Tire suggestions

The Michelin LTX M/S tires are starting to get there. P225-75R15

I may go up to a 235 but not in a 15" rim. The ZJ is about as floaty as I want it to be. May go back to the 215s it came with for some better acceleration, but right now that's a wash.

Unless there are some better all round tires out there it will probably be the LTX M/S tires again. Been happy with them.

Got them back in May 2000 and put 35,653 miles on them. Probably another 10,000 left but my driving style tends to wear the outer edges. (it's not alignment, it's my tendency to push corners) :/

Reply to
DougW
Loading thread data ...

When i bout my YJ about 50,000 miles ago, it had 4 LTX M's tires on it. theyre still on it wearing nice and even. Never had a problem, although in the snow i do feel them slipping a little more than they used to. not sure how long they were on before i got them, but they are a real nice tire. Jason

Reply to
Jason Halsey

Jason Halsey did pass the time by typing:

Thanks for the feedback.

Reply to
DougW

Michelin is one brand I don't mind paying a premium for. I can't wait for my tires to wear out on my van so I can put Michelins on.

-Brian

Reply to
Cherokee-LTD

Here's my experience with Michelins:

I bought a new '89 Honda Accord for my wife in '89 and it came equipped with Michelins. I took the road hazard policy for the tires with it. The guy who closed the deal told me that if we had a tire problem that was other than normal wear and tear, to just bring the tire in and they (the dealer) would make it right.

The Michelins were leaky. I had to check the pressure constantly and pump them up weekly. I took the car back to the dealer several times in about a six-month period to have the tires checked for damage and, although they couldn't find any leaks in the tires, they did find leaks in the beads, so they re-mounted the tires twice during the course of my visits. And on one such visit they even replaced two of the wheels, but to no avail; one of the tires was still leaky. I decided to live with it and hoped that they would wear out soon.

In addition to this, the Michelins were lousy in the snow, even on a front-wheel-drive car.

A few months later my wife was driving through a construction zone and had a blowout. A 1/8"-thick metal plate with a 2"-long spur sticking out of it was leaning against a curbing opposite an open trench in the zone. The flagman and barricades forced her to swerve to the right to clear the workers and in doing so she ran too close to the curb and against the metal plate. The spur sticking out of the plate slashed the sidewall of her right-front tire. She called me and I, wearing my shining armor, rode in on my white horse, changed her tire, retrieved the plate, and saved her from certain peril.

OK. Nothing too unusual here; typical "road hazard" covered by the policy, right? Keep reading...

So I took the tire to the dealer as instructed. I then showed him the tire, showed him the road hazard policy, showed him the metal plate, and asked him to make it better. After pecking on his computer for a few minutes, he said that I'd have to take it to a Michelin dealer.

OK. No problem-o.

So I toddled off to the Michelin dealer, road hazard policy in one hand, shredded tire in the other, metal plate in a third hand, and asked him to make it right. He looked at the tire, looked at the plate, glanced at the policy, scratched, pecked on his computer, then told me that I'd have to take it to the Michelin distributor.

Fortunately, the Michelin distributor is just a few miles down the road from where I live. So off I went with my road hazard policy, shredded tire and metal plate in hand and asked him to fix it. He looked at the tire, looked at the plate, glanced at the policy, and finally said that there was no way that the plate had caused the damage. He then said that it looked like vandalism to him, which wasn't covered by the policy. We discussed this for several minutes (read: argued) and I finally left with my road hazard policy, shredded tire and metal plate in hand, no better off than when I'd walked into the place.

I went to the Goodyear dealer the next day and had him replace the Michelins. I later sold the remaining three tires in a yard sale.

I haven't bought a set of Michelins since, and never will. In fact, when my wife bought a '00 Olds van, I had the dealer replace the Michelins that were on it with whatever other brand he had in stock. We never had a tire problem with that van.

Scotty '99 TJ Sahara '99 XJ Sport '03 BMW Z4

*** This reply was processed using all-natural ingredients ***

"Cherokee-LTD" wrote

Reply to
Scotty

Hey Scotty, enjoyed reading that post and you should do something about that third hand - must cost you a fortune in gloves.

The problems you described can't all be blamed on the tires.

First off, they're OEM tires... that's not a knock on Michelin, almost all OEM tires are substandard. The leaky wheel is a bead issue that they could have solved with bead sealer. It's most frequent with aluminium rims but I've had my share of leaky steel rims as well.

Bad in the snow... again, OEM issue. If you had your pick of the crop amongst Michelins when you ordered your car, you would likely not have chosen the ones it was equipped with. A friend of mine had a '91 Accord, not sure if they were the same Michelins but it wasn't great in the snow either. I do recall him putting on another set non-name brand tires and they were even worse.

The road hazard issue would have likely destroyed any tire. I think I would have approached the construction company for related costs.. water under the bridge now. This is where you have a strong and valid point. This repair was completely mis-handled but I'd let the car dealer off the hook for it. The Michelin dealer should have honoured the claim and if they had any sense at all, they would up-sell you into an alignment, oil change, free inspection... whatever. If your claim was within warranty period they should have jumped at the chance to win a new customer. Instead, they passed the buck and in turn the distributor lost Michelin a customer.

In all honesty, if this tire was replaced within the parameters of the warranty (i.e.. pro-rated for mileage) would you have considered replacing the worn out tires with Michelins from the that tire shop? I think I would have and I look forward to your reply.

-Brian

: I haven't bought a set of Michelins since, and never will. In fact, when my : wife bought a '00 Olds van, I had the dealer replace the Michelins that were on : it with whatever other brand he had in stock. We never had a tire problem with : that van. : : Scotty

: : : : : :

Reply to
Cherokee-LTD

Hi Brian,

LOL! Yep, and it's a great conversation piece, too. 8-)

I'm fully aware of this, and was at the time. However, this is the reason we have "road hazard" insurance. If the policy pays like it's supposed to and one or the other of the parties involved aren't a**holes, then there's no need to lay blame on the tires, the road, the insured or the dealer.

Yep. But nevertheless, it was a royal PITA.

I know, but Michelin didn't do themselves any favors by selling junk tires to Honda to put on the car. This just contributed to the bad attitude I had toward Michelin tires by the time she had the blowout.

All very true. But as I said above, there shouldn't have been a need to hold anyone accountable; the insurance policy should have been honored without question. I paid for the policy, not Michelin, and the insurance underwriter would have accepted the liability, not Michelin. All Michelin had to do was put a new tire on that rim and collect their cost from the insurance carrier. It was right there in the paperwork I had in one of my three hands.

She was eight months' pregnant at the time of the blowout, so if I'd have said anything to the construction guys it would've been to that flagman, and I would've said, "Thanks for slowing her down." Those sappy Michelin TV ads that express Michelin's phoney concern for children riding in cars equipped with their tires make me want to puke to this day.

I harbored no ill feelings toward the car dealer, either. The only fault the dealer had in any of this was that his closing guy explained that I should bring a damaged tire back to him (the car dealer), which was wrong. He should've told me to take it to a Michelin tire dealer from the git-go. This part ot the story was simply a misunderstanding; I didn't know any better and he didn't have his facts quite straight, but it was no big issue. Nope, the car dealer acted in good faith the entire time and bent over backwards trying to fix the problems we had with these tires throughout the whole miserable rigamarole.

I didn't fault the Michelin dealer, either. I think that the guy I talked to was just ignorant of how to handle a road hazard claim. I dunno...

A couple more things that I failed to mention in my original post (I'm sorry, it's because I'm getting old and forgetful) is that the tires weren't wearing evenly, either. They also vibrated at hiway speeds. Some of the trips to the car dealer were for these type of problems. The dealer couldn't find any problems with the front-end alignment, shocks, wheel balance, or steering. I think the tires were out-of-round or maybe the belting was faulty. I guess he could've offered to replace the tires, but that's really not his responsibility.

I apologize for not explaining all these other details in my original reply, but I thought it was getting long-winded (long-pixeled?) enough as it was. The worst problems (that is, the greatest pains in the butt) with the tires were that they leaked and had no traction in snow, whatsoever.

It's hard to say. I had a real bad attitude toward Michelins from all of the problems we'd had by the time she had the blowout. What really took the taco was the jerk at the distributorship. When he started arguing that it was vandalism and not road damage right out ot the chute, I knew that it was his word against mine and that it was a lose-lose situation. The really stupid part that makes this such a pisser was that it was no skin off Michelin's nose at all -- the insurance carrier would've accepted the liability, which is the whole point of the policy. Road hazard coverage is an insurance policy, not a warranty. If he'd just have been decent about it and honored the claim, I might have pretty much forgotten about all those trips to go change a flat for her, all the trips to the dealership, etc. And I probably would've had a better attitude about Michelins in general. So yeah, maybe I would've considered another set of their tires. I dunno.

But that's not the way it worked itself out. We had their tires less than a year, and as it stands today, Michelin saved the insurance underwriter a couple hundred bucks and lost a customer for life.

BTW, we kept that car for 8 more years and through two sets of Goodyears and had no more tire problems with it.

Scotty '99 TJ Sahara '99 XJ Sport '03 BMW Z4

*** WARNING: Do not operate heavy machinery while reading this reply ***
Reply to
Scotty

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.