These were the latest Bridgestones, that had received very good reviews. I bought them because I wanted tyres with better wear rates than the Dunlop BlueResponses I’d fiitted all round a couple of years prior. The BlueResponses were great but they wore fast. So I went for the Bridgestones. They performed well in the few hundred miles that I drove on them. Somewhat rougher riding than Dunlops, but I guess that’s the other side of the equations of compromises that one makes when choosing tyres.
Not sure that 6 year old tyres fitted on a car that has done most of its action sat on it’s a*se is a valid reason to automatically sniff at everything from the tyremaker.
Get tyres from ATS, they give you insurance on them £7 each - ifthe tyre gets wasted 6-8mm free replacement and then it’s a slding scale of costs (less than full price) dependant on the amount of tread left and free puncture repairs.
Just a small personal sample from a wide and varied experience, also reinforced by reports from many others I trust.
1960s Michelin had the same problem, lasted forever but not much wet grip, Fifty years later the new Michelin are much better, but unfortunately the BS seem to be worse than before.
I’m very, very lucky I can at long last afford to vote with my feet, less need for hard haggling.
In my experience it went on much longer than that, well into the 70s at least. Yes, X, ZX, XZX etc. dreadful wet grip and impossible to wear out. The next time I had Michelins on a car was around 2000 and I couldn’t believe how much better the Pilot range were.
JS
Are references to tyres 50 years ago actually relevant ?
As it happens, I do remember the X, ZX XZX. Every one of them were, as I recall , tyres for the family saloon market, in much the same way as the Goodyear G800 was, of similar capabilities. I didn’t drive family saloons. For much of the seventies I drove a 1967 TR5 PI. The factory fitted tyre for that, and also the later TR6, was the Michelin XAS. That was a high performance tyre. The XAS’s suited the car well, and I never had any complaints about them.
I never said the references were relevant. I was merely responding to Richard’s comment about Michelin tyres of the 1960s. Having had them on a couple of Fords, I thought they were verging on dangerous in the wet, not that any other makes were exactly sparkling performers, by modern standards. Tyres have moved on immeasurably since that time. Quite why the abilities of the XAS were absent from their other products, I have no idea.
JS
It is not a brand I have ever heard of. However if I search for them, the price of the tyre is pretty much the cheapest you can get for the size, (any size) which possibly tells you all you need to know.
I guess it depends on the tyres and their condition.
I mean, say you buy a second hand car with Pilot Sport 4 all around on it, with a solid 6mm left and a sub year manufacture date, that’s a lot different, say, to the second hand car having different types of Kumhos on it with sub 3mm left.
It is compulsory to advise -sombre face, serious voice- that you must always buy premium tyres as not to do so will involve your imminent demise .But I wonder … the most fun I had was when I drove sheds like an Escort Van and a Mk 3 Midget on iffy tyres of dubious provenance whose defining characteristic was poor grip in the dry , and even poorer in the wet . I learned a lot about oversteer . The only firm brave enough to adopt this philosophy is Toyota (OK Subaru too ) for the GT86/ BRZ , which is shod with hard tyres normally found on a Prius. So what do many owners do - swap 'em for grippy ones , thus sort of missing the point of the car in the first place.
Obviously I don’t practice what I preach, as I binned the Bridgestones and changed to PS4s on my MX5. In mitigation , that was because the Bridgestones were rubbish in the wet - the one condition where grip really is important. Rest of the time most of us never get near the limit of grip most of the time , even on rubbish tyres . Maybe I ought to find some cheap crossplies - for old times’ sake…?
I always thought this was arguable, although there’s nothing wrong with getting the best tyres you can… Get four tyres of the same make,( pretty much any make that you’ve heard of) and condition and set them to the correct pressures, and drive within their limits. When a driver loses control and blames the tyres, it’s basically driver error with very few exceptions.
Tyres and cars are so good now especially with ABS and ESP that even the most insensitive bimblers can go years without being aware of any kind of accidental skid or how close they might be to disaster (watch people doing 80-90 in heavy rain on any motorway). When it eventually happens it can’t be their fault, even though for years they have been braking round corners, accelerating before they’ve got the car on a straight course, and making no allowance for road conditions - all things that would have got them into trouble in a Morris Marina with 50hp in even slightly damp weather.
There was a thread on one of the MX-5 FB groups recently by a chap who had been “drifting” his new Mk4 in the dry. Knowing this to be basically impossible I asked if he was using licorice allsorts as tyres. Today there is an update - he really had been drifting - it turns out the tyres were at 37-39 psi. Good skills!
I liken the desire to upgrade the tyres, suspension, brakes etc to the chap who used to listen to and enjoy music but then got into his hi-fi. Sadly he no longer listens to the music, just his equipment.
Take heed, it is an expensive slippery slope.
Imo the standard s001’s on mine are unpredictable in the dry, worse in the wet, and very noisy. Just my take on them, I’m no expert, and can only compare them with tyres I’ve had on heavier more powerful cars in the past, most of which have been better.
Roll on the day I find some sensibly priced nice looking wheels that fit over Brembo brakes so I can get some decent tyres, PS4’s or F1’s.
Yes, fair enough. I’m in the minority I know as many people seem to speak lowly of them.
Noise wise i find them fine. Granted I’ve got the top down 95%+ of the time, so I guess all of them will be similar. However, the s001s have a 68db rating, which is less than the more talked about alternatives (Asymmetric 5s, PS4 etc etc).
Touch wood I’ve found them fine. In the dry fine thus far (13K miles). I don’t drive much in the wet. Of course hard to avoid over winter with damp floors given i try to give the car a go at least once a week then to keep it ticking over.
Bit of an outlier but many of the trans failures on the US forum have had sticky tyres on them. To eliminate that albeit wide of the mark variable, I think I’ll stick with them when I replace them.
I kind of find them fine thus far for what I use them for. And I’m happy with the car in general.
Honestly, I have no idea if the Brembos work better than the standard brakes.
Looking at them side by side I would say they have a larger pad area, which is a good thing, and more pistons, which is also good. I guess in extremis they would be better, but on the road, I doubt if there’s much difference.
they do bite well, are very easily modulated, plenty of feel, and no fade,
Oh and they look good .
.