Oh, yes...DOH...sorry.2014 CX-5 GT has Toyo A23 instead of Toyo A36 tires from factory. And OP believes A36 is different from A23 at least on comfort category.
Oh, yes...DOH...sorry.2014 CX-5 GT has Toyo A23 instead of Toyo A36 tires from factory. And OP believes A36 is different from A23 at least on comfort category.
You could try this:Oh, {HardRight..]for the love of....I'm just trying to determine if there is a tire that is MORE comfortable than the Toyo A36.
You're starting to sound like a guy defending a choice not seeking advice. Or is it risk aversion beyond reasonable bounds?Another off-topic post. Spectacular. Hoping for a winner on #25.
I'll Answer the OP first - the Conti LX25 seems to be the overwhelming consensus of most. Yes, there will always be "I like this or that" or "I hated this or that", but again, if you survey 100 the LX25 seems to be the general winner.
Now my comments. Trust me, I can be as anal as anyone about specifics, but I don't see how this got so far off the rails - this seems kind of simple. Tire Rack has all the specs and ratings, including "comfort" - as close to cushy-ness as you're going to get. I understand about wanting 1st hand input, but that's where tire rack reviews even show what car people have it on.
Also consider where you drive. You're in North Texas, don't know if you ever/never drive in snow. I'm currently looking at a performance summer tire, probably the Michelin Sport 4 SUV, it's only a 20,000 tire but should last me over 4 years, and People hear "performance summer tire" and they think Mustang or Camaro. - nope. A summer tire will likely be quieter, smoother and better wet traction and braking than an A/S. I almost never look at price as the tire is one of the most important safety (and comfort) components of a car. People will spend hundred of dollars on cosmetic upgrades but cheap out on tires.
Summary, you really can't go wrong with the TR reviews or the Conti LX25
I think that idea crosses a line. Deflating tires below the manfacturer's recommended pressure can compromise safety, even if only at the margins.Then I'll kind of agree with the poster. I'm sure there are many people here who went from the OEM to something else, and can compare that something else. However, I'll agree with someone in earlier, if ***all*** you want is a softer ride, decreasing tire pressure is the answer. However you should be taking the tire characteristics as a whole.
My experience with Avid Ascends on my Sienna says they are cr*p. Avid Ascend GTs are a different story.I think truck tires might give a harsher ride over bumps than passenger car tires. The reason probably mostly because they have more plies.
I've seen promotional stuff on tires that describe their special shock absorbing sidewall compounds. Continental and Avid come to mind.
As far as a consumer rating from a current owner I doubt that any comparisons would be very useful. It's a pretty subjective thing without any kind of test instrumentation. New tires always seem quieter and smoother than the old tires they replaced.
I think that idea crosses a line. Deflating tires below the manufacturer's recommended pressure can compromise safety, even if only at the margins.
truly asking for member's seat of the pants opinions on how their replacement tire choice compared to the OEM A36 for COMFORT. That's it.
Yup. I tried to make that point earlier. Typical Mazda owners are not going to put cushiness at the top of the want list when buying that second set. This is still the "Vroom! Vroom!" marque even if Mazda dropped that to cast a wider consumer net. Sportiness and handling is a typical Mazda buyer priority. OEM tires are selected to complement the sporty character of the vehicles, particularly for the test drive. Upgrade to 19" rims and you accentuate that character.Another reason why there's so little addressing his only concern - so few of us are going to buy (therefore able to recommend) a tire based on cushiness alone. I'm sure there's some nice spongy $98 Walmart tires, but none of us have them.
Excellent, Antoine!