Topic: Winter Tire Review: Sailun Ice Blazer WSL2

[HeliDriver]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

[gosteelerz]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

[HeliDriver]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

Bridgestone did not decide to put greasy and quick-wearing tires on that car, Mazda did.

[gosteelerz]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

Bridgestone did not decide to put greasy and quick-wearing tires on that car, Mazda did.

Mazda switched to Goodyear after that,  Mazda 3s came with RSAs.  Perhaps they weren't happy with them either.

[HeliDriver]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

Bridgestone did not decide to put greasy and quick-wearing tires on that car, Mazda did.

Mazda switched to Goodyear after that,  Mazda 3s came with RSAs.  Perhaps they weren't happy with them either.

Or perhaps Goodyear won the bid at a buck nickel cheaper per tire?

Hardly an improvement, IMO: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=HPAS

[dirtyjeffer]

yea, Blizzaks are among one of the better rated tires...i, along with several colleagues who bought some as well, have been very happy with them...that's not to say there isn't other good tires out there, but really, tires isn't usually something i would recommend "saving a buck on"...and as has been said, the manufacturer specs the tire and buys the tire they want to put on the car...OEM tires are often chosen for cost (regular cars, not high end ones, of course).

[gosteelerz]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

Bridgestone did not decide to put greasy and quick-wearing tires on that car, Mazda did.

Mazda switched to Goodyear after that,  Mazda 3s came with RSAs.  Perhaps they weren't happy with them either.

Or perhaps Goodyear won the bid at a buck nickel cheaper per tire?

Hardly an improvement, IMO: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=HPAS

Yeah, I do remember people being unhappy with them on the message boards.  I remember them being quite good in the dry, OK in the wet with a relatively short tread life.  They were still a big improvement over the RE92s.  As cheap as these tires were to the OEMs, they sure were expensive to replace.

[Angry Chicken]

If you want to blame someone, blame the car company: they're the one who spec'd the tire for cost/fuel economy/whatever above all else. Doesn't matter which tire OEM ends up winning the bid, the result will be an equally bad tire.

I can understand using tires to meet the EPA ratings but the Bridgstone RE92s had the lovely combination of lousy grip and fast wear.  They felt greasy at all times and lasted only 20,000 kms.  Bridgestone's decision to put these on the Protege has turned me off their products.  Being the OEM supplier for tires is a great opportunity for a long term relationship, it is very sad that they don't realize it.   

Bridgestone did not decide to put greasy and quick-wearing tires on that car, Mazda did.

Mazda switched to Goodyear after that,  Mazda 3s came with RSAs.  Perhaps they weren't happy with them either.

Or perhaps Goodyear won the bid at a buck nickel cheaper per tire?

Hardly an improvement, IMO: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=HPAS

Actually, My 2007 Mazda3 came with Goodyear RSAs, the 2012 came with Yokohama Yokohama AVID S34D..  Both these tires proved that even reputable tire companies can produce crap when asked by the manufacturer (per helidriver's point) to build to a price.  If the tire's qualities during the test drive influence the prospective car buyer to purchase the vehicle, why would they care how long they last?  ??   

The aftermarket purchaser tends to be more discerning and the tires are also of better quality by and large compared to the rim protectors that the cars roll off the assembly line with.  There are notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, notably at the high end of the car spectrum.  High end in both performance and price. 

[dirtyjeffer]

There are notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, notably at the high end of the car spectrum.  High end in both performance and price.

exactly...if you are buying a Corvette, it is much more likely to have quality rubber on it to begin with than a Sonic, for example.

[mixmanmash]

My Protege came with Dunlop all seasons.  Decent tire, wore out by 60k kms.  Useless tire in winter.  At the point they had to be replaced is when I went to dedicated winter tires and summer tires.

[gosteelerz]

My Protege came with Dunlop all seasons.  Decent tire, wore out by 60k kms.  Useless tire in winter.  At the point they had to be replaced is when I went to dedicated winter tires and summer tires.

Those were used on the top of the range Proteges and Protege 5.  Don't see much of Dunlop around here,  perhaps they are more prevalent in Europe.

[blur911]

^^How much are a set of these brand new?

The Sailuns were $120 each last year for the Mustang, where I bought them.  Looks to be same this year.

i bought my WS70 Blizzaks from Costco for about the same price.

Actually the difference is $240 for a set when you include taxes. Also, as good as Blizzaks may be, Bridgestone hold the distinction of being the worst tires I ever owned.  The RE92s that came with my Protege were absolutely horrid tires.  I don't hold grudges against people but I tend to with manufacturers which may be a bit irrational.

From a price/ performance perspective, I have no regrets so far, they have done their job perfectly.

Yeah, that's pretty irrational. There isn't a company out there that doesn't make cheap and horrible tires for the OE market.

They should offer their best tire for OEMs to attract repeat customers.  I know I will strongly consider getting the same tire on my Mustang as I am really impressed with them.

Tire manufacturers would love to have the carmakers put their top tier tires on their cars, but who would pay for it?
The car makers specify everything about the OE tires, don't blame the tire manufacturers if they suck, it's exactly how the carmakers want it.

A Mazda Protege is an econocar, it comes with econotires.

[Angry Chicken]

 
Exactly!