Honda Car Forum

My daughter borrowed my car and hit a chuck(pot)hole and took out one
of my front OEM Bridgestone RE 92's with 27K miles. Still had almost
half the tread left. This surprises me as the wear rating for the tire
is 160. Actually the rating surprised me. I had no problems with these
tires. Well, this sweet machine never quite handled as nimbly as my
Integra (with Michelin xgtv's OEM), so here was the opportunity to see
what this baby would do with better (ultra high performance) summer
tires. I ended up buying 4 750's and an alignment. Wear rating, if it
means anything at all, is 340. Now, this auto not only sticks to the
road better on those 25mph curves at 50, but feels more sure and
stable doing it. Sweet! As a matter of fact, I had to use more gas
just to back out of the garage as the machine was almost stuck to the
ground. Or could it be that Keira was playing with the hot glue gun
again.
Anyone else want to comment on their experience with these tires? I
know they are not much for snow, but summer's coming. I can drive my
Integra in the winter. If my daughter lets me.

"O.Phooey" <jsk2@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a146702d.0404120608.408081ca@posting.google.c om...
> My daughter borrowed my car and hit a chuck(pot)hole and took out one
> of my front OEM Bridgestone RE 92's with 27K miles. Still had almost
> half the tread left. This surprises me as the wear rating for the tire
> is 160. Actually the rating surprised me. I had no problems with these
> tires. Well, this sweet machine never quite handled as nimbly as my
> Integra (with Michelin xgtv's OEM), so here was the opportunity to see
> what this baby would do with better (ultra high performance) summer
> tires. I ended up buying 4 750's and an alignment. Wear rating, if it
> means anything at all, is 340. Now, this auto not only sticks to the
> road better on those 25mph curves at 50, but feels more sure and
> stable doing it. Sweet! As a matter of fact, I had to use more gas
> just to back out of the garage as the machine was almost stuck to the
> ground. Or could it be that Keira was playing with the hot glue gun
> again.
> Anyone else want to comment on their experience with these tires? I
> know they are not much for snow, but summer's coming. I can drive my
> Integra in the winter. If my daughter lets me.

I replaced my OEM R 92s on a 01 Prelude at 36k miles with the 750s and am
extremely pleased with them at 40k now. Vastly improved wet weather
handling and overall improved dry pavement handling. Still have not
figured out what the tire pressure is supposed to be. The installer claimed
I shoudl run them at the max rate 51 lbs. I have tried 45 and now 40. The
latter appears to be a good compromise. Most of my driving is to and from
work on I75 in mid GA running 80- 85. Could not tell you about snow --
never see it.

"twaugh5" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message news:<ShFec.117$uF3.97@lakeread04>...

> I replaced my OEM R 92s on a 01 Prelude at 36k miles with the 750s and am
> extremely pleased with them at 40k now. Vastly improved wet weather
> handling and overall improved dry pavement handling. Still have not
> figured out what the tire pressure is supposed to be. The installer claimed
> I shoudl run them at the max rate 51 lbs. I have tried 45 and now 40. The
> latter appears to be a good compromise. Most of my driving is to and from
> work on I75 in mid GA running 80- 85. Could not tell you about snow --
> never see it.

The tire pressure is another story. I'm use to running my tires at the
car specs, or 2 to 3 lbs. higher. On the Prelude, about 32 psi (Honda
recommended). I've replace tires on both my '91 Integra and 2001
Prelude and in both cases, w/o asking me, Discount Tire had the
Falkens at 38-40 psi. And when I asked the other tire dealer what they
put the Bridgestone re 750's at he said 40 lbs. I mentioned this to
the tech who put on the second set (4 tires at different times during
the same week)and he was shocked and immediately lowered the first set
to the same as the ones he'd put on. I've never run tires at 40 psi.
They probably wear out faster, but may resist side wall damage better.
I haven't had a flat in years, but have lost several tires, and some
wheels, to sidewall damage from road debris or holes. I bought the
tire warranties for the first time. Chuck holes be damned.....Of
course they don't cover the other undamaged tire you replace for
balance.

On 12 Apr 2004 07:08:44 -0700, jsk2@excite.com (O.Phooey) wrote:

>My daughter borrowed my car and hit a chuck(pot)hole and took out one
>of my front OEM Bridgestone RE 92's with 27K miles. Still had almost
>half the tread left. This surprises me as the wear rating for the tire
>is 160. Actually the rating surprised me. I had no problems with these
>tires. Well, this sweet machine never quite handled as nimbly as my
>Integra (with Michelin xgtv's OEM), so here was the opportunity to see
>what this baby would do with better (ultra high performance) summer
>tires. I ended up buying 4 750's and an alignment. Wear rating, if it
>means anything at all, is 340. Now, this auto not only sticks to the
>road better on those 25mph curves at 50, but feels more sure and
>stable doing it. Sweet!

Ya, you betcha pilgrim. Welcome to the world of driving on
high-quality tires. It's gooood.

"O.Phooey" <jsk2@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a146702d.0404130842.2e91f7bd@posting.google.c om...
> "twaugh5" <twaugh5@cox.net> wrote in message
news:<ShFec.117$uF3.97@lakeread04>...
>
> > I replaced my OEM R 92s on a 01 Prelude at 36k miles with the 750s and
am
> > extremely pleased with them at 40k now. Vastly improved wet weather
> > handling and overall improved dry pavement handling. Still have not
> > figured out what the tire pressure is supposed to be. The installer
claimed
> > I shoudl run them at the max rate 51 lbs. I have tried 45 and now 40.
The
> > latter appears to be a good compromise. Most of my driving is to and
from
> > work on I75 in mid GA running 80- 85. Could not tell you about snow --
> > never see it.
>
> The tire pressure is another story. I'm use to running my tires at the
> car specs, or 2 to 3 lbs. higher. On the Prelude, about 32 psi (Honda
> recommended). I've replace tires on both my '91 Integra and 2001
> Prelude and in both cases, w/o asking me, Discount Tire had the
> Falkens at 38-40 psi. And when I asked the other tire dealer what they
> put the Bridgestone re 750's at he said 40 lbs. I mentioned this to
> the tech who put on the second set (4 tires at different times during
> the same week)and he was shocked and immediately lowered the first set
> to the same as the ones he'd put on. I've never run tires at 40 psi.
> They probably wear out faster, but may resist side wall damage better.
> I haven't had a flat in years, but have lost several tires, and some
> wheels, to sidewall damage from road debris or holes. I bought the
> tire warranties for the first time. Chuck holes be damned.....Of
> course they don't cover the other undamaged tire you replace for
> balance.

I don't think the higher pressure will cause them to wear out sooner. Ran
the R92s at 36 lbs and probably could made 40k miles before replacing. The
wide range of pressures recommended by the "experts" bothers me. I am
inclined to think that the factory recommended pressures still apply because
they consider the weight and handling characteristics of the car.

>
> Ya, you betcha pilgrim. Welcome to the world of driving on
> high-quality tires. It's gooood.

i finally replaced the OEM firestones on my 98 civic hatch. rock hard, a
couple plugs in some of the tires, can o fixaflat in one, but still with
half the tread left.

went from the 185/65 14s to a set of BFGoodrich touring tires, 195/60 14.

it feels like a brand new car now. guess i wont be getting that scion xA ive
been wanting.
>

mike wrote:
>
> >
> > Ya, you betcha pilgrim. Welcome to the world of driving on
> > high-quality tires. It's gooood.
>
> i finally replaced the OEM firestones on my 98 civic hatch. rock hard, a
> couple plugs in some of the tires, can o fixaflat in one, but still with
> half the tread left.
>
> went from the 185/65 14s to a set of BFGoodrich touring tires, 195/60 14.
>
> it feels like a brand new car now. guess i wont be getting that scion xA ive
> been wanting.
> >
>
I'm seriously considering Bridgestone Turanza LS-T's for my '93 Accord LX.
There are a lot of positive reviews for this tire on TireRack.com. Then
again, I think any tire would be better than the horrible Uniroyal's that
are on the car now.

The RE950's are no slouch either, even better at blending lots of good
characteristics than the RE930's that they replaced. But,
progressively noisy after the first half of tread is gone, so I just
replaced them with Yokohama db's at 4/32". Well it's a quiet ride as
Tirerack advertised, but responsiveness is much the poorer though not
really unacceptable. Ride is much better too. The zoom has been
taken out of the car. Though it still hangs on tenaciously around
corners, it just isn't comfortable and reassuring. (a '96 I30t).

I think the Yoko's can stand much more than the 29 psi factory
recommended. But it is just compensation for the really soft
sidewalls. Most tire companies will admit that the tire should be run
at 2-3 psi more than the car company says. Car manufacturer is bias
toward a good ride, tire company toward long tire life.

As to the RE92's, keep in mind there are several variants of this tire
all with the same name. Some are H rated, some T, some are OEM. My
wife had OEM on a '96 Avalon when brand new. It was okay for a
cruiser, but hardly a performance tire. (Nor did the handling tighten
up much with RE930's later; the suspension just wasn't up to it.)

JM

"JM" <jmattis@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:de3b9c1b.0404140921.303efe94@posting.google.c om...
> The RE950's are no slouch either, even better at blending lots of good
> characteristics than the RE930's that they replaced. But,
> progressively noisy after the first half of tread is gone, so I just
> replaced them with Yokohama db's at 4/32". Well it's a quiet ride as
> Tirerack advertised, but responsiveness is much the poorer though not
> really unacceptable. Ride is much better too. The zoom has been
> taken out of the car. Though it still hangs on tenaciously around
> corners, it just isn't comfortable and reassuring. (a '96 I30t).
>
> I think the Yoko's can stand much more than the 29 psi factory
> recommended. But it is just compensation for the really soft
> sidewalls. Most tire companies will admit that the tire should be run
> at 2-3 psi more than the car company says. Car manufacturer is bias
> toward a good ride, tire company toward long tire life.
>
> As to the RE92's, keep in mind there are several variants of this tire
> all with the same name. Some are H rated, some T, some are OEM. My
> wife had OEM on a '96 Avalon when brand new. It was okay for a
> cruiser, but hardly a performance tire. (Nor did the handling tighten
> up much with RE930's later; the suspension just wasn't up to it.)
>
> JM

The RE 92 V rated on the Prelude were barely adequate. Lousy wet traction
and dry not much better. Transitional response OK, but given the weak
traction you could not trust them. Wore well though.