I wil need two new tyres on the front of my 406 soon. Currently fitted with Michelin Energy, these are about £10 per tyre more than the standard Michelins. Does anyone have any data to show whether or not these are worthwhile in terms of better fuel consumption? Or is this just another ploy to charge a higher price?? All advice would be welcome.
CG
|
The new Michelin E3A energy tyres are a massive improvement over the older energy ones.
If you have a www.costco.co.uk near you, give them a call for a tyre price. Their Energy plus the joining fee may be cheaper than your alternative supplier.
Several people say that PSA cars respond best to Michelin Energy tyres, I wouldnt put anything else on my C5.
|
|
SeeFive, As a matter of interest, do your Michelin E3A Energy tyres have two wide grooves and one very thin groove? Is the thin groove on the outside edge? If so, does that mean these E3A's directional fit?
|
|
If your tyres are directional they will say so in large letters on the sidewall, usually in several languages.
|
If your tyres are directional they will say so in large letters on the sidewall, usually in several languages.
>
And have a big arrow pointing which way is forward.
|
And have a big arrow pointing which way is forward.
Not if the arrow is at the bottom of the tyre......
|
|
|
|
|
They don't say they're directional unless the writing is so small I've missed it! The few I've seen fitted (including my tyres) have the thin groove on the outside edge. I was really wondering what would happen if the thin groove was on the inside edge or they were mixed up on the same axle.
|
|
The only directional tyres I have examined in detail have had sipes running at an angle from centre to edge of tread, rather than straight round or almost straight across. They are designed to squirt water outwards and would clearly do the opposite if fitted the wrong way round.
|
If I remember correctly, the E3A have a very unattractive inside, you wouldn't want that fitting to the outside.
There is a word inside or outside, just I can't remember which.
|
Following my original request for assistance with this subject I wrote to Michelin and received reply below. Simply put, they seem to be saying that there is a 5% saving to be had, although both types of tyre appear to go out to the trade at the same price. My local tyre dealer wants £10 extra per tyre for the Energy type. Think perhaps there's a bargaining point here?
Anyone like to comment further on this please? My only observation is that with a 406 HDi consumption is around 50mpg, so presumably this means that my saving (on their calculation) is going to be less? Have I got that right? All suggestions from the mathematically gifted gratefully rec'd!
CG
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The tyre price, from Michelin to the tyre distributor, will not vary between
different tread patterns, when considering the same tyre size & speed/load
ratings. Any price differences will be down to the individual tyre distributors
marketing strategy.
The 'Energy' tread pattern range will give 5% fuel saving, compared to previous
non-energy tread patterns - quite a cost saving over the lifetime of the set of
tyres:
Average front/rear tyre life 30,000 miles at 35 mpg, with £3.60/gallon
(80p/litre):
Total fuel=30,000/35=857 galls
Total cost=857 x 3.60=£3086
5% of £3086=£154 (154 pounds)
'Energy E3A': launched in mid December 2002
The new reference for tyre life & fuel saving, having a potential 5% saving
in fuel costs.
The best grip in it's class, on wet or dry roads.
Asymmetric tread pattern design supersedes the previous 'Energy' ranges.
Once again thank you for your interest in Michelin.
Yours sincerely
Michelin Tyre Public Limited Company
|
CG - "My only observation is that with a 406 HDi consumption is around 50mpg, so presumably this means that my saving (on their calculation) is going to be less? Have I got that right?".
If your consumption (50mpg) is already modest, then assuming all things remain equal and you achieve the advertised 5% fuel saving, your money saving will be correspondingly modest. You must decide whether the tyres last long enough to pay for any premium your tyre supplier charges.
For a full set of tyres, that will be £40, which buys ~50 litres of fuel; that is 5% of 1000 litres, which takes you 11K miles at 50mpg. Michelins should manage at least 3 times that, so the premium SHOULD be worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
Michelin Pilot Premacy, You wont find a better tyre then these!
Got them on my 405, Had the backs on for 24k miles, stuck them on the front now & still 5mm tread left!
New fronts last me about 14K miles.
These grip well in wet & dry & last ages.
Tyres normally last me 6K miles because of my driving style
Goodyears, Dunlops, Bridgestones, Firestones & Pirells & ive tryed them all just cant compare to these wonder tyres from Michelin.
|
Thanks to all.
I have just noticed that the reply from Michelin included a sheet of additional info - now reproduced below for - well - your info I suppose.......(with apologies for the element of hype it includes).
CG
NEW MICHELIN ENERGY
FACTS AND FAQs
1. The new Michelin Energy will replace MXT 80/XT1/ XT2/XH1/XV1 progressively size by size over the first few months of 2003
2. Two derivatives ? Energy E3B (smaller diameter sizes), Energy E3A (larger diameter sizes)
3. Improved Grip - particularly when braking with wet stopping distance now markedly better than the best of the rest
4. Improved Mileage - The newly crafted ?textured? faces of the sipes keep the tread blocks much more stable when working hard
5. Improved Mileage - there is the addition of 2 extra tread bracing plies - the tread is more stable, the bracing firmer, resulting in reduced tyre slip in bends
6. Improved Handling - the shoulders are better braced and direct the vehicle more positively
7. Improved Fuel Economy ? Further development of silica-based rubbers give best in class rolling resistance
8. Mixing with tyres they replace ? Best in complete sets but work well in pairs with the newer pair to the rear, it is quite legal to mix the same size of radial tyres of any manufacture across an axle, although this does not necessarily give the best handling characteristic
|
|
|
>New fronts last me about 14K miles
>last ages.
>wonder tyres from Michelin.
U what? 14k? what are you smokin.
|
|
I have tried several energy types, and I have found the Continental ECO-CONTACTS far better than the Michelins, whose sole attribute seemed to be long-life and low-resistance, at the expense of everything else ! The eco-contacts have low-noise, great handling and low resistance - they cost less, too !
|
|
Thanks Arnold2. Were the Continentals a recent purchase? If not can you say what kind of mileage they might be good for? In other words do they wear well in comparison with other makes??
|
|
|
|
>New fronts last me about 14K miles
>last ages.
>wonder tyres from Michelin.
U what? 14k? what are you smokin.
Hi
Im just using the 405's excellent handling to its full potentional, Still miles better then a Focus or Mondeo on the twisty stuff.
|
|
I have had the eco-contacts on for 20k so far, and wear seems good (doing high mileages....) - seems the same as both the Goodyear GT3's and Michelin Energy .... I SUSPECT the Energy may last a bit longer (my rears went to 90K!), but as I said, I think Michelin have traded wear + low rolling resistance for every other aspect ...
|
I had Michelin Energy on my A4 TDI. Grip was poor in the wet. Great wear life.
I would not buy again..
madf
|
|
Just checked my car- i have Energy E3A all round. I have to concur, good wear rate and economy, but grip isnt great. They do give way quite smoothly though. Considering Michelin themselves claim only 5% improvement, i think i would replace with "regular" tyres when the time comes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
