Darn banks selling off-lease cars

[Nick R]

Well online reviews must be taken with a grain of salt. For example, for reviews of the Continental Crosscontact LX (245/60/R18) for my grandmothers edge, and the Goodyear Assurance tripletred (195/65/R15) on my cavalier they are slightly off. The treadwear reviews for the contis were very good, but she only got 32K out of them, and I noticed alot of reviewers did as well. And the Goodyear tires on my car many people complain about the noise level... Well, my car is severely lacking in soundproofing, and they don't seem loud at all to me. Very strange.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
These tires have a load rating of 1,235 lbs per tires. A 91 load index tire is 1,356 lbs. Not a significant difference. In addition, some tires at the correct 195/65 size have the same load index as these Rikken's. I'd say it's a non issue.
+1 I still think these tires will be fine and no safety issue. Obviously the lease company/bank is not going to pick a top of the line tire on a car for sale.

While I don't think it's necesssary, I do have a suggestion if there is still some concern. There are several Discount Tire stores in the Triangle area. As it is a tire they advertise/sell, just stop by a DT store and get their opinion. In my experience they will be straight and work with you. For best results, I suggest you ask to speak to the manager.

 

[George Bynum]

Originally Posted By: jcwit
Do you really expect a seller to put expensive tires on a 13 year old car he's selling? Did the car also come with a 12 month/12,000 mile no questions asked warranty.
My typing mistake, really 3+ rather than 13 years ... and no, I wouldn't expect expensive tires, but I would expect the placard size tires. From Discount Tire and Riken, they would have been, it appears, $24.00 more for the set, $63 vs $57 per.

The speedometer/odometer error is of less concern than the load capacity. Despite the regular suggestions here that it never be lowered from OE, I agree that it SEEMS to have been specified higher than it needed to be. I've taken what seems to be the consensus and suggested she drive it until they wear out and match the placard when they replace them.

I wonder if Toyota specified (and geared to match) for appearance reasons ... those 13" of old were not very good looking to me.

THANKS!

 

[jcwit]

Well that puts a different light on things. I'd still just use the tires supplied when she bought it tho, at least till they wore down. Unless you could get a store to switch them without too much loss.

 

[CapriRacer]

While it may seem that the tire size specified is much larger than it needs to be, the guys who put their name, reputation, and are in a legally binding position - the vehicle engineers - specified something different. With over 30 years in the tire business, I will rarely disagree with what the vehicle engineer specifies - particularly when it come to load carrying capacity.

So, George, I think you have a good bargaining position here. Tell them they sold you a car that was un-safe and you expect them to compensate you for it. Threaten to sue in small claims court.

Then make a reasonable settlement. DO NOT allow them to make the final decision as to what gets put on. Be sure you are in that position.

 

[tomcat27]

I would not be concerned. the riken's look fine. "H" rated tires are overbuilt to withstand high heat and speeds and usually have extra belts. and again, this is a corolla, not a truck or heavy car.