreased weight by decreasing the radius, the diameter of the tire.
A decrease of a quarter inch will help greatly toward decreasing the penalty for the greater weight in both acceleration and mpg.
Racers, A/xers, and trackies here find that 205/50x15 hipo tires on 14 lb wheels are the fast stick for the street/track combination. Only the guys who race find the 10-12 lb wheels of value for the money.. The tire diameter decreases from about 23.5" to 23" and it shows. We have many, many lap times to prove it. since none opf us get more than 15k on our tires UTOG isn't important.
(see tireRack for latest info on lap times, weights, and revs/mile, lap times, not opinions count here) Only the guys who race find the 10-11 lb wheels of value for the money. If your ruyles allow even a 215/45x15 on the front will help. Of course that all presumes you disconnect the frontantiswaybar on drivers side to reduce that understeer that haunts Fits.
cheers.

 

First,the OEM pressure is based on marketing allegiance to comfortable ride rather than performance or long wear. Out of literally hundreds of tires on the dozen or so Fits here not one has had poor tire wear or center overwear from running at 36 and up tire pressures.

Second, bald tires or harder tread compounds have little effect from tire swirm; tires with truck tread compounds and full tread do increase mpg on long steady speeds. If accel or decel gets involved tire weight is a hinderance.. What you call tread swirm is really the compression as the tire rotates across the road surface itsel. Any high speed video of tread action seen from underneath will demonstrate, And without tread there is still compression, for practical purposes just as much, hence better mpg as rolling resistance decreases because the tread is smooth. You can see that the tread deforms just as much for smooth straight ribbed tires as squirrelly ones. Because of radial tire construction and the lincreases in rim width the tendency for tires to bow with tire pressure is al kmosrt none existance. In fact because wider rims an increase in tire pressure can result in a falatter tread rather that a bowed one. Tha's especially true when your rim widh exceeds the tread width (not section width altho that absolutely applies.)

Third, find the cornering coeffient of any of the LRR tires and you can see why we say they have harder treads. Softer casings will indeed have a softer ride but predictably is not the factor in traction between treads and road surface. No one here has tried more than one LLR tire and none a second time.
cheers,

 

I just put 4 Michelin premiers on my 09 fit sport about...7k miles ago. Initially two things i noticed.

1) mileage went down, but that was because they were at the recommended psi. I immediately noticed a quiter ride and smoother on bumps in the road. I brought them up to 40 psi (which is what i did on the dunlops) and im seeing an average of 40 mpg

2) the dunlops max psi i believe was 52? These Michelins are 45 i believe, ive gotta look at them again.

Ive thought of going up to 205's next time just because the price on the stock size sucks...plus ive heard it wouldn't be big enough to rub inside or make much of a difference on mpg. Please forgive me if im wrong, as ive kind of skimmed through the previous posts without reading them, but overall im pleased with the Michelins

 

I just got four Bridgestone Ecopia EP422 Plus tires (standard size: 175/65R15) on 2/10/16 from Costco for $82.99 each (installed: $427.76 total for everything except alignment) and I've found them to be significantly quieter on my 2013 Fit base automatic than the original Dunlops.
The handling seems a little better, though that might be due to new tires. The quiet ride on expressways is definitely a new thing, though!