Alternatives to OEM tires

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charged_Up
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 111
  • Views Views 42K
C

Charged_Up

Member
At 37000 miles it’s time for new tires on my 2019 plug in hybrid Clairty. I found a Consumer Reports table of tires with low rolling resistance. The top rated tire was the NEXEN 5000 Platinum. According to CR this tire could pay for itself in energy savings vs a lower rated tire.

I bought four NEXEN 235/45ZR18 98WXL on Amazon for $134.58 each delivered. Price includes shipping. Mounting and balancing is extra.

The tire has a speed rating of 149 mph, “A” traction rating, 1653lbs load rating, 55,000 tread life warranty

I believe the OEM tire is about twice the price.

I tried to attach the screen shot from CR but it failed. I found it by searching for low rolling resistance tires.











Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Last edited:
Charged_Up said:
At 37000 miles it’s time for new tires on my 2019 plug in hybrid Clairty. I found a Consumer Reports table of tires with low rolling resistance. The top rated tire was the NEXEN 5000 Platinum. According to CR this tire could pay for itself in energy savings vs a lower rated tire.

I bought four NEXEN 235/45ZR18 98WXL on Amazon for $134.58 each delivered. Price includes shipping. Mounting and balancing is extra.

I believe the OEM tire is about twice the price.
Click to expand...

The problem with the CR claim of the tire paying for itself in energy savings vs a lower rated tire is, would you choose a lower rated tire? CR isn’t making that claim against the OEM Michelin. Is the Nexen as energy efficient as the Michelin?

We’ve had owners report 8-10% declines of EV range and MPG when switching to non-OEM tires. Maybe the Nexen tire is on par with the Michelin, which is $222 on Amazon. Maybe the Nexen will hold up for more than 37,000 miles. Both tires have a 55,000 mile warranty. FWIW: Our 2019 Touring has 35,000 miles on the OEM tires, which are showing no signs of unusual or premature wear. I expect them to last for at least 55,000 miles.

At $134/ea, you may come out ahead, even if the new tires are less energy efficient than the OEM tires. There’s also the possibility that they will last longer, but then again, they may not.
 
Without a standard, meaningful comparisons can be elusive. CR also limited their testing to “Performance” tires. Is there a standard for that?

Interestingly, they included the Michelin Cross Climate 2 in the test. This is a tire that some members of this forum are using. If I recall, it is one of the tires that has reportedly reduced efficiency compared to in the OEM tires. Looking at the chart from the CR testing procedure, we see the Nexus tire at 9.1 and the Michelin tire at 11.1. There is one tire that is a bit of an outlier which comes in at 12.8. The chart also shows the range of 9.1 to 12.8, corresponds to 29mpg and 28mpg respectively. This would put the Michelin tire very close to the middle, or 28.5mpg. That would make the Nexus 5000 approximately 2% more efficient than the Michelin CC2. The CC2, however, may be 8-10% less efficient than the Energy Saver A/S, which theoretically would make the Nexus tire 6-8% less efficient than the OEM tire.

A couple of things we don’t know are the weight of the test vehicle or the tire size used for the testing. Both factors could produce different results than if the test vehicle weighed 4000lbs and was equipped with 235/45-R18 tires. It’s a half baked report, which is why I put little value on the results.
 
I lost about 4 miles EV range after switching to Mich Pilot all-season. It does provide way better traction than the OEM energy saver tires. So I guess tires preferences comes down to 'drive like a grandpa and get a few more miles and use energy saver tires' vs " drive like a teenager and get performance tires"
 
That’s right there in the 8-10% loss we frequently see reported here. Let’s face it, the Clarity is a car for grey haired codgers. It takes a confident person to be seen in one. Spirited driving and impressing others are not on the top 10 list.

Efficiency is one aspect of performance. A tire that is more energy efficient than another, would be a tire that offers improved performance in that area.
 
Yeah I didn’t do a good job with tire rotation. Fronts were shot, rears were still ok.

I just drove 100 miles in a steady/heavy storm. The tires had way more grip than the OEM.

They also have a rim guard built into the tire and are asymmetrical. The tire now hits before the rim. I never understood why Honda didn’t spec that on the OEM tire.

My car is in like new condition but the wheel rims are a mess.

So far I haven’t noticed any big change in EV range and I’m happy and $300 richer.

I don’t baby my cars. In addition to the Clarity my garage holds a fully original 2002 Honda S2000 and a 400 hp Shelby Cobra Replica. I may be old enough to drive like a grandpa but I have the foot of a teenager.






Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Any recommendations for a summer tire with both high performance and low rolling resistance? Michelin Pilot Sport 5?
 
I just switch to Pilot Sport AS (all season) A lot better grip but you will lose a few miles on range.
You can't have both good performance and low rolling resistance.
 
megreyhair said:
You can't have both good performance and low rolling resistance.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but have to ask, what constitutes “good performance”?

Typically, “good” tends to fall in the middle, pretty close to “average”. It is neither exceptional/outstanding or terrible/poor. We’ve driven the Clarity on the OEM tires for nearly 4 years and 36,000 miles. It has seen dry, wet and snowy/slushy roads. On one occasion I was in the process of installing tire chains when the restriction was lifted. It has been driven on dirt/gravel roads, on freeways at 80mph and on curvy mountain roads in both wet and dry conditions. In my experience, the OEM tire has offered at least “good” overall performance. It has never displayed anything less than “good” performance under the previously mentioned conditions and it appears to offer better than “good” performance in the area of energy efficiency.

I’d say that a tire with “good performance” and “low rolling resistance” is readily available. Such a tire may not be appropriate if the goal is to zip through corners at a rapid pace or set the lap record in a Clarity at the local track, but at least we have options.
 
I don't think anyone of us are taking the Clarity to race tracks or drive it beyond 90MPH. For me "good performance' would be a tire that grips. From my past experiences, the OEM tires sometimes would lose traction and spin from stand still, especially on wet road or if the front wheels are pointed left or right like when you are at a stop sign.
 
megreyhair said:
For me "good performance' would be a tire that grips. From my past experiences, the OEM tires sometimes would lose traction and spin from stand still, especially on wet road or if the front wheels are pointed left or right like when you are at a stop sign.
Click to expand...

What you’ve experienced could be explained, in part, by the torque of an electric drivetrain as compared to the torque of an ICE drivetrain. It would be interesting to see if a FWD gasser such as an Accord, Camry or similar, would spin its wheels in the same way as the Clarity if equipped with Michelin Energy Savers.
 
Charged_Up said:
I bought four NEXEN 235/45ZR18 98WXL on Amazon for $134.58 each delivered. Price includes shipping. Mounting and balancing is extra.
Click to expand...

Charged_Up Do you have a feel yet for how the range and performance of the Nexen tires compares to the OEMs?









Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Well, I’m disgusted! I just went to America’s Tire for the third tire rotation of my 2020 Clarity with a little over 15,000 miles, and I was told that the fronts are in the “warning zone” and are too worn to rotate! How is it that you guys are getting 30,000, 40,000 and 50,000+ miles on your OEMs and I am only getting 15,000? And what does it mean that the tire has a 50,000 mile warranty? How do I cash in on that?
 
Last edited:
@Charged_Up looks like a pretty good find on these NEXEN tires. I've done a little research. Let us know how they work out. An interesting comment in that article you referenced is that rolling efficiency improves with age. So it is common that new tires dissapoint visa vis rolling efficiency when compared to the old tires that are comming off.
 
BrianRC said:
Well, I’m disgusted! I just went to America’s Tire for the third tire rotation of my 2020 Clarity with a little over 15,000 miles, and I was told that the fronts are in the “warning zone” and are too worn to rotate! How is it that you guys are getting 30,000, 40,000 and 50,000+ miles on your OEMs and I am only getting 15,000?
Click to expand...
My first set of Michelin Energy Savers wore out in 20,000 miles. The second set of Michelin Energy Savers is going to last at least 30,000 miles. Not sure why the first set wore out so fast, but I saw what you are seeing with the tires that came on the car.
 
BrianRC said:
Well, I’m disgusted! I just went to America’s Tire for the third tire rotation of my 2020 Clarity with a little over 15,000 miles, and I was told that the fronts are in the “warning zone” and are too worn to rotate! How is it that you guys are getting 30,000, 40,000 and 50,000+ miles on your OEMs and I am only getting 15,000? And what does it mean that the tire has a 50,000 mile warranty? How do I cash in on that?
Click to expand...

It’s a gift. At nearly 4 years and 36,000 miles the tires all have at least 6/32” of tread remaining.

Technically, tires in any condition can be rotated by simply moving them to a different position on the vehicle. Most likely, the shop was implementing a relatively new guideline of mounting the tires with the most tread on the rear axle rather than the front axle. Testing has demonstrated that a driver in a passenger vehicle is more likely to lose control during a rear tire failure than a front tire failure. Hence the change in protocol.

If your tire wear is even, that would suggest the premature wear is due primarily to aggressive driving habits. Fast starts and stops, cornering at speeds above posted recommendations, etc. Uneven wear would suggest alignment issues or improper inflation pressures.

Here’s a generic blurb on tire warranties. Since they are OEM, meaning you didn’t purchase the tires separately, a warranty claim may need to start at a Honda dealer, even though Michelin handles the claim. IMG_2796.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top