Quiet!! Plus great traction!
Written: Jun 16 '03 (Updated Apr 04 '07)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Handling and Control: |
 |
|
|
Pros: Excellent wet traction, quiet, good ride
Cons: Can't always find them.
The Bottom Line: This is a less expensive, great handling, performance tire, for conversion vans, SUV's, and light truck usage.
|
|
|
| gunner69's Full Review: Yokohama Geolandar H/T Truck/SUV Tire |
I have 235-75-15XL on my GMC Savannah Starcraft full size conversion van. I had American Generals, that were very worn out after just 30,000 miles. Traction on wet roads and snow was horrible. I had read about Yokohama's in magazines, and on a web site that sells tires, and decided to give Yokohama's a try. Found a place locally to purchase and install, but had to wait 4 weeks for this size because of backorder. I was told that other sizes came very quickly if not in stock- usually a couple of days.
The ride on this heavy van improved remarkably with these Yokohama's. The real test to me was highway noise, which I despise. Highway whine is minimal if almost non-existent. There is no tire noise in town whatsoever. Wet traction is great. No slipping and sliding anywhere ever. I have not driven on snow yet, so I cannot report on snow traction. I have no reason to suspect that these tires won't do well on snow.
Sidewall strength is superb. My gas mileage went up approximately 1 mile per gallon. I'm no scientist, but the friction coefficient has to be less as it seems my van wants to roll further when coasting, and with the improved highway mileage, I'm hopeful my conclusion is correct.
These tires are cheaper than the big names like Michelin, and some Goodyears. Time will tell on how they wear.
These tires do not ride quite as well as Turanzas, but they don't cost near as much either.
If you want a lower cost tire with excellent ride, road noise, and handling, these are some good ones!
UPDATE- One year after writing this review, I find that these tires still almost look like new. The nubbies are gone, but after about 10,000 miles, mostly highway, the tread shows almost no wear at all. During the winter, I found traction to be acceptable. We never had huge big snow, but roads were slick with ice and slush. The size and weight of the vehicle help, but these tires didn't protest at all when I needed more traction. After driving on these for one year, I am still completely satisfied and would purchase these tires again.
Second Update @ 25,000 miles- Still happy with the tires and the rate of wear. However, one of the tires has had an internal cord failure which causes "tire pull" when placed on either front wheel. The pull follows the tires, so this is not a front end issue. This type of failure is not covered in the 50,000 wear warantee. It would be covered by a road hazard warantee, which these tires do not have. This failure is usually caused by hitting a pothole, which we have many of in the midwest. I will be replacing two of these tires soon, to eliminate the pull with Yokohamas.
Third Update @40,000- Replaced two of these tires as mentioned above due to chord failure @28,000 miles. The two remaining tires are pretty much shot at 40,000 miles. Been rotated fairly religiously, with a close watch on air pressure. Supposed to be good for 50,000 miles. We're close, but I thought 80% of the advertised wear is a little early to be going bald. Of course with worn tires the wet/snow/slush traction is not very good. Will be replacing these two tires soon. Still, overall fairly satisfied.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 80
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
gunner69
|
|
Location: Bloomington, Illinois
Reviews written: 25
Trusted by: 1 member
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.