You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: V vs H Rated Michellin's
| jim beam | 24 Jan 2008 03:16 |
> It's time for some new shoes for my '03 Accord V-6. I know people on > this usenet group are not all that fond of the OEM Michellin Energy [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > road, so 80 mph is not uncommon. I don't know why Honda uses the V > rating in the first place, unless it is just a marketing tool. the energy is not a performance tire - it's a high mileage low rolling resistance tire. you're not going to gain anything paying to replicate their "speed" rating.
|
| Dick | 23 Jan 2008 18:52 |
It's time for some new shoes for my '03 Accord V-6. I know people on this usenet group are not all that fond of the OEM Michellin Energy MVX4 91V tires, but I have been happy with them. Good snow and wet pavement performance, quiet and good mileage. That's good enough for me. I buy my tires at Costco, so straying away from the mainstream in tires is not an option for me.
I see that the Energy tire has been replaced with the Primacy. It's supposed to be a blend between the old Energy and another higher-end Michellin tire. There is a $30 per tire difference between the V and the H ratings in the Primacy. Is there any real reason to spend the extra $120 to get the V rating again? I do spend some time on the road, so 80 mph is not uncommon. I don't know why Honda uses the V rating in the first place, unless it is just a marketing tool.
Dick
 Signature Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
Quick links: