Destination LE2 updates?

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I do wish they were available in this size. My CR-V uses it as well (actually, 225/65R17, without the preceding P).

The Michelin in our size is the Latitude, which matches the trim line of your Jeep. Coincidence??

Keep us in the loop on how the LE2s perform for you. They are great tires.


These actually don't carry the P either. Just a habit of mine to add it on non LT tires. Size is actually 225/65R17.

 

[Rand]

honestly I think these 2 are probably the best 2 tires in their category on the market right now.

If not they are definitely at the top.

It would probably come down to what I could get a deal on.

I'm not a huge michelin fan but I will admit they make good tires, overpriced maybe but at least they arent overpriced junk like some(oem style) tires.

 

[Hermann]

The LE's that came on my Tacoma have 61K on them approaching 5 years in service. They were made in March of 2008. They still have 5/32 of the original 10/32" of their tread left. They have never needed rebalancing or alignment, and have worn perfectly even across the tread. They have been rotated 3 times at 15-18K intervals.At speeds as high as 85 MPH on rare occasions, they have never sent a shimmy through the steering wheel. The new LE/2's are at the top of my list when replacing the originals before next winter.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Rand
honestly I think these 2 are probably the best 2 tires in their category on the market right now.

If not they are definitely at the top.

It would probably come down to what I could get a deal on.

I'm not a huge michelin fan but I will admit they make good tires, overpriced maybe but at least they arent overpriced junk like some(oem style) tires.

 

[Johnny248]

Originally Posted By: Rand
honestly I think these 2 are probably the best 2 tires in their category on the market right now.

If not they are definitely at the top.

It would probably come down to what I could get a deal on.

I'm not a huge michelin fan but I will admit they make good tires, overpriced maybe but at least they arent overpriced junk like some(oem style) tires.


The crazy thing is that the Bridgestone truck/suv tires are more expensive than the Michelins. Dueler H/L Alenza's cost more than Latitude Tours, Revo 2's cost more that LTX A/T 2. I guess they consider their products top notch.

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Johnny248
Originally Posted By: Rand
honestly I think these 2 are probably the best 2 tires in their category on the market right now.

If not they are definitely at the top.

It would probably come down to what I could get a deal on.

I'm not a huge michelin fan but I will admit they make good tires, overpriced maybe but at least they arent overpriced junk like some(oem style) tires.


The crazy thing is that the Bridgestone truck/suv tires are more expensive than the Michelins. Dueler H/L Alenza's cost more than Latitude Tours, Revo 2's cost more that LTX A/T 2. I guess they consider their products top notch.


I would say that both of those Bridgestone tires are superior to the Michelin tires you compared them to so why wouldn't they cost more?

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
I would say that both of those Bridgestone tires are superior to the Michelin tires you compared them to so why wouldn't they cost more?


I think the Dueler Revo 2s are better than the LTX A/T2. Michelin never has put much into its AT tire line, because it doesn't have to; it also produces the BFGoodrich All Terrain T/A KO, which is probably the best all terrain tire available for sale (and also available for less than the Bridgestone).

Regarding the Dueler H/L Alenza, it's a relatively old tire, one that Bridgstone needs to update in my opinion. It's not really competitive anymore. This Tire Rack test was back in 2008, and the Alenza finished 3rd of 3 tires: a General and a Pirelli. Tire Rack doesn't have a direct comparison between the Michelin and the Bridgestone, but Consumer Reports does. The Latitude Tour finished 5th (behind 3 other Michelin tires); the Alenza finished 14th. It was worse in wet braking, worse in snow traction, worse in ice traction, worse in measured noise, worse in measured tread life, and worse in measured rolling resistance. It did beat the Latitude Tour in handling.

I'm with you on the Revo 2 (a very competitive AT tire), but the H/L Alenza is no longer class competitive. This is to be expected; it's a design that's nearing a decade old I believe. Unfortunately, the LE2 wasn't around when Consumer Reports did their light truck tire testing. They tested the original Destination LE; it finished 18th of 23 (same round of testing as mentioned above).

Bridgestone, like Michelin, has some very expensive tires. Firestone is Bridgestone's "middle class" brand, as BFGoodrich is Michelin's. Primewell is BFNA's "value" brand, as Uniroyal is Michelin's.

 

[Grebbler]

Regarding the Duelers, Alenza, Revo tires I see a lot of love/hate reviews. I keep thinking Murphy's Law is gonna put me on the hate side.

Can't recall which one is basically the big LT brother of the LE'2. The Firestone shop guy has them on his pickup and they do look like a nice tire but I don't haul or tow enough to put up with an LT ride all the time.

I am prolly over thinking all this. I wonder about the reviews. The LE(2) are a good priced tire and will attract budget minded folks upgrading junky OEM or Wally World tires and be really happy with them. Is that why the reviews so far are high across the board? Low score reviews might be folks used to spending big money and/or have had better baseline tires previously to compare them with. Most reviewer don't included enough info to know how how much salt to add to the review

A trend I see in just about any new model of just about everything is. oh I don't how to word this..plateaus? A new model is usually either going to be a genuine improvement and a benefit to mankind or it's going to be on over hyped marketing ploy because they found a new way to cut corners or change ingredients/construction to meet a new EPA guideline. Maybe all these new zigs and zags and silica and computer enhanced design is need to make the new mediocre ingredients tolerable or a way to make new gizmos to attract customers while the real performers that don't bring the revenue because they last so long or don't look snazzy enough are discontinued. Everything is a push to MPG. Remember how automakers will change something that works well into something barely functioning or add some hideously complicated doohicky to get that 0.02 fleet wide MPG gain? Are tire makers under that kind of pressure also?

Which plateau are we on now? The genuine or the corner cutting? Are the new tires really better or are they going to be great for only 10k miles and have to be replaced and generate more revenue.

I sincerely apologize for straying off the topic. I grew up blue collar. Build it better and make it last - until about 4 years ago when I moved to blue/white collar. Just that small move into the corporate world and I am constantly bombarded with the school song and the "make it cheaper - increase the profits! They are gonna have to buy it no matter what." attitude that I am leery of everything.

Shame is only time will tell us the winners and by then they, too, are discontinued.

*pant pant* Must be time for my meds.

I am still leaning to the LE2's. Does it make sense to get a $200 70K tire that will dry rot and get hard before wearing down (not covered by warranty) and have to be replaced anyway?

Bah. I feel grouchy and I better stop before going on a another rant

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Grebbler
I am still leaning to the LE2's. Does it make sense to get a $200 70K tire that will dry rot and get hard before wearing down (not covered by warranty) and have to be replaced anyway?


No, it doesn't. If the Michelin will age before it wears out for you, I would not recommend it. You paid for that tire life; if you won't be able to use it, might as well not pay for it.

This is one reason I don't really care for long-mileage tires. Many people will not wear them out, and they'll dry out on 'em. For me, a 50-60k mile tire is in the sweet spot of longevity (the LE2 is rated 60k I think).

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
These actually don't carry the P either. Just a habit of mine to add it on non LT tires. Size is actually 225/65R17.


A-ha. In our particular size (I didn't know you changed sizes, and this wouldn't apply to the OP), the LE2 is actually an H-rated tire, which I would generally prefer over a T-rated tire. Curiously, it still only carries a B temperature grade (most H-rated sizes carry an A temperature grade). I would generally recommend an H-rated tire over a T-rated one, given a similar choice.

(To keep people like me happy, Michelin now offers a Latitude Tour in 102H in our size, in addition to the 102T version I bought for our Honda about a year ago.)

 

[NHHEMI]

Originally Posted By: Grebbler

I am prolly over thinking all this. I wonder about the reviews. The LE(2) are a good priced tire and will attract budget minded folks upgrading junky OEM or Wally World tires and be really happy with them. Is that why the reviews so far are high across the board? Low score reviews might be folks used to spending big money and/or have had better baseline tires previously to compare them with. Most reviewer don't included enough info to know how how much salt to add to the review

I can tell you as someone who has run the original LTX M+S's, the original LE's, and now the LE2's( granted only for a couple days )that these tires are not receiving high praise just because the people are used to cheap tires as a rule. The original LE's and now the LE2's( from what I see so far )take a back seat to no tire. They are both EXCELLENT tires. I am sure the M+S2 is an excellent tire as well but with what it costs and with the great performance from the Firestones I just would never buy them.

I have gone with the LE series over the M+S series time and again now( assuming size is available - ok Hokie?

)because I don't experience any better/improved performance or other advantage out of the Michelins to justify such an increase in cost p/tire. The original LE's, compared to the original M+S, anyway have given me as good or better( snow )performance and at least for me treadwear has been right there with the M+S. Granted the M+S2 is an improvement over the original. The LE2 does appear to be an improvment over the original LE as well though.

I run expensive synthetic oil and filters for just 5K OCI's as one example so I am not some kind of a cheapskate. Believe me I will pay top dollar for a top performer if I think it is worth it. I just can't see spending all that extra for the Michelins when the Firestones have done everything I could ask for and then some for a LOT less.

I do think you are over thinking this and looking for a smoking gun that just doesn't exist if you think the LE2's are getting high praise because the reviewers have some kind of low standards for tires. Both the Firestones and Michelins receive the reviews they do because they are both excellent tires.

 

[Grebbler]

That's why I come here.

Of all the boards I read - THIS one has a much greater portion of informative, insightful, knowledgeable bordering on fanaticism posts from some really smart folks. I can bet that if someone here says something works it's not because of a slick ad campaign.

If I post why I think something works or doesn't I like to list my reasoning here so it can be acknowledged or refuted by logical means or first hand experience. I feel the majority here are the same way which is why I ask these goofy questions.

Some of us just need a group hug now and then

In short (before the meds wear off) thanks for the info and I will post my experiences with whatever I get. Maybe that set of Sumichen SRX9000's in the blister packs that I saw at the drugstore check out.