****Tyres**** who runs what

[AlanD]

Hi,

We are now past 25000Km on the second set of tyres

Dunlop 235/45R17 97W XL SP Sport 01.

Original tread depth 5.6 mm. Depth now on front 2.5 mm. Both depths to the wear bars. So 45% tread left which translates to 45,000 km life approximately.

Had Potenza RE050s as OE but a bad wheel alignment at 15,000 chopped out the front inner corners and by the time I noticed the damage it had been done. So I can not really compare the two for wear characteristics.

The dunlops seem to be a grippy as the bridgestones and the car does not wander about a highway speeds, so I'm fairly happy with the dunlops but they were expensive at about 270 per corner with 20% discount, but the old tyres needed to be replaced quickly so I didn't have the time to shop around.

In another 10,000 or so I'll start looking for something that might last a bit longer.

Cheers

[champ]

Michellin Pilot Sport 3 245/45/17 97W. Have don't about 3 to 4,000 kms so far. Very happy with Michellin. Always.... I do find these ones a bit noisy though compared to my Preceda 2's.

[ryeman]

Originally Posted by AlanD

Hi,

We are now past 25000Km on the second set of tyres

Dunlop 235/45R17 97W XL SP Sport 01.

Original tread depth 5.6 mm. Depth now on front 2.5 mm. Both depths to the wear bars. So 45% tread left which translates to 45,000 km life approximately.

Had Potenza RE050s as OE but a bad wheel alignment at 15,000 chopped out the front inner corners and by the time I noticed the damage it had been done. So I can not really compare the two for wear characteristics.

The dunlops seem to be a grippy as the bridgestones and the car does not wander about a highway speeds, so I'm fairly happy with the dunlops but they were expensive at about 270 per corner with 20% discount, but the old tyres needed to be replaced quickly so I didn't have the time to shop around.

In another 10,000 or so I'll start looking for something that might last a bit longer.
Cheers

I got Dunlops 245/45/17 Sport SP 01 to replace my original ones after 52K and would have got near 60K but for a screw in one for the last 40k and an offer of $215 f&b which was too good to ignore.
Like you, never any sign of tramlining good grip and even wear.

[rxj]

Originally Posted by Canyonero

Driving down through Galston Gorge in northern Sydney, from the Dural side, yesterday morning I hit a monster pothole with the OSF wheel. Being a narrow winding road with oncoming traffic, there was no avoiding it. It was an awfully big thump and when I stopped later and looked I found I had one damaged tyre, with a nasty bulge in the sidewall. Fortunately the wheel was undamaged. Goodyear no longer import the OE tyre, their EfficientGrip, in the size and rating to suit the Mondeo, so I had it replaced with one of their Assurance Triplemax in the correct 215/50R17 95W rating. Beaurepaires fitted the new tyre to the rear, so that the two front ones have the same pattern. There is less than 20,000km on them all and they were rotated at the 15K service, so it should be OK. All up about $350 including a wheel alignment check and the extra fees. An expensive drive to work. So, if you are needing to replace your Goodyear EfficientGrip you'll need to find and alternative.

BTW number two child was driving it a couple of weeks ago and someone gave him a little tap on the rear bumper, so that gets fixed next month. I hope what they say about things occurring in threes isn't true!

If I can figure it out, I may try to reduce the photo file size and post a picture of the bulge in the tyre.

Hi, I can understand your pain. Unfortunately I have found things occur in threes. In two weeks I had a flat tyre, bike rider ran into my car at the traffic lights and damaged my front bumper bar and rode off and finally a large rock hit the windscreen, $1300 later to replace windscreen. :(

Originally Posted by AU2GHIA

yeah i was crying when frosty was coming to the last corner, i'm a blue blooded fan, best race i've watch for a long time

[Canyonero]

Originally Posted by rxj

Hi, I can understand your pain. Unfortunately I have found things occur in threes. In two weeks I had a flat tyre, bike rider ran into my car at the traffic lights and damaged my front bumper bar and rode off and finally a large rock hit the windscreen, $1300 later to replace windscreen. :(

Thanks for that, though it's not really what I wanted to hear!

Well, I'm glad that I have taken the windscreen and glass option on my insurance. I was curious about the cost of a new screen and at $1300, I think the $5 per month extra is good value. SHMBO thought I was being a little extravagant, but I must mention that to her. If this three thing comes true, then I wonder what is next?

[Draadnor]

2011 MC TDCI (90,000klms)
The OEM's lasted 40,000klms (Bridgestone RE002's from memory). Thought I'd go with the Bridgestone Ecopia's but was disappointed to only get 30,000klms from them (although the fuel economy was marginally better than the OEMs). Now how Toyo ones on and have done about 20,000klms on them and they look like I'll get maybe 50,000klms out of them.

[b2428]

Originally Posted by Draadnor

2011 MC TDCI (90,000klms)
The OEM's lasted 40,000klms (Bridgestone RE002's from memory). Thought I'd go with the Bridgestone Ecopia's but was disappointed to only get 30,000klms from them (although the fuel economy was marginally better than the OEMs). Now how Toyo ones on and have done about 20,000klms on them and they look like I'll get maybe 50,000klms out of them.

What toyo's you running? Only reason I ask is I have now got over 30000 km and I'm looking at the same mileage. Only problem is in the wet there grip levels have dropped off the cliff and nearly non-existent.

[Draadnor]

225/50R16 Toyo TEO plus. Definitely worse fuel economy from them, up to an extra 1L/100Klms.

[msford]

2011 MC TDCI. Ran through the first OEM Bridgestone Potenza RE050A in 28000kms. Replaced all four with the same tyres and have done about 22000kms and I just had them checked this morning and they'll only have another 5000kms or so. We're just a family driving around the 'burbs and quite a few long freeway trips from Wollongong to Melbourne so I don't understand how we're getting so few km's out of them. But maybe my expectations are too high.

I am interested in trying a different tyre next time around so any recommendations are welcome. The Michelin Pilot Sport 3 mentioned earlier interests me if anyone can give me more info on how many km's they got out of them.

Cheers

[steve289]

Im still happy with the Kuhmo KU22, have 5000 km's on them now.
Drove Mel>Syd>Mel over Xmas holidays, super quiet tyres, they handle very well & minimal road noise.


4 x Kuhmo Ecsta KU22 (235 / 45 / 17)
Total cost $606 fitted, balanced, aligned etc from Bob Jane.
MB Mondeo - zetec diesel.

[msford]

Originally Posted by steve289

Im still happy with the Kuhmo KU22, have 5000 km's on them now.
Drove Mel>Syd>Mel over Xmas holidays, super quiet tyres, they handle very well & minimal road noise.


4 x Kuhmo Ecsta KU22 (235 / 45 / 17)
Total cost $606 fitted, balanced, aligned etc from Bob Jane.
MB Mondeo - zetec diesel.

Cheers for that. I'll have to give Bob Jane a ring as my wheels are 235/45/R18 and that size isn't on their website, but it is on Kumho's.

[msford]

Help, please, because I'm really confused.

As mentioned earlier, the current tyres on my 2011 MC Titanium Hatch are Bridgestone Potenza RE050A 235/45/R18 98Y. However, I have been searching online for tyre options and prices and when I select my car model details many tyre sites are recommending tyres 235/40/R18 with a load rating of 95W. I did more searching online and have found conflicting 'facts' on which are the correct tyres for my car. Most research has found the 235/40/R18 tyres mentioned as the right ones but some places have the 235/45/R18. What I have found is that the 2013 model appears to have moved to the 235/45/R18 size. The Red Book website confirms this (ie 2011 model has the 235/40/R18 and the 2013 model has the 235/45/R18).

I bought the car brand new but I have no idea what size tyres (apart from the fact that they were Bridgestone Potenza RE050A) were on it. I assumed that the Bridgestone store changed them for exactly the same type/size. Unless they mistakenly gave me the 2013 model tyres. Could that be possible? Can a 235/45 tyre be fitted onto a car that should be 235/40?

Any urgent help is appreciated as I may be needing new tyres as early as this week.

[ope126]

Originally Posted by msford

Help, please, because I'm really confused.

As mentioned earlier, the current tyres on my 2011 MC Titanium Hatch are Bridgestone Potenza RE050A 235/45/R18 98Y. However, I have been searching online for tyre options and prices and when I select my car model details many tyre sites are recommending tyres 235/40/R18 with a load rating of 95W. I did more searching online and have found conflicting 'facts' on which are the correct tyres for my car. Most research has found the 235/40/R18 tyres mentioned as the right ones but some places have the 235/45/R18. What I have found is that the 2013 model appears to have moved to the 235/45/R18 size. The Red Book website confirms this (ie 2011 model has the 235/40/R18 and the 2013 model has the 235/45/R18).

I bought the car brand new but I have no idea what size tyres (apart from the fact that they were Bridgestone Potenza RE050A) were on it. I assumed that the Bridgestone store changed them for exactly the same type/size. Unless they mistakenly gave me the 2013 model tyres. Could that be possible? Can a 235/45 tyre be fitted onto a car that should be 235/40?

Any urgent help is appreciated as I may be needing new tyres as early as this week.

Simple answer...

As you noted, your car is a 2011 model not a 2013; so disregard what they might now do. Open up your drivers door and refer to your Tyre Placard, it will give you the answers you are seeking...

I have just referred to mine and it states the following for OEM 18" wheels; 235/45R18 98W / 235/40R18 95Y. So you have a choice of two (2) options. Now it comes down to availability and price of the tyres you are seeking.

As a side note I would say 45 profile tyres will give you a smoother ride.

[msford]

Originally Posted by ope126

Simple answer...

As you noted, your car is a 2011 model not a 2013; so disregard what they might now do. Open up your drivers door and refer to your Tyre Placard, it will give you the answers you are seeking...

I have just referred to mine and it states the following for OEM 18" wheels; 235/45R18 98W / 235/40R18 95Y. So you have a choice of two (2) options. Now it comes down to availability and price of the tyres you are seeking.

As a side note I would say 45 profile tyres will give you a smoother ride.

My placard states the same as yours; either 235/45R18 98W or 235/40R18 95Y. So I've got the 45/98Y's instead but from my reading that's fine as it is a higher rating than 98W. But I could go down to the 40/95Y's if I wanted to. Which is partly where my confusion started because some of the tyres mentioned on this thread were 40/95Y's and that didn't match with what I had.

That helps a lot, and eases my mind a bit as I was worried I was driving on the 'wrong' tyres.

Cheers and thanks for the quick response.

[AlanD]

Hi msford,

The two tyre sizes that you have nominated are not equivalent in respect of rolling radius. The 235/40R18 tyre has a diameter of 645.2mm when new and the 235/45R18 has a diameter of 668.7mm which is a 23.5mm difference.

Now I'm relying on memory, but I seem to recall that diameter alterations for wheels are limited to 15mm (someone will correct me if I'm in error here) but it does mean a significant error on speed readout and distance travelled will occur (it's about 3.6%).

Are you sure that the two sizes are as you have quoted are correct. I ask because the tyre diameter difference if the tyres quoted on the placard are 235/40R18 and 235/45R17 is less than 2mm and I know many Mondeos were supplied with 17 inch rims - we have one.

The other factor is load rating, I think the higher rating was specified for the diesel engined cars as that engine is heavier than the petrol alternative which could use the 95 load rating rather than the higher 98 rating (excluding the XR5 models).

If the OE tyre was the 45 profile tyre and you have replaced it with the same profile then no worries. But if the OE was a 40 profile and you are now using a 45 profile then the car will be travelling faster than the speedometer reading by about the 3.6% I have mentioned ie 103.6 when reading 100 kph. However no manufacturer calibrates a speedometer with absolute accuracy and they always make sure the speedometer reads high ie you are travelling slower than indicated. This gets them out of being a co-defendant in speed related court cases.

Cheers

[msford]

Originally Posted by AlanD

Hi msford,

The two tyre sizes that you have nominated are not equivalent in respect of rolling radius. The 235/40R18 tyre has a diameter of 645.2mm when new and the 235/45R18 has a diameter of 668.7mm which is a 23.5mm difference.

Now I'm relying on memory, but I seem to recall that diameter alterations for wheels are limited to 15mm (someone will correct me if I'm in error here) but it does mean a significant error on speed readout and distance travelled will occur (it's about 3.6%).

Are you sure that the two sizes are as you have quoted are correct. I ask because the tyre diameter difference if the tyres quoted on the placard are 235/40R18 and 235/45R17 is less than 2mm and I know many Mondeos were supplied with 17 inch rims - we have one.

The other factor is load rating, I think the higher rating was specified for the diesel engined cars as that engine is heavier than the petrol alternative which could use the 95 load rating rather than the higher 98 rating (excluding the XR5 models).

If the OE tyre was the 45 profile tyre and you have replaced it with the same profile then no worries. But if the OE was a 40 profile and you are now using a 45 profile then the car will be travelling faster than the speedometer reading by about the 3.6% I have mentioned ie 103.6 when reading 100 kph. However no manufacturer calibrates a speedometer with absolute accuracy and they always make sure the speedometer reads high ie you are travelling slower than indicated. This gets them out of being a co-defendant in speed related court cases.

Cheers

Hi Alan

I can only assume that the OE tyre was the 45 profile as I went to two places for quotes and they were within a few dollars of each other. I went with the local Bridgestone Tyre Centre. That was about 15mths ago, from memory.

Whereas the quotes I am getting now for a 40 profile tyre are much cheaper than the 45 profile tyres.

I recall from my GPS that the speed is the same on the original and current tyres, when I'm doing exactly 100 kph on the car (as measured using the ACC), the GPS says 97 kph. So no change there from the OE tyres and the current set.

If I'm reading the placard correctly, and I believe I am, then for 18 inch wheels it has 2.0D, 2.2D and 2.0GTDi with both the 235/45 R18 98W or 235/40 R18 95Y as tyre options.

And I rang the Bridgestone Tyre Centre today as they have a buy 3 get 4th tyre free sale on and he recommended the S001 and RE002 in 40 profile as a cheaper but equivalent option to RE050A, in fact mentioning that the S001 (or perhaps it was the RE002, I forget) is supposed to be a replacement for the RE050A.

[manamp27]

The Ford website states 235/45 R18 And that's what I had on my car as original equipment in Bridgestone RE050A. Replaced with Michelin Pilot Sport 3 in same spec and 98W, as per the tyre placard.

Hope this helps.

[ope126]

From my understanding; MA/MB series had 40 profile tyres and MC has 45 profile tyres.

[AlanD]

Hi again msford,

Based on what you have written I'll conclude that the later model Mondeos were fitted with the 45 profile tyres on 18 inch wheels AND the electronics determining speedometer readings were altered to provide proper readings (your 97 kph when 100 kph is being shown is the sort of figure I would expect - especially for tyres that had some wear).

That being said, if the original tyres were 45 profile and the replacements are 40 profile AND the tread width remains unaltered then the difference in diameter is as I previously indicated. A change of profile from 45 to 40 would have some effects that you might not want:

1. At an indicated 100kph your speed would be 93.5 kph (based on your 97 actual when 100 is indicated currently)

2. Service intervals will be indicated after 14,500 km approximately

3. Tyre life will be lower (assuming the tyre compound is the same for both tyres)

4. If my recall about wheel/tyre diameter alterations is accurate then the car would be considered unroadworthy owing to the total diameter alteration.

One of the problems we have in this country is that Ford Australia's Customer Care people, generally, are not technical and tend to refer technical questions back to the dealer, and, in my experience, dealers are not yet adequately trained about the various combinations that imported fords can be equipped with.

I had hoped the Ford ETIS site (www.etis.ford.com) would provide information about the OE tyres, but no. Yes for OE wheels, but no information about tyre fitment.

I'll admit that the information from your tyre placard is interesting. I know that the later models of Mondeo have a much enlarged information panel compared with our car. Ours is shown in the attached picture.

For the wheel/tyre combinations the unloaded diameters are 642.9mm (215/55R16), 643.3mm (235/45R17) and 645.2mm (235/40R18). Note that all these figures lie within 2.3mm of one another ie the maximum radius variation is 1.15 mm and I might comment that the radius of the wheel/tyre combination varies much more than that as wear takes place.

It is also interesting that the placard indicates which tyre is applicable to which engine, because the column to the right of the tyre sizes shows engine displacement information (2.3 litre NA petrol, 2.0 litre Turbo Diesel and 2.5 litre Turbo Petrol). Broadly speaking these engines relate to the basic car (2.3 litre) the turbo diesel models (usually Zetec standard) and the XR5, but these names are now old hat.

And sorry ope126 but your understanding isn't quite correct. MA series vehicles could appear with 55, 45 and 40 profile tyres. I think that the later models had even more variation.

Incidentally, if you want to work out the unloaded diameter of a wheel/tyre combination then you use:

(Tyre width in mm x tyre profile expressed as a decimal fraction of 1.0 x 2) + (wheel diameter in inches x 25.4)
hence a 235/45R17 combination gives (235x0.45 x 2) + (17 x 25.4) = 643.3 mm

If you do google search this sort of information is readily available, in fact I think it can be found on the forum. A useful site is: http://www.rimsntires.com/specspro.jsp

Cheers

[ope126]

Originally Posted by AlanD

Hi again msford,

Based on what you have written I'll conclude that the later model Mondeos were fitted with the 45 profile tyres on 18 inch wheels AND the electronics determining speedometer readings were altered to provide proper readings (your 97 kph when 100 kph is being shown is the sort of figure I would expect - especially for tyres that had some wear).

That being said, if the original tyres were 45 profile and the replacements are 40 profile AND the tread width remains unaltered then the difference in diameter is as I previously indicated. A change of profile from 45 to 40 would have some effects that you might not want:

1. At an indicated 100kph your speed would be 93.5 kph (based on your 97 actual when 100 is indicated currently)

2. Service intervals will be indicated after 14,500 km approximately

3. Tyre life will be lower (assuming the tyre compound is the same for both tyres)

4. If my recall about wheel/tyre diameter alterations is accurate then the car would be considered unroadworthy owing to the total diameter alteration.

One of the problems we have in this country is that Ford Australia's Customer Care people, generally, are not technical and tend to refer technical questions back to the dealer, and, in my experience, dealers are not yet adequately trained about the various combinations that imported fords can be equipped with.

I had hoped the Ford ETIS site (www.etis.ford.com) would provide information about the OE tyres, but no. Yes for OE wheels, but no information about tyre fitment.

I'll admit that the information from your tyre placard is interesting. I know that the later models of Mondeo have a much enlarged information panel compared with our car. Ours is shown in the attached picture.

For the wheel/tyre combinations the unloaded diameters are 642.9mm (215/55R16), 643.3mm (235/45R17) and 645.2mm (235/40R18). Note that all these figures lie within 2.3mm of one another ie the maximum radius variation is 1.15 mm and I might comment that the radius of the wheel/tyre combination varies much more than that as wear takes place.

It is also interesting that the placard indicates which tyre is applicable to which engine, because the column to the right of the tyre sizes shows engine displacement information (2.3 litre NA petrol, 2.0 litre Turbo Diesel and 2.5 litre Turbo Petrol). Broadly speaking these engines relate to the basic car (2.3 litre) the turbo diesel models (usually Zetec standard) and the XR5, but these names are now old hat.

And sorry ope126 but your understanding isn't quite correct. MA series vehicles could appear with 55, 45 and 40 profile tyres. I think that the later models had even more variation.

Incidentally, if you want to work out the unloaded diameter of a wheel/tyre combination then you use:

(Tyre width in mm x tyre profile expressed as a decimal fraction of 1.0 x 2) + (wheel diameter in inches x 25.4)
hence a 235/45R17 combination gives (235x0.45 x 2) + (17 x 25.4) = 643.3 mm

If you do google search this sort of information is readily available, in fact I think it can be found on the forum. A useful site is: http://www.rimsntires.com/specspro.jsp

Cheers

My reference to 40 and 45 profile tyres is a direct answer relating to the 18" tyre questions previously asked.

I do understand that tyres are available for these in many different profiles along with many different diameter wheels.

For example my Zetec (MC) runs 215/50 tyres whereas the MA / MB Zetec run a 235/45...

[AlanD]

Hi again ope126,

thanks for the clarification - can you tell me what wheel diameter you are running?

Thanks.

Cheers

[msford]

My placard is not much different to yours. FYI I've attached it and highlighted the section I was reading from.

I don't mind being out a few k's on my speedo but not double that amount. I'm leaning to sticking with 45 profile tyres if the effects are as severe as you estimate.

Bridgestone has offered to give me the RE050A's for $315 which will reduce to $236 per tyre after the promo. Jax have the Michelin SP3 45's for $291 per tyre with a $100 fuel card promo so that cuts it to $266 per tyre, but I haven't fully shopped around for those yet and I may find them cheaper. I wouldn't mind trying those out as I've read quite a few good reports about them.

[GT2]

Our MC Titanium TD has 235/45-18. When I shopped around I was told that only Modeo & Kizashi arefitted with this particular size.
I ended up fitting Kumho KU39 for $165ea. 5000km and they seem quite good in wet & dry. Very quiet also.

[AlanD]

Originally Posted by msford

My placard is not much different to yours. FYI I've attached it and highlighted the section I was reading from.

I don't mind being out a few k's on my speedo but not double that amount. I'm leaning to sticking with 45 profile tyres if the effects are as severe as you estimate.

Bridgestone has offered to give me the RE050A's for $315 which will reduce to $236 per tyre after the promo. Jax have the Michelin SP3 45's for $291 per tyre with a $100 fuel card promo so that cuts it to $266 per tyre, but I haven't fully shopped around for those yet and I may find them cheaper. I wouldn't mind trying those out as I've read quite a few good reports about them.

Well that's a very interesting placard you show.

I say that because there are two distinct tyre groups based on overall diameter;

215/55R16 = 642.9 mm dia
215/50R17 = 646.8 mm dia
235/40R18 = 645.2 mm dia

and

235/45R18 = 668.7 mm dia
235/40R19 = 670.6 mm dia

This would mean that the manufacturer would need to have two types of software constants to calculate the speed of the vehicle dependent on which of the two groups the tyres on the car fell into. Generally manufacturer's try to avoid this sort of thing because it gives them grief when the wrong software package is loaded (possible) or the wrong wheel set is fitted (probably less likely).

I endorse your feelings. Stick with the same tyre size that came on the car when bought - especially as you have some confidence that currently the indicated speed is close to the actual speed.

You might consider getting the tyre franchise to show you the two tyres side by side. A 23 mm difference in diameter ought to be easy to pick.

Cheers

[ope126]

Originally Posted by AlanD

Hi again ope126,

thanks for the clarification - can you tell me what wheel diameter you are running?

Thanks.

Cheers

Zetec's run 17" wheels...

[msford]

I went with the Bridgestone RE050As again as I needed a new set for an interstate trip in two days time and my rear tyres were a bit on the low side to take the risk of going that far and back (approx 2500kms return) with them. If I didn't have that trip and was just driving around locally I would've run them another 1000-2000kms.

I tried to get the Michelin Pilot Sport 3 but no-one near me had the 45 profiles in stock (unsurprising) and, unfortunately, I didn't have the luxury of waiting. As it was, only the Bridgestone Tyre Centre had the RE050As in 45 profile in stock so it was very fortunate they had the buy 3 get 4th tyre free promo as it worked out cheaper than the Michelins this time around. Michelin need a better promo for these higher priced tyres than a $100 fuel card, imo.

The Bridgestone dealer also said the RE002 and S001 are yet to be made available in 45 profile but they are expected to, especially as the S001 is supposed to be the replacement for the RE050As.

The consensus opinion amongst the tyre dealers I went to was that getting upwards of 20,000kms out of these tyres in a Mondeo like mine is about what is expected for a mix of suburban and highway driving. No-one suggested or implied I'd get over 30,000kms and some implied I might not get even 20,000 kms if I drove aggressively and mostly in city traffic.

Thanks for all the help. I hope some of my info helps others.

[AlanD]

Originally Posted by msford

The consensus opinion amongst the tyre dealers I went to was that getting upwards of 20,000kms out of these tyres in a Mondeo like mine is about what is expected for a mix of suburban and highway driving. No-one suggested or implied I'd get over 30,000kms and some implied I might not get even 20,000 kms if I drove aggressively and mostly in city traffic.

Hi again msford,

This is an interesting bit of information.

I say this because our car is the MA version of yours and mechanically similar, I believe, perhaps somewhat more torque and power in your model.

The OE tyres on our car were Potenza RE050 and they lasted 28,000 km. They would have gone to 44,000km but I allowed the car to be wheel aligned at the 15,000 km service and by 28,000 km the inside edges of both front tyres were chopped out. At that point there was about 3 mm depth on the outside of the tread!!! The realignment fixed the problem and the aligner said that the front wheels were aligned with about 1.5 mm of toe out when they ought to be 1.4 mm of toe in with a variance of +- 1.0 mm. That misalignment cost me about 13,000 km of tyre life. I guess the message here is that if your tyres are wearing evenly then refuse advice that an "alignment would be good" at normal services or when tyres are being replaced.

The replacement tyres are Dunlop SP Sport 01 coming up to 32,000km and they have 44% of the original tread left to the wear bars. And I'm happy to say they are wearing evenly across the tread. So I'm anticipating about 50,000km out of them. And I could not discern any major difference between the old and new rubber so far as general roadholding is concerned. So I wonder if the comments are designed to lower expectations. Our experience tends to be rather different from the comments you have received.

But if you are in a major urban environment and most of the distance travelled is in suburban streets with lots of cornering/roundabouts to negotiate, I guess this will adversely affect tyre life.

[msford]

I'd love to get that sort of mileage but I fear it's just going to be a dream. I'll do my best with this set and be more diligent with the tyre rotation (I wasn't with the last set). Considering how much Hume Hwy/Fwy driving we've been doing it's quite disappointing to only get 25-28000 kms. We've got a lot of such driving to come in the next 12 mths so if I can't break 30000kms with this set then I'll just have to accept that's how it is. It seems that what I save on fuel I'm paying on tyres.

[Jesmol]

Just got some Toyo TEO 235/40 18's to replace the Starfire RSR1.0 that the dealer had fitted, holy crap they're quiet. I no longer need new wheel bearings

[b2428]

Jesmol I too run Teo's they are great up till about 70% worn (if that) then fall off the cliff really bad in the wet. Or so i found. Which must be down to the low profile as have had them with a larger profile with less dramas. I run 235/45/17's. I hope yours run well though. Oh and I only lowish kms out of them so far with about 5000 to go.