I have owned both a first and second generation fit and both came with Dunlap tiles tires. The Dunlap tires were very noises and didn't handle all that good so I put Yokohama avid on which made both fits drive much more pleasurable.

Anyone else have similar experience?

Are the Dunlap sp31 still the oem tire on the 2015 fit...hope not!

 

Stock tires usually aren't the best, what's new.

 

The cars shown at the press preview were shod with Bridgestone EL470 tires, this is one of 2 tires that have been OEM on 2009-2013 fits. Whether they are still using the Dunlop SP sport 7000's I don't know for sure, but Tire rack only shows the EL470 as the OEM tire for the 2015 Fit.

There are many better tire choices depending on your priorities, but the OEM tires do help fuel economy and many higher performance tires will decrease fuel economy.

 

I've gone through two sets of "Maxxis Victra MA-Z4S" Tires, I rather like them. As far as the new Fit, I don't remember what brand was on the 2015s I was driving, but road noise was very low and grip felt pretty good

 

Nothing wrong with Dunlop 7000 series. Have 51K miles on 2010 Fit and still at least 50% tread left. The car is driven 90% hwy.

 

Wow that is very good wear- I just replaced the tires on my 2010 Fit the other day - they were almost worn at 32,000 miles. I do mostly in town and have done a bit of dirt & gravel roads.

 

Indeed that is very good wear rate! I needed to replace my SP 7000 tires on both my Fit and my CRZ at 32,000 miles. And that was with rotation every 10,000 miles. They were not the greatest tires in terms of performance, but I did not mind them as much as many others here have expressed they did.

I will note that when I replaced them on my Fit with slightly larger 195/55/16, I lost about 1.5 MPGs, 0.5 of which is a result of the larger circumference that causes a 1.5% error in my odometer! but the other 1 MPG loss is a result of the wider tread width and higher rolling resistance.

 

Rotated only left front and rear as the drivers side showed wear at the 10k mile check. Passenger side had even front and back, maybe I should lose a few pounds.

 

The car is driven with only one person inside. Gravity is my brake pad. I take turns slowly. I rotate about every 10K miles. I monitor the tire pressure to be between 32-35 psi. All hwy in these conditions, the tires would probably go 80K miles or more.

 

Just curious, with that type of driving style, what kind if fuel economy do you average?

 

I don't always get a chance to do long, uninterrupted hwy drives anymore. My commute to work on LA's freeway involves a lot of stop and go and in these conditions the car consistently gets 39-40 mpg. When I drove it at 45-50 mph to Yellowstone few yrs ago, I got as far 53+ mpg. The lowest I've ever gotten on a tank of gas was 36 mpg and that's a lot of city driving or 80+ run while in Nevada's back country.

 

39-40MPG in LA traffic is nothing to sneeze at, but I had a feeling that you had achieved some spectacular fuel economy based on the driving style you described. 55+MPG

 

The car has a potential of being efficient given the right conditions. The drives where I've seen the most numbers (calculated over at least one fill up) were probably influenced by favorable wind as well as moderate and consistent speed. I remember rolling at 45 mph in rural Utah and seeing the trip meter to display as high as 58 mpg but the real average for the tank was around 51-53. I don't think there is anything surprising about it. If the fit ran in vacuum, i.e. without air resistance at, say, 45 mph, on a smooth glass surface, with tires at 37 psi, with one person inside, and no speech change for the entire tank, I bet it would get high 50s low 60s miles per gallon.