It’s a gift. At nearly 4 years and 36,000 miles the tires all have at least 6/32” of tread remaining.
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. View attachment 20883
I checked the Michelin website, and since 2017 they no longer offer mileage warranties on original equipment tires.
I've somehow burned though two sets of tires. I don't drive fast and mostly just kids to school and back home for work. A few road trips and rotated every 6k on the dot.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?
First set of oem uneven wear at under 20k.
Not sure but afaik they were supposed to do alignment as wellDid the uneven wear occur while the tires were on the front axle? If so, there could be an alignment issue. In that case, rotating tires will just cause uneven wear on the other two tires in short order.
Uneven wear at 6K or 10K miles is a red flag warning. The collective finger is being pointed at the tires. Maybe Honda is buying some China-bomb Michelin knock-offs? That doesn’t seem likely. And a QC issue at Michelin or Honda shipping off cars with the alignment out of spec seem equally unlikely. Yet we have numerous reports of members needing to replace tires at 15K-30K miles.
Not sure but afaik they were supposed to do alignment as well
I'm feeling better and better about this Nexen N5000 Platinum tire. I've read alot of good reviews about them on the internet and it's predesessor, the N5000 Plus. Sam's Club is offerring the N5000 Plartinum in 235/45R18/XL 98W for 127.88 plus $20 for installation. I'm going to see if America's Tire will do a price match. Also, I checked the manufacturer's web site and they are not made in China. They are comming from either a plant in Ohio or one in South Korea.
Agreed! I've probably owned 30 sets of tires on my vehicles over the years. Lots of Michelin, Perelli, Continental and Goodyear, some of which were OEM. But I've also tried some of the less expensive Asian manufacturers life Kuhmo and Falken and I've always been impressed with the quality for the price.There’s certainly no point in buying expensive tires if the car is going to eat them every 15,000 miles.
Agreed! I've probably owned 30 sets of tires on my vehicles over the years. Lots of Michelin, Perelli, Continental and Goodyear, some of which were OEM. But I've also tried some of the less expensive Asian manufacturers life Kuhmo and Falken and I've always been impressed with the quality for the price.
No question that Michelin tires are the best. But that can't justify spending twice as much than a competitor tire that is 80% or 90% as good.
I just put a set of Michelin Cross Climate 2 (19") on my wife's Tesla Model 3, and so far it seems to be an improvement on the OEM Continentals: smoother ride, less noise, and a much longer projected life.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 am very picky about seats too. You must have sat in the base model Clarity. The front seat of the Touring model is a huge upgrade over the base Clarity. For tall people, the base model seat doesn't work at all IMHO.PS: I nearly bought a Clarity hybrid when they were first introduced... until I found I couldn't get comfortable in the front seat.
Elaborate charts that show a prospective net difference in mileage of ~1 MPG seem to me a waste of time. If money is important (of course it is), calculate total cost of ownership, including projected mileage rating (e.g. 30K vs 60K). If you care about braking distance, wet and dry traction, then rolling resistance figures will become less important.
Finally, based on personal experience, just about any BEV is a better choice than just about any hybrid, but, of course, YMMV.
PS: I nearly bought a Clarity hybrid when they were first introduced... until I found I couldn't get comfortable in the front seat.
@Landshark - I take Consumer Reports at its face value anytime over your pseud-sceptisimsm. You have no standards and ,as it turns out, you had no clue that Consumer Reports developes its own standard stick with which they compare tires.I recently had the rear wheels off the Jeep PHEV (Grand Cherokee 4xe) while installing a trailer hitch. It was thrilling to discover that the OEM Michelin Primacy tires have the words “Total Performance” displayed on the sidewall. Look no further if you are seeking total performance.
Think about it. Do not reply, please. Think.