New cars and tires.

Dammit. Stop trying to save a buck by putting shitty tires on new cars. Now, I know it’s hard to please everyone, and you have to consider noise, wear factors, ride and such. BUT if you tout BETTER tires on an up grade to the Off Road model on an SUV, PUT SOME DECENT TIRES ON IT. Yeah, I looked at them before I bought it. Yeah they looked like shit. I was right. I’ve got 7,000 miles on them, and I’m tempted to get new tires. Saw a comment on a tire review message board about these tires – “The best thing this tire has going for it is that it is round.”

I’m not even sure if it’s the cost. I think that tire manufacturers sometimes have a bad design, and realize nobody is going to buy a second set, so they off load them for a song for new cars as the OE.

So, now I’m stuck with shitty tires . Quite literally.

I’m going to try to get through the winter with these, and dump them next year. Nissan and BFGoodrich really screwed this one up.

I don’t buy new cars very often, but I am perfectly happy to pony up some more money for a decent set of tires on it. I hate that I may ditch these tires and add to the landfills because of the bad design.

What model of BFGoodrich are the tires and what exactly is that you don’t like about them?

Don’t those tires have a warranty?

BFGoodrich Rugged Trail T/A.

'06 Pathfinder with vehicle dynamic control and posi-traction front and rear. (controled by the breaking system)

What I don’t like is that the snow traction seems horible at best. Deep snow, is real bad. They load up and turn to slicks. The outside bands don’t seem to have any place to throw out snow (or water) and I’ve read that the tires have a bad tendency

My '93 Pathfinder with no posi did great with just a basic set of Cooper snow tires.

I realize that the new Pathfinder is quite a bit heavier than the old one. And I’ve only gone through a few heavy snows this year.

But… Sheeesss. I would have thought that a vehicle that has posi-traction, front and rear, and ‘off road’ tires would do as well as my '93 that ran snow tires.

Not sure what I’m going to do. Basic snow tires did fine for me before. The tires on my new car could barely pass as All-Season, let alone off road. People are getting 60-70,000 miles out of them. I suspect they are more like a wheel on a railroad car than the soft rubber you need for off road or snow and ice.

I may go back to mud terrains. They do quit well in deep snow, though they are a bit noisy, and are not a good high way tire.

You do realize that the tire that are OE have to be a compromise don’t youo?
If they had put straight snows on your Pathfinder from the factory, we would be reading the exact same rant from a Pathfinder owner in LA.

From My OP -

I would expect upgraded tires for the Off Road version should be a little better than a tire that is good for tooling around L.A. I understand that there needs to be compromise. The tires that came with it are better suited for cross country drives between Chicago and Denver in nice weather. In a word. They suck in snow.

I’ve been jeeping and driving 4x4s for 30 years. These tires have no business being on an SUV.

I’m not pitting the tires as much as I am pitting Nissan for putting crap, supposedly upgraded tires on the Off Road model. I expected more from them.

If someone bought the Off Road version of a vehicle and complained that it was not good on dry city streets, they would not have anything to complain about. I had hoped that the tires on the off road model would be a little better than getting agound an L.A. parking lot.

I saw the tires before I bought the vehicle. I looked at them on-line too. Ehh, I said to myself. They will probably work until I get some new ones. New designs and rubber compounds and such. I’m not going to change my a purchase based on shitty tires on the car. They looked ‘good enough’. I was wrong.

I guess that’s where they’ve got me. I’ll put new rubber on it, tose these into the landfill and I’ll be all set.

Still pissis me off to see such waste.

I bought a new 2002 Toyota Camry with Bridgestone tires on it. Even though I rotated the tires on schedule and followed the maintenance recommendations, they were almost bald after a little over 15,000 miles.

I went to the local Bridgestone dealer and he told me straight out that the car manufacturers put the cheapest crap tires they can on new cars. Even though he couldn’t do anything under warranty (since it was weasel-worded to not cover tread wear), he did give me a 50% off deal on a new set of tires.

I could start a multi-page rant on this, but let’s keep it short and sweet:

If consumers put anywhere near the emphasis on AVOIDING an accident as they do on SURVIVING an accident, manufacturers would put better tires on as OEM equipment. As long as consumers’ ONLY priority in tires is “long-lasting” and “quiet” you will never see better tires come from the factory.

You see people swoon over airbags and crumple zones. But I never see the young mother who wants her kinds to be safe comparing braking distances, skidpad specs and dynamic handling.

The US auto buying public gets what it deserves. Which is why anyone who really cares should take two steps when they need a new car:

  1. Buy car
  2. Replace tires

BTW, I just ordered a set of Blizzaks for my AWD Infiniti FX. Should make a world of difference this winter. I’d definitely recommend a set for your Pathfinder. But hurry! With the loss to fire of Bridgestone’s Blizzak factory in Japan this month, these tires may be in short supply soon.

Thanks. But I think I’m going to go with something a bit more agressive for deep snow. That’s the only time I have any problems. I need someting with deep lugs.

I’m looking at the BFGR A/T’s. Not quite the mud terrain. I’ve had both before, and I would rather not go to mudders. I do a bit of highway driving.

A buddy of mine at work (has a rock crawler) swears by them for his everyday vehicle. I’ve had two sets before, on other vehicles and they where quite good.

The tire has been around for a long time. That to me, says something. I think I will go back to them even though I am very disapointed in the current BF’s that came with the vehicle.

From the BFGoodrichs website. The first thing mentioned about the tire that they stuck on my Off Road model Pathfinder is this.

Authentic all-terrain appearance

Great highway performance plus off-road traction

Appearance…. Highway performance….

It ain’t a race car. I know that. I did order the off road package with the need to use it.

Thanks. Thanks a lot.

The idiots that overload their SUVs and drive their tires down to a nubbin are to blame for this. And it pisses me off.

I’l bet that what you really bought was the off-road “Appearance” package, not an actual off-road model SUV. There was once a time when trucks and SUVs that you bought left the showroom floor ready for haulin and ballin, but those days are long gone. Oh, and they cost a shitload more, too.

Well it did come with heavier duty shocks, skid plates, anti-locs and hill descent control (silly). And the ‘up-graded’ off road tires. So it was intended to be more than just show.

And I’m aware that SUV’s aren’t what they used to be. I’ve been 4-wheelin for a long time. One of the reasons I bought the Pathfinder is it it still has decent ground clearence, and is built on a Nissa truck frame - full box ladder.

PS- Is this the thread where I can complain about the new style of tires that has maybe 1 inch of rubber between the external diameter of the rim and the external diameter of the tire? The ones they call ‘high performance’ but in reality blow out and bend the rim at the very smallest of potholes…?

What I meant to say there is locking diferentials. Well not truly locking I guess but limited slip controled by dynamic braking. Seperate from the vehicle dynamic control.

I recently bought a Honda Element. The wisdom on the Element owner’s forum is “Dump the OE tires as soon as possible.”

I bought this SUV specifically for driving in the snow, so I traded in the OE tires for some decent tires before I’d put two hundred miles on 'em. There’s a huge difference.

I suspect that car manufacturers skimp on the tires because they can- when someone’s buying a new car, they’re not going to be looking too closely at the rubber.

My data point…New Saab wagon, tires were bald before 20k miles.

When buying a new car, I honestly think a good tactic would be to ask the dealer to swap your new tires with the tires from one of the used cars on the lot.

As a dissenting voice, I’ll say that the OEM Goodyear Wrangler SR-A tires that came on my '05 Dodge Dakota seem pretty good so far. No problems in wet or dry weather, and the tread seems plenty deep (I’d guess close to 3/8") after 7200 miles on them.

They’re lightyears ahead of the Firestone Wilderness HT tires that my old Ford Ranger had, and those weren’t even OEM.

Tirerack give good reviews on all OM and none OM tires. I think you could buy the tires you want but save the originals for replacing back on the car before you eventually sell it off.

… I mean Tire Rack give high quality reviews of OE and none OE tires.

(Usually the OEs are considered very poor quality).