I don't know that there is a 'typical' tire that spans all of the Subaru
range given the size variations. My 2018 Outback has "Bridgestone Dueler,
H/P 255/60R18, 100H M+S". From past experience I would have preferred
Continental but not enough to replace them.
I'm sure that John was talking about factory tires, since he has a 2018
Subie. I think my 2013 Outback also came with Bridgestones. I had to
replace them at 30,000 miles and got Michelins. As John noted, there
may not be a single brand that comes on all Subie model lines. I'd lay
a bet that all the SUV/wagon/crossover models come with M+S tires. I'm
equally sure that you won't find any factory-installed Michelins.
Yes, and No.
My 1988 Subaru GL 4x4 wagon came with Bridgestones. They weren't very
good. One winter of them not behaving well in wet coastal BC and WA
state snow (not the toughest test in the world) made me switch to
Michelins, which I had been using on previously owned Chevrolets since
about 1968. The Michelins (all-weather) lasted about twice as long and
were at least twice as good in snow and on poor mountain pseudo-roads,
as the original Bridgestones. I decided that, unlike with my previous
Chevrolets, I did not need snow tires.
My 1997 Outback came with Michelins! I was overjoyed. So, in the past,
sometimes Subarus came with Michelins. I kept that car for 307,000 km
before giving it to one of my daughters, and during that time it went
through 2.5 sets of Michelin all-weather tires. (The third set was about
half-used when I gave her the car in 2007.) They worked fine, including
a February trip back via Idaho and Washington from eastern BC to the
Vancouver area (to avoid a 5800 ft high pass on BC 3). When I got out of
the car in northern Idaho to fill up on cheaper US gas, I slipped and
fell. The car had been driving beautifully ignoring the slipperiness
that careless walking did not tolerate.
My 2007 Outback came with Bridgestones. Because of a strike I was not
able immediately to replace them with Michelins, as I otherwise would
have done. Instead I replaced them with Goodyears, rated at Tirerack
nearly as good as the Michelins I would have bought, had I been able to.
The Goodyears were not that good. A year and a half later I replaced
them with Michelins. Those Michelins lasted about 120,000 km. I just
bought their replacements on sale at Costco. They still had adequate
tread, but I was concerned about their sidewalls because of their age. I
don't drive as many km per year as I used to.
BC has changed things a bit. It used to be that if you had decent all
weather tires on an AWD vehicle and stayed out of trouble, all was well.
Not so now. Go outside the Greater Vancouver area, or even within it up
the roads leading to two ski hills, without snow tires (all weather
tires aren't considered snow tires) and you get in trouble if the RCMP
stops your car to check. So last November, again at a Costco sale, I
bought my first set of Michelin winter tires since the mid-1980s.
They're in the basement awaiting needless re-installation next winter.
They too worked fine in what snow we had this past winter. They're rated
for about half as much tread mileage as the all-weather tires. They're
also a bit noisier than the all-weather tires.
There are some conditions when good all-weather tires just aren't good
enough on an AWD car. But I haven't driven in them yet, and, given such
conditions, if I had the choice I'd stay home, even with the Michelin
I know. That's why I used the present tense in my answer.
David, are you talking about studded tires? Here in California, the
only state requirement (under certain road conditions) is M+S tires.
Not all tires marketed as "all-season" are M+S, right?
I keep chains in my car in case I ever have to go past a CHP checkpoint,
but truth be told, if conditions ever got to the point where I would be
required to put them on (what's called R-3 in California), I would turn
around and go home! I think the CHP and Caltrans actually rarely call
R-3; they usually just close the road when things get that bad.
No. They're not required here, and are prohibited for much of the year.
I used to use studded Michelin snow tires in winter in BC when I drove a
Chevelle wagon or a Cavalier wagon, but the trouble with that was that
they had to come off one month earlier in WA state than in BC or in OR
state. So to drive south to Oregon and California at that time of year
without vaulting over the top of WA state you had to remove the things
before leaving home. I remember one interesting April trip through
Siskiyou Pass on I-5 with summer Michelins on my 1971 Chevelle wagon. It
did have a limited slip differential on the rear end, which did a little
bit of good.
Yes. Here's what the government says:
While M+S tires with 3.5 mm tread is the minimum requirement for
winter driving in B.C. it is highly recommended that you use
mountain snowflake tires and carry chains while driving high
mountain passes like the Coquihalla and the Malahat or anywhere
that severe winter conditions are likely to occur.
It seems to me that any tires that can get you safely up, and, more
importantly, back down snow-covered logging roads (where the RCMP will
not be inspecting your car) should be more than good enough for
provincial highways. But what seems to be the case to me and what the
law requires can be two different things.
I see you've been a Mac user and a radio amateur. I was W8EZE 1949-1967,
unlicensed 1967-2013, and VE7EZM and AF7BZ 2013-now. My first Mac was
purchased in 1988 and my first Subaru in 1989.
The snowflake-on-the-mountain symbol is pretty. :-)
I started doing work for Apple in 1979, so I got a Mac very early on. :-)
As for amateur radio, I haven't done anything lately, but in 2016, I was
very active in National Parks on the Air, and I was one of many hams who
were using Subarus for mobile or portable operation. Here's a photo of
mine next to the Merced River in Yosemite, near El Capitan:
Yes, of course they would -- they are a money-making entity and they
invariably sell tires and have arrangements with local tire distributors so
that they can get virtually any tire you might want. Have no doubt that
they would make maximum profit doing what you demand and would do it ten
times a day as long as you kept paying and in the end they'd sell the
"scrap" OEM tires to somebody else.
Just HOW is the dealer going to *get* the car without tires (so they put
on only your choice and not end up having to "dispose" of the
originals)? Cars are not delivered atop pallets with no tires
installed. Did you call your nearby dealers?
Per John's reply, Bridgestone tires are manufactured in the USA and
Michelin has production facilities in China, too. Aw, too bad your
Whether China, Japan, or elsewhere, quality is dictated by whomever
defines the specifications which the manufacturer must meet. The same
plant can produce low-, medium-, or high-quality products depending on
what the "maker" specified.
You're buying Subarus but don't want tires from China. (rolls eyes)
Geez, get over the prejudice.
That lists some tire brands and their country of origin. That is NOT
the same as where are their manufacturing plants or whomever they
contract to product that brand's tires. If your bias prevents you from
buying tires from a company who has manufacture plants in China (as well
as elsewhere), then you waste your time doing the further research on
That lists the OEM tire brands and sizes for the Legacy. You didn't
bother to mention a model. Yokohama is Japanese but they also have
plants in the USA.
I once encountered someone who said that my Porsche 944 wasn't a real
Porsche because it was made at an Audi factory instead of at the main
Porsche plant in Zuffenhausen. He didn't care that the car had been
designed by Porsche and manufactured to their specifications. Talk
about a snob!
That's like saying a Beretta handgun assembled at a plant in the USA
isn't a true Beretta. At first, the handguns were only milled and
assembled in Italy. Sorry, I don't know the country of origin for the
non-milled parts (return spring, wood or plastic handle grips, screws,
sight paint, stamped metal magazine). Then they started shipping parts
to a USA plant for assembly there. Geez, parts made in Italy but
assembled in the USA aren't true Berettas. Uh huh.
I see the same snobbery about car brands but the snobs never bother to
do the research to see where are all the assembly plants for a brand.
Besides, a large portion of the parts for a car are made elsewhere and
the car plant just assembles the parts into a product. Is the brand
location where the car got *assembled* or where all the parts were made
that went into that assembly? What about where all the components that
were used to build the parts? Where was the refinery that made the
sheet rolls that went into making the car body? Where was the ore
mined? Car manufacture is a world-wide business.
I remember a long time ago when I found out Teac and Radio Shack used
the same co-production facility. Their products were assembled at the
same plant. In fact, Radio Shack had tighter specs than Teac resulting
in a pooh-pooh'ed brand being a better product than the name-brand. I
found out when I disassembled the Radio Shack tape deck and found Teac
branded parts inside and then did some research (although the Internet
existed back then, the Web did not which is only a part of the
Talk about experience. I used to work at Boeing which ordered a lot of
components for the 787 model from other companies. Those parts also had
exact specs from Boeing engineers, yet many of them had to be reworked
at the Boeing plant causing all kinds of delays initially with the new
787 model. Another example is my old '94 Honda Accord assembeled in
Japan. My mechanic told me he could always tell when an Accord was
assembled in the US or Japan without looking at the VIN. The Japanese
assembled cars were just better put together. I'm sure the US Honda
factory was also not supplied completely by the same part vendors as the
Japanese assembled ones even though they probably used the same specs.
The tires come on the cars from the factory. It's not something the
dealer puts on. So It is about the factory's affiliation with the tire
manufacturer then, not the dealer's, even though the dealer may replace
those tires for some customers if it is so inclined.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.