Toyo A36 tire blew up; Toyo website does not list A36; what to buy?

[Jack Rabbit]

Ime, based on 4wd trucks and AWD SUVs that have outlasted their rusted frames, where the engines and transmissions were still functioning , albeit aged...

Have never had transmission or differential problems. Always ran the same brand and type tire on all 4 wheels but never paid tires tread depth much attention. If flat was unrepairable, swapped a new one on and kept going. Maybe there is some unseen minor damage done over a long period of time... But no immediate damage.

Imo there would be more damage running on that stupid Mazda undersized spare for 50 miles in search of civilization than any long-term damage from a few mm difference. My vehicles and tranny's lasted between 12 and 14 plus years and 150,000 to over 220,000 miles with no major tranny damage.

But then again maybe I just got lucky or maybe the ford tranny's we're just built better.

Lastly did you notice most of the websites that predict doom and gloom are tire dealers and not manufacturers ? Better replace all 4 or something bad will happen they all say.

 

[onerpm]

You have driven 22K miles and your A36’s have used only 1/32” tread?

Anyway, if your other 3 tires have 9/32” tread depth, don’t worry about shaving your new tire.

The new A36 has 12/32, so I am presuming my OEM ones did, as well.

 

[yrwei52]

The new A36 has 12/32, so I am presuming my OEM ones did, as well.

 

[yrwei52]

Ime, based on 4wd trucks and AWD SUVs that have outlasted their rusted frames, where the engines and transmissions were still functioning , albeit aged...

Have never had transmission or differential problems. Always ran the same brand and type tire on all 4 wheels but never paid tires tread depth much attention. If flat was unrepairable, swapped a new one on and kept going. Maybe there is some unseen minor damage done over a long period of time... But no immediate damage.

Since you mentioned “rusted frames”, most likely your experience won’t be the newer CUVs which has more sophisticated traction control system and “automatic” AWD. Even thought the CX-5 has open differential at front and rear, but it does have a clutch pack controls the power to the rear. If the overall rotation speeds are different between front and rear, the clutch may be activated by the TCS, and certain wheels which rotate a bit too fast (slippery situation) may have brake applied by the TCS too. Although these actions can be very minimum with minor circumference difference on a single new tire, but nevertheless these are unnecessary actions if all 4 tires are in the same circumference. Yes, it should be a long term effect on unnecessary wear, but the control issue could get affect more as mentioned in CX-5’s owner’s manual.

Imo there would be more damage running on that stupid Mazda undersized spare for 50 miles in search of civilization than any long-term damage from a few mm difference. My vehicles and tranny's lasted between 12 and 14 plus years and 150,000 to over 220,000 miles with no major tranny damage.

But then again maybe I just got lucky or maybe the ford tranny's we're just built better.

Yes, the severely undersized compact spare from factory definitely will cause some damage much faster to the AWD system than people’s thought. Once I put the undersized OE spare at front instead of a spare with the same diameter I got from a 2015 CX-9, due to a flat, I heard some grinding noise which made me worried. Once I put back the fixed Toyo A23 everything was back to normal.

Lastly did you notice most of the websites that predict doom and gloom are tire dealers and not manufacturers ? Better replace all 4 or something bad will happen they all say.

Mazda’s owner’s manual says that too, although it’s for different reason.

 

[Jack Rabbit]

Since you mentioned “rusted frames”, most likely your experience won’t be the newer CUVs which has more sophisticated traction control system and “automatic” AWD. Even thought the CX-5 has open differential at front and rear, but it does have a clutch pack controls the power to the rear. If the overall rotation speeds are different between front and rear, the clutch may be activated by the TCS, and certain wheels which rotate a bit too fast (slippery situation) may have brake applied by the TCS too. Although these actions can be very minimum with minor circumference difference on a single new tire, but nevertheless these are unnecessary actions if all 4 tires are in the same circumference. Yes, it should be a long term effect on unnecessary wear, but the control issue could get affect more as mentioned in CX-5’s owner’s manual.
View attachment 314234


Yes, the severely undersized compact spare from factory definitely will cause some damage much faster to the AWD system than people’s thought. Once I put the undersized OE spare at front instead of a spare with the same diameter I got from a 2015 CX-9, due to a flat, I heard some grinding noise which made me worried. Once I put back the fixed Toyo A23 everything was back to normal.



Mazda’s owner’s manual says that too, although it’s for different reason.

The insanity of Mazda is this.

They recommend the 145/90 r16 tire which is a full 2.4 inches smaller than the full size tires. So you don't have to look that up it's a full 61 mm difference that rotates 66 times more per mile.

Then they warn that driving on this way undersize spare (that they supplied) cannot be driven for a long period of time over 55 mph or else the clutch pack(that's filled with fluid) as well as the tranny and both diffs will be subjected to more stress than normal.

Really?

While I realize a new tire which may be a couple mm( 2 mm, 4mm, etc) off from the rest may cause some slight damage over a long period of time,
Imo, it is doubtful it would cause catastrophic damage.
And your front tires may wear 1 mm, 2 mm , maybe even 3 mm more than the rear even before rotation(which most people don't do)

Imo, I think using their spare even for a short time would cause more damage in one day than a new replacement tire would cause over 10 years.

That's why my spare is a 165/90 r17 which is only 0.2 inch(5 mm) difference and only a 5 rotation difference per mile. And a slight decrease in air pressure can correct/compensate any mm difference in diameter.

 

[yrwei52]

The insanity of Mazda is this.

They recommend the 145/90 r16 tire which is a full 2.4 inches smaller than the full size tires. So you don't have to look that up it's a full 61 mm difference that rotates 66 times more per mile.

Then they warn that driving on this way undersize spare (that they supplied) cannot be driven for a long period of time over 55 mph or else the clutch pack(that's filled with fluid) as well as the tranny and both diffs will be subjected to more stress than normal.

Really?

While I realize a new tire which may be a couple mm( 2 mm, 4mm, etc) off from the rest may cause some slight damage over a long period of time,
Imo, it is doubtful it would cause catastrophic damage.
And your front tires may wear 1 mm, 2 mm , maybe even 3 mm more than the rear even before rotation(which most people don't do)

Imo, I think using their spare even for a short time would cause more damage in one day than a new replacement tire would cause over 10 years.

That's why my spare is a 165/90 r17 which is only 0.2 inch(5 mm) difference and only a 5 rotation difference per mile. And a slight decrease in air pressure can correct/compensate any mm difference in diameter.

Yeah, I totally agree with your point. That’s why I got a T155/90D18 compact spare from a CX-9 which has the same diameter as my 225/55R19 road tires. In fact, when I got my 2016 CX-5 GT AWD in March 2015, the specification on Mazda North American Operations’ website did list 2 different sizes on compact spare for FWD and AWD CX-5. AWD was supposed to have T155/90D18 spare, of course what I found in my brand new CX-5 was the much smaller T145/90D16!