New CX-9 Grand Touring/Tire Concerns

If you look up the specs on tirerack.com, you would be surprised.
Say, tire A (your OE) and B are both 245/50R20, and C is 255/50R20.
The diameter difference between B and A could actually be BIGGER than C and A.
The reason is in the tolerance of error in diameters. The diameter differences among
all 245/50R20 tires can be as large as 0.4 inch.
I would not take the numbers literally. I would look at the specs on tirerack.com,
if you care about the odometer/speedometer readings.

Wider tires are
good: road holding, braking
bad: MPG, hydroplaning/snow traction
Though, we are taking about a very small differences (255/265 - 3% wider if same tire).

Note also that, in cross-section view, some tires are rounder, others are more rectangular.
Therefore, a 255 tire not necessarily has wider contact patch than a 255 tire (if not the same tire)
 
so i'm in the same boat as many of you, considering what to do this winter for shoes on my cx-9. based on what i'm seeing here, the prada-x looks like a good all-season option. I'm wondering why no one has mentioned the Michelin LTX (http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...=46TR8LTX&vehicleSearch=true&fromCompare1=yes) as an all-season option. Tire Rack rates it nearly as high as the prada spec-x in pretty much every category, although the one that means the most to me as an all-season tire is winter performance, since i live in northern Vermont. Thoughts?
 
Because LTX has no 245/50R20 (GT size).
It looks like a good alternative for 18" wheels.
The thread pattern looks like more designed for snow performance than dry/wet.
 
good point on the 20" tire size. But you can get the LTX in the 245/60 R18, which is what my '08 Sport uses. My concern is that it is a more "truck like" tire than a "performance" tire like the spec-x.

Anyone out there have LTX's on their CX-9?
 
Even if the Michelins were available in 245/50, I eliminated the tire on price alone. There's a reason why the Parada is 4-6 weeks back-ordered, if that's actually the case. After 10,000 miles and a couple light snows, I'd buy them again without a second thought.

A while back, I replaced the donut spare with a full-size 20" factory wheel and one of the OE Bridgestone tires I had laying around. Mounting it underneath took some out-of-the-box thinking, but it's done. I was worried about the additional load on the cable, but it seems to be holding fine. I wish I was as confident about the car itself as I am about the Parada's and the spare.
 
Thats a sick looking tire. Haven't even heard of Nokian before. It says they're already available in the US, are they on Tirerack?
 
Nokian is from Finland.
As you can imagine, their snow tires are more famous and popular.
No, tirerack does not carry Nokian YET.
To me, buying tires is a significant investment ($500+). I would rather base my decision on customers' reviews. Once you bought a set of poor tires, you are stuck with them for years.
 
Nokian are great snow tires. They are not all-season tires. You would not want them on your car year round.
 
The Nokian WR is indeed marketed as an "all-season" tire, but the only one that actually has a snow flake symbol. I ran them year round on my Honda CR-V, and they did great in the snow, great on wet roads, and OK on dry pavement. I'm really not sure what they'd do for a CX-9 though. My CR-V wasn't a "Performance" car, not nearly as fast & tight as the CX-9.

The Nokian Hakka ("Q" series, Nordman, etc) are the hard-core winter tires.
 
I called Mr. Tire and price quoted tires. Obviously they tried to sell me the crappy Duellers for close to a grand. I asked for the Yoko Parada Spec-X. With tax, mounting, balancing for life, warranty, back massage and hair transplant it came up to $893. I am definatly going with the spec-x when I scrape the money up.
 
My tires have 6-7/32 thread depth left. I surely will replace them with Yoko Parada Spec-X before the winter time this year. Can't wait. The OE tires were bad when new, and get worse over time.
 
Some of you folks must know something I don't, because anytime I ever bought a road hazard warranty (from anywhere), anything past the first 2/32 inch of tread, the cost of the replacement has always been prorated where I had to pay for the portion of the tire I utilized before the hazard took the tire out of service. Otherwise, what's to stop someone from damaging a tire with 3/32 inch of tread for the sole reason of obtaining a brand new tire at no cost.

Again, if I'm not understanding, please educate me.
 
I personally think these tire warranties are a waste of money. I have bought/leased over 20 new vehicles in the last 22 years. In many cases I immediately replaced the OEM tires with better tires.

A few weeks ago my wife hit a curb and sliced the sidewall on one of the tires on her '08 Santa Fe. This was the first tire we ever had to replace, excluding normal wear.

Come to think of it, I've had one flat in the last 22 years.
 
And if you're relatively healthy, you don't need health insurance.

If you don't plan to burn your house down, you don't need homeowners insurance, either.

Let me see.....

My home would cost about $400K to replace.

A medical emergency or treatment can be tens of thousands of $$$.

Her tire cost $190, mounted & balanced.

Good comparison! (notcool)
 
We're finally getting replacement tires and can't find the Paradas anywhere! Even the factory is supposedly backordered. Since I want to have new tires before winter hits, I'm looking at the others mentioned here: Michelin Latitudes, Pirelli Scorpion, and Toyo Proxes S/T II.
 
Can you imagine how many CX9 owners want to buy the Yoko Parada Spec-X?
No wonder it is on back order.
The next you see will be Yoko raising the price of Spec-X. Hope not.
 
Back