Michelin or Bridgestone?

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
WhiteMaxima
Posts: 1377
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:04 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by WhiteMaxima » Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:19 pm

Michelin though they are expensive.

chevca
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:22 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by chevca » Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:22 pm

Both are fine tires.

If you're going to sell soon, don't overthink this, save $150, and go with the Bridgestones.

KlangFool
Posts: 10147
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by KlangFool » Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:48 pm

Mr.BB wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:13 am
Check out Michelin Premier A/S
+1.

KlangFool

tj
Posts: 2139
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:10 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by tj » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:58 pm

On my 2011 Honda Civic, it came with Bridgestones. They only lasted 28k miles.


At the 28k miles, I added Kelly Chargers at "Just Tires". it cost me $529 with a 1 year alignment package. These were rated for 50k miles and I ended up getting around 55k miles out of them.

At 82k miles, I added Michelin Defenders at "Discount Tire", which are rated for 80k miles. These cost me $672, but I got a $70 rebate, so call it $600. I wouldn't have immediately sprung for Michelins, but with the rebate, the cheaper tires just weren't that much cheaper.

Edit: looks like I definitely could have saved $$$ by using Costco. At least I have a "road hazard" package I guess.

User avatar
WestUniversity
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:27 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by WestUniversity » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:14 pm

I've never had Bridgestone. I now always buy Michelin. I have been disappointed with other brands in the past. I've never been disappointed with Michelin...

randomguy
Posts: 6284
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by randomguy » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:35 pm

pochax wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:10 am
in my sample size of one, i had an SUV crossover with Bridgestone OEM all-season tires - i did not care much for them. noisy and a bit slippery in light snow. when switched to Michelin all-season tires, they were quieter and seemed to have better snow traction. personally, i think Michelins are worth their price premium.
What are the odds you were comparing say 300 dollar bridgestones with 600 dollar Michelins? Or an 80k tire with a 40k one? Both brands have an large range of products and is easy to compare vastly dfiferent ones. And it gets even tougher when they try to use the same branding "Assurance" for a range of tires with vastly different qualities. My experiences with both brands on the same car and roughly same price is the difference is basically unnoticeable.

User avatar
just frank
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:13 pm
Location: Philly Metro

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by just frank » Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:55 am

Another vote for the Michelin Premiers....I got them this year. I like that they are engineered for wet stopping power when worn.

lazydavid
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by lazydavid » Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:40 am

jadd806 wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:24 am
The Bridgestone Ecopia is an excellent tire. I got 100k miles out of my first set (EP422) and judging by the wear rate on my current set (EP422+) I should get 100k miles out of these too.
There are differing definitions of excellent. I would never even consider trusting my family's life to a tire that could routinely wear for 100k miles. There's just no way that such a hard compound can provide grip anywhere near what a "normal" treadwear tire does.

User avatar
jadd806
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 4:34 pm
Location: New England

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by jadd806 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:33 am

lazydavid wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:40 am
jadd806 wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:24 am
The Bridgestone Ecopia is an excellent tire. I got 100k miles out of my first set (EP422) and judging by the wear rate on my current set (EP422+) I should get 100k miles out of these too.
There are differing definitions of excellent. I would never even consider trusting my family's life to a tire that could routinely wear for 100k miles. There's just no way that such a hard compound can provide grip anywhere near what a "normal" treadwear tire does.
Would you trust your family's life to a 300 grade treadwear tire? Cause I got 70k miles out of my last set of those.

If you're concerned with stopping distances, the size of the car matters far more than whatever kind of tires you have on it. If I had to stop short, I'd bet on the sedan with 800 grade treadwear tires over an SUV with the softest tires you can find.

User avatar
jabberwockOG
Posts: 1443
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 7:23 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by jabberwockOG » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:38 am

Michelin Premier are outstanding in the rain, super smooth and wearing very well. Would absolutely purchase again. Costco is unbeatable for high quality tire purchases.

pochax
Posts: 1334
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:40 am

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by pochax » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:49 am

randomguy wrote:
Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:35 pm
What are the odds you were comparing say 300 dollar bridgestones with 600 dollar Michelins? Or an 80k tire with a 40k one? Both brands have an large range of products and is easy to compare vastly dfiferent ones. And it gets even tougher when they try to use the same branding "Assurance" for a range of tires with vastly different qualities. My experiences with both brands on the same car and roughly same price is the difference is basically unnoticeable.
The Bridgestone product was their Ecopia line and ran for ~$220-250/tire at the time. the Michelins are in their Premier line and got them for ~$200/tire at Costco. they were both All-Season Touring SUV/CUV tires. i am pretty sure they were comparable (they are ranked against eachother in the Tirerack surveys in the same class).

lazydavid
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by lazydavid » Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 am

jadd806 wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:33 am
If you're concerned with stopping distances, the size of the car matters far more than whatever kind of tires you have on it. If I had to stop short, I'd bet on the sedan with 800 grade treadwear tires over an SUV with the softest tires you can find.
That's moving the goalposts just a tad. Any given vehicle will stop shorter and handle more safely with grippier tires vs. harder ones. The Ecopias in question are just barely outside of the bottom third in their class (27th best out of 43).

As for stopping short, I too drive a sedan. But it's equipped with 6-piston calipers and tires that were top-ranked in their category (summer ultra high-performance) at the time I bought them (since replaced by an even better version). With the stock AS run-flats, it will 60-0 in 109 feet. I expect my current setup will do it in under 100.

Actually, looking at some data, your self-assuredness appears to be on a shaky foundation, at least with regards to your particular vehicle, even before considering tire selection. A Prius with stock tires can stop from 60 in 133 feet. I would take the over on its stopping distance with the Ecopias--probably fairly close to The 5,822 lb Chevy Suburban's 145 feet. A small SUV such as the Ford Escape stops in 115 feet. The Toyota Rav4 does it in 124 feet. The substantially larger/heavier Highlander takes 126 feet.

The difference between 115 and 133 feet is more than a typical car length--your car and mine are both about 15 feet long.

User avatar
midareff
Posts: 5725
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:43 am
Location: Biscayne Bay, South Florida

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by midareff » Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:26 am

I tend to buy higher quality tires when changing as the lives I'm protecting are mine and my wife's. Tires tend to last me a few years and I never wear them down to the legal limit either.

BW1985
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:12 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by BW1985 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:14 am

Also going back and forth on the Premier vs. Ecopia for my Escape..

On Tirerack the General ALTIMAX RT43 seems to be an excellent value, but then you'd need to pay for install as well.
"Squirrels figured out how to save eons ago. They buried acorns. Some, they dug up, for food. Others, they let to sprout, in new oak trees. We could learn from squirrels." -john94549

User avatar
jadd806
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 4:34 pm
Location: New England

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by jadd806 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:06 pm

lazydavid wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 am
But it's equipped with 6-piston calipers
Do you really think that those makes your car stop sooner?
lazydavid wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 am
Actually, looking at some data, your self-assuredness appears to be on a shaky foundation, at least with regards to your particular vehicle, even before considering tire selection. A Prius with stock tires can stop from 60 in 133 feet. I would take the over on its stopping distance with the Ecopias--probably fairly close to The 5,822 lb Chevy Suburban's 145 feet. A small SUV such as the Ford Escape stops in 115 feet. The Toyota Rav4 does it in 124 feet. The substantially larger/heavier Highlander takes 126 feet.

The difference between 115 and 133 feet is more than a typical car length--your car and mine are both about 15 feet long.
What kind of source is "carsort.com"? Upon further inspection, it appears you just cherry-picked the link which showed the highest braking distance for the Prius (and cherry-picked other links which were the lowest for the SUVs) in order to craft your narrative. That same carsort.com website quotes a 147 foot stopping distance for the Ford Escape, which you conveniently found from another source stating 115 feet. For credibility, you should choose all data points from the same (reliable) source, to ensure consistency of the testing method. But I'm sure you knew that. ;)

lazydavid
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by lazydavid » Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:31 pm

jadd806 wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:06 pm
lazydavid wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:07 am
But it's equipped with 6-piston calipers
Do you really think that those makes your car stop sooner?
Considering it stops 5 feet shorter than a substantially lighter version of the same car without them? Yes. Both numbers from Motor Trend.
jadd806 wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:06 pm
What kind of source is "carsort.com"? Upon further inspection, it appears you just cherry-picked the link which showed the highest braking distance for the Prius (and cherry-picked other links which were the lowest for the SUVs) in order to craft your narrative. That same carsort.com website quotes a 147 foot stopping distance for the Ford Escape, which you conveniently found from another source stating 115 feet. For credibility, you should choose all data points from the same (reliable) source, to ensure consistency of the testing method. But I'm sure you knew that. ;)
I did not cherry-pick, just selected the first search result that had 60-0 figures. Unsurprisingly, there weren't a ton of sources of performance data on the Prius. But pick your source. Edmunds quotes 129 feet for the v, a Toyota dealer in Canada lists 41m--which is 134 feet--on its spec sheet for the c, motor trend is at 123. Motor Trend's number for the Rav4 is 124 feet. Same source, effectively same result. And the same publication's figure for the Highlander is just 2 feet longer. Do you really think the difference in braking distance between soft/grippy tires and hard/long wearing ones is less than 3 feet?

But NONE of this has anything to do with, given the same vehicle, whether it is better/safer to have tires with more or less grip. My position is simply that more is better. I think your position is that it doesn't matter, because at least you didn't buy an SUV.

iamlucky13
Posts: 999
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:28 pm
Location: Western Washington

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by iamlucky13 » Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:15 pm

lazydavid wrote:
Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:40 am
jadd806 wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:24 am
The Bridgestone Ecopia is an excellent tire. I got 100k miles out of my first set (EP422) and judging by the wear rate on my current set (EP422+) I should get 100k miles out of these too.
There are differing definitions of excellent. I would never even consider trusting my family's life to a tire that could routinely wear for 100k miles. There's just no way that such a hard compound can provide grip anywhere near what a "normal" treadwear tire does.
Sure, all else considered equal, a higher grip tire is a bit safer, but we're not in either case talking about tires that are unable to stop in distances shorter than those traveled just recognizing and reacting to a hazard, nor about tires implicated in unusual rates of fatalities.

The cost tradeoff can also affect life risks if it goes into alternatives like a future car purchase having more safety features or a more comprehensive driver's ed program for a teenager (or less directly, better eating or more physically active hobbies that help keep a person healthier). For most of us, costs like this in one area really are tradeoffs in another area.

Based on Consumer Reports' indicating they typically see 1-2 mpg worth of difference between relatively high and low rolling resistance all-season tires, and the roughly $200 price difference between the Ecopia's and the Michellin Premier, we're talking about probably around $1500 difference in overall costs over the life of a vehicle.

BW1985
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:12 pm

Re: Michelin or Bridgestone?

Post by BW1985 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:11 pm

Well today is the last day for $70 off Bridgestone, I went ahead and ordered the Ecopia's after reading way too many reviews.

Also if anyone else is ordering you can get a $25 off/ $250 purchase by asking in online chat. You just have to order the tires online though.

Ended up paying $650 + $50 tax = $700 out the door
(Ford Escape SEL)
"Squirrels figured out how to save eons ago. They buried acorns. Some, they dug up, for food. Others, they let to sprout, in new oak trees. We could learn from squirrels." -john94549

Post Reply