Jump to content





News Feed (View All Updates)


Photo

Fuel Efficient Tyres


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Diverdave80

Diverdave80

    Likes to chat

  • Members
  • 305 posts
  • 9 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:MK4 Mondeo Estate
  • Name:Dave
  • Location:worcestershire

Posted 02 September 2013 - 01:24 PM

So my MK4 Mondeo will need some new boots soon (235/45/R17 W), she has a set of Michelin Pilot Sport's at the moment and the front's are almost down to 2mm tread depth. As cash is tight I have been looking at mid range tyres. I found this website which is a test on 50 tyres that underwent a wet and dry brake test from 100KMH and it shows some interesting results.

 

Its from these results that I started to look at the Kumho Ecsta's (came 15th in the test) and the Nankang NS20's (came 21st). Looking on the black circles website, it seems there aren't many tyres that offer low rolling resistance and hence better fuel economy. Samples shown below (prices are per tyre inc fitting).

 

Nankang £80    'E'

Kumho    £95    'C'

Hankook £109  'B'

 

So I had pretty much decided on the Kumho tyre, but has anyone else noticed any difference with fuel economy when using different brands of tyres? The 'B' rated Hankook is the most fuel efficient tyre offered by Black Circles.

 


2007 Mk4 Mondeo Estate Titanium 1.8TDCi
EGR Blanking Plate Fitted
4titx's Exterior & Interior LED's Fitted
Torque Pro App & Bluetooth OBDII Diagnostics Inc ElmConfig

 


#2 mike4369

mike4369

    Big Megger

  • Members
  • 1,508 posts
  • 92 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:58 2.2l TDCi Estate
  • Name:Mike Gittins
  • Location:Brecon,Powys

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:02 PM

Fuel efficiency is only part of the equation the important elements are dry/wet handling, road noise, and tread wear (mondys eat front tyres especially budget ones). I have asked many times for a recommendation but the answers are all conflicting, even in test results from different sources. It's an expensive learning curve when choosing replacement tyres.



#3 rickybaby1985

rickybaby1985

    Regular...still learning though!

  • Members
  • 217 posts
  • 4 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:2006 Ghia TDCi 115
  • Name:Rich
  • Location:norfolk

Posted 02 September 2013 - 09:13 PM

from what ive found when ive been reading around, if you've got up to and including a 16" wheel, you can have energy type tyres. anything above 16" and you don't get the option. basically you're on sticky or stickier, and then you have to decide on wet handling and road noise (and cost).

 

best bet is something along the lines of the Michelin primacy 3 or primacy hp (not sure what they're on at the moment) - they're pretty hard wearing, aimed at reps doing higher than average mileage, and nowhere near as sticky as the pilot sports etc!


Location - Generally found floating around West Norfolk or Staffordshire

Car Driven - 2006 Panther Black Mondeo Mk3 2.0 TDCi 115 6-speed

*Mods Done - Front Cup Holder finally replaced, Mud Flaps fitted all round, Reverse Parking Sensors fitted, Ghia X Boot Handle, Motion Lock, Clarion NX502e HU w/DAB tuner + external microphone, OEM Xenon Retrofit with headlight washers, Full 8 Way Electrically Adjustable Black Recaro Leather Interior, LED courtesy lighting throughout, Zetec-S Front Bumper*

*Mods To Come - Reversing camera, Ghia X Steering Wheel (bought), Decat, Racebits Intercooler, Silicon Hoses, Custom Remap*


#4 Spare Wheel

Spare Wheel

    Likes to chat

  • Members
  • 357 posts
  • 33 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:Mondeo
  • Location:cambridgeshire

Posted 02 September 2013 - 09:17 PM

... (235/45/R17 W), she has a set of Michelin Pilot Sport's at the moment and the front's are almost down to 2mm tread depth. As cash is tight I have been looking at mid range tyres. I found this website which is a test on 50 tyres that underwent a wet and dry brake test from 100KMH and it shows some interesting results.

 

Well, you know what will happen with this method; you'll select tyres that are good in braking, and not in anything else. provided that you are happy with that (and it is better than having tyres that aren't good in braking...).

Its from these results that I started to look at the Kumho Ecsta's (came 15th in the test) and the Nankang NS20's (came 21st). Looking on the black circles website, it seems there aren't many tyres that offer low rolling resistance and hence better fuel economy. Samples shown below (prices are per tyre inc fitting).

 

Nankang £80    'E'

Kumho    £95    'C'

Hankook £109  'B'

 

So I had pretty much decided on the Kumho tyre..

 

Well, 'E' rated isn't that good for fuel economy; you could hardly consider that a fuel economy tyre. 'C' or 'B' are obviously better.

 

The trouble is that if you go for fuel economy, you'll get better fuel economy and worse grip. Now this may not be too bad with 235/45/17s, because that's a reasonable amount of rubber and it doesn't have to be the softest, squidgiest, rubber to get a reasonable amount of grip. And that's not at all bad, if you are happy with the trade-off that you are making.

 

So I had pretty much decided on the Kumho tyre, but has anyone else noticed any difference with fuel economy when using different brands of tyres? The 'B' rated Hankook is the most fuel efficient tyre offered by Black Circles.

 

 

Yes. Well, the easiest thing is note the temperatures that the tyres run at on a trip at normal cruising speeds on an extended trip. So, out with the optical pyrometer, and you can definitely see a difference, but it is difficult to know how that relates to, eg, fuel economy (but it does confirm that it isn't just bull droppings). As far as I could tell, on my old Cougar, there was about 1 mpg difference between (relatively fuel efficient) Michelin Pilots and (not as good, but not the worst tyres for FE by any means) Kumho (KU19s) on the front. The trouble with that was that the precision of measurement was about+/- 1 mpg, so that would be anywhere between 0 and 2 mpg, but 1 mpg seemed like a decent estimate.

 

Now if you take the Official A....G classification at face value (which I don't), there is the possibility of making a calculation (which, again, will be pretty approximate, but there you go), As far as I can tell, and per tyre (not pair, or four tyres) and over 9000 mixed miles qnd relative to 'A' rated tyres (and I don't care that you can't find them, because I sort-of understand why, although I do not understand why 'D' tyres don't exist, but that's life for you) 

 

 

                       A      B      C      D      E      F      G
£, @ 1.40/l      0     26     57    -       91    128  1 63

 

(with the original info from some tyre website or another, and, ultimately, who knows about them, too).

 

But, if you want a reasonable first order estimation, I can't do better than suggest that, per tyre, and over 9000 miles (roughly my average annual mileage) you subtract the two relevant figures from one another. Its a bigger number than I might have expected, but that's what happens when you do the multiplying thing by a relatively big number. 

 

On the one hand, it does look as if paying a little extra for fuel economy tyres can pay for itself, on the other you pay upfront and receive back in trivially small amounts over an extended period. And lose grip...

 

As they say 'you pays your money and you takes your choice'.



Thanked by 1 Member:
Diverdave80

#5 Diverdave80

Diverdave80

    Likes to chat

  • Members
  • 305 posts
  • 9 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:MK4 Mondeo Estate
  • Name:Dave
  • Location:worcestershire

Posted 03 September 2013 - 01:38 PM

Thanks for the replies, especially Spare Wheel, that was a very informative response. I have to say the Michelin's I have at the moment are noisy but these have been fitted to the car since I bought it. Think I might try the Hankooks, they have good ratings for fuel efficiency and wet braking.


2007 Mk4 Mondeo Estate Titanium 1.8TDCi
EGR Blanking Plate Fitted
4titx's Exterior & Interior LED's Fitted
Torque Pro App & Bluetooth OBDII Diagnostics Inc ElmConfig

 


#6 Spare Wheel

Spare Wheel

    Likes to chat

  • Members
  • 357 posts
  • 33 thanks
  • Vehicle Driven:Mondeo
  • Location:cambridgeshire

Posted 06 September 2013 - 04:46 PM

Blah! I realise that I completely omitted something that I meant to include (I think that I was doing something else at the same time, but that's just an excuse).

 

When you say 'Hankooks', for example, there are about four or five different Hankooks available in that size (and they are different), there are at least a couple of different Kumhos (not sure about Nankangs).

 

So, given that I don't which tyres you are talking about, I can't make any comment (but recent ones tend to be better than older designs).

 

You could add to your list:

  • Toyo Proxes CF2 (decent, but not great general perf, which is what you'd expect for an economy tyre); better on snow than most comparable tyres
  • Goodyear Efficient Grips (at least one bad review on this site about the tyres going out of shape, but most people don't have this experience; Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance would be better, but not available in this size)
  • Michelin Primacy 3s; good, for an economy tyre, until the exact point that you find out the price
  • Conti Ecocontact; very nearly as expensive as the Michelins

 

In theory, I'm sure eco tyres do something close to what is claimed, but

  • If you get an unrepairable puncture, you could lose quite a value of tyre (ie, it starts off expensive, and is only worth it if the tyre lasts)
  • I've had an older Michelin go out of shape; I just put up with it, but it was noisy, but there was quite a value in tyre left
  • If you really cane the car on eco tyres, they will skid and when skidding tyres won't last at all well, and a grippier tyre which doesn't skid (so, to that extent, wear ratings are a bit dubious)





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users