Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 171

Thread: My new OEM-size tires: Vredestein Quatrac 5

  1. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    SW, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    7,402
    Thanks
    594
    Thanked 2,688 Times in 2,106 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 7milesout View Post
    A couple things. I too doubt the weights for the tires on tirerack are accurate. Maybe sometimes, or most of the time, but not always. I would have to believe the Quatrac would weigh more than the Enasave. But I could be wrong on that. Perhaps the LRR does add weight.

    Mark - My desire to compare the Enasave and the Quatrac is that I personally think the Quatrac to be very close to the performance of the Enasave as far as rolling resistance. It would be nice to find a redneck (but accurate) way of testing them, but it would have to be when the tires are both new or both plum worn out. Making it a difficult measurement to make for most of us. There's no way I'm going to have both new at the same time, and be swapping them out on my wheels just for something like this.
    I wouldn't expect a "severe snow service rated" tire to be anything close to a LRR tire like the Enasave. I have to believe the rubber compound would be softer during cold weather with the Quatrac 5.

    I would say my worn down $40 Federal SS657 tires didn't roll much differently than the Dunlop Enasave tires, but I was using a pair of both at the same time.

    Most 165/65r14 tires are in the 13 pound range (give or take a pound or two).

    Dunlop Enasave 01 A/S (340AB/no warranty) = 13 pounds
    Bridgestone Potenza RE92 (250AB/40,000 miles) = 13 pounds - these are a LRR tire you may want to compare
    Falken Sincera SN250A A/S (320BB/no warranty) = 13 pounds - current Mirage factory tire

    Personally, I wouldn't spend my money on any of the above tires. Prices are higher than most & their UTQG ratings are nothing spectacular. If LRR tires are your thing, you may feel differently. I see no problem with that.

    All-season alternatives
    Federal SS657 (420AA/40,000 miles) = 14.7 pounds (factory closed that made this size)
    Nexen N'Priz AH5 (460AA/50,000 miles) = 13 pounds
    Kumho Solus TA31 (500AA/60,000 miles = 14.2 pounds

    Winter tires
    Dunlop Winter Maxx WM02 (snow tires are NOT given a UTQG rating) = 14 pounds
    Nokian Nordman 7 = 14.1 pounds
    Kumho Solus Wintercraft Ice Wi31 = 15.7 pounds
    Federal Himalaya Kattura = 15.9 pounds

    The Vredestein Quatrac 5 (400AA) is what I consider an all-weather tire. I will weigh one when I get them, because 12 pounds seems light by comparison to everything else. I haven't weighed any of the tires listed above. I just used whatever specs I could find on them.

    There are lots of Chinese brands available these days. That was not the case a few years ago. If anyone has experience with any of them, I would love to hear about them.

    Of all the tires I have purchased so far, I am the most impressed with the Nexen N'Priz AH5 pair. I got them on sale for around $50/tire. I feel their quality & thread pattern is superior to the Kumho Solus TA31 (but I have no complaints about the Kumho which seemed priced lower most of the time when comparing them).



  2. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Country
    Netherlands
    Posts
    340
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 158 Times in 109 Posts
    My experience with Quatrac's is that they perform equal or better than the stock tires, when it comes to rolling resistance. I had to exchange my stock tires (can't remember which brand/type, but it were LRR's) in fall 2019 at 75000 km. Because of reasons I bought Quatrac's, and I was afraid for my economy, which is important to me. But actually I didn't notice any difference, and if you look at my fuel log, you can't point where I changed the the tires.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2013 Space Star Cleartec Intense 1.0 manual: 55.7 mpg (US) ... 23.7 km/L ... 4.2 L/100 km ... 66.9 mpg (Imp)


  3. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    SW, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    7,402
    Thanks
    594
    Thanked 2,688 Times in 2,106 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Space Wolf View Post
    My experience with Quatrac's is that they perform equal or better than the stock tires, when it comes to rolling resistance. I had to exchange my stock tires (can't remember which brand/type, but it were LRR's) in fall 2019 at 75000 km. Because of reasons I bought Quatrac's, and I was afraid for my economy, which is important to me. But actually I didn't notice any difference, and if you look at my fuel log, you can't point where I changed the the tires.
    That's awesome to know! Thanks for sharing that. I honestly don't feel my Nokian Nordman 7 tires are that bad for snow tires. I believe I read where they are one of the better rolling snow tires, but they wouldn't outperform a true LRR tire. I can't really share any true data, however. I don't seem to have 4 of the same tires ever on my Mirage at the same time. I currently have 4 different brands/pairs, and when the Vredestein tires replace the worn out Dunlop tires, I will still have 4 different brands/pairs for my Mirage.

    Maybe some day I will 4 Vredestein tires on my Mirage at the same time! That's sort of my goal eventually.

  4. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Atlanta Metro
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    3,527
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 1,389 Times in 1,007 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Space Wolf View Post
    Because of reasons I bought Quatrac's, and I was afraid for my economy, which is important to me. But actually I didn't notice any difference, and if you look at my fuel log, you can't point where I changed the the tires.
    This is the basis for my wanting to see official documentation. Now, don't get me wrong guys. I know it doesn't exist. And I wouldn't climb a mountain and shove a pole in the ground with a Vredestein or Dunlop flag in it and purchase that brand based on which flag I flew on the pole. I would just find it interesting, and go "hmm." And still purchase the set that makes the most financial sense. It's hard for me to explain my thinking. But just redneck testing (like I would do on my own) doesn't bring me to a conclusion on anything. Scientific testing and data would. But even with scientific data saying the Enasaves LRR is (for example) 9% lower than the Quatracs, at this time I would buy the Quatracs over the Enasaves without hesitation.

    Space Wolf's mpg data (before and after) is more scientific than what I could generate on my own. And I consider his post (and his mpg data) to be valuable information.

    Maybe this makes a bit of sense toward what I'm trying to convey. IMO, the Quatracs "seem" like they are so much higher in quality (performance, ride quality, durability etc) than the Enasaves, that I wouldn't be surprised if the RR of the Quatracs were so close to the LRR of the Enasaves that it makes nearly no sense to consider the Enasaves. I have respect for the Enasaves in the fact that Dunlop made the effort to develop a LRR tire. But overall, the Quatracs are just mo' bettuh. I'm still not making my muddled thinking clear.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2020 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 42.4 mpg (US) ... 18.0 km/L ... 5.6 L/100 km ... 50.9 mpg (Imp)


  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    SW, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    7,402
    Thanks
    594
    Thanked 2,688 Times in 2,106 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 7milesout View Post
    This is the basis for my wanting to see official documentation. Now, don't get me wrong guys. I know it doesn't exist. And I wouldn't climb a mountain and shove a pole in the ground with a Vredestein or Dunlop flag in it and purchase that brand based on which flag I flew on the pole. I would just find it interesting, and go "hmm." And still purchase the set that makes the most financial sense. It's hard for me to explain my thinking. But just redneck testing (like I would do on my own) doesn't bring me to a conclusion on anything. Scientific testing and data would. But even with scientific data saying the Enasaves LRR is (for example) 9% lower than the Quatracs, at this time I would buy the Quatracs over the Enasaves without hesitation.

    Space Wolf's mpg data (before and after) is more scientific than what I could generate on my own. And I consider his post (and his mpg data) to be valuable information.

    Maybe this makes a bit of sense toward what I'm trying to convey. IMO, the Quatracs "seem" like they are so much higher in quality (performance, ride quality, durability etc) than the Enasaves, that I wouldn't be surprised if the RR of the Quatracs were so close to the LRR of the Enasaves that it makes nearly no sense to consider the Enasaves. I have respect for the Enasaves in the fact that Dunlop made the effort to develop a LRR tire. But overall, the Quatracs are just mo' bettuh. I'm still not making my muddled thinking clear.

    I look at value. This is not it ($227.15/tire) -

    https://www.walmart.com/ip/4-New-Dun...79S/2573124674

    That makes the current factory brand look cheap (approximately $95/tire) -

    https://www.walmart.com/ip/4-Falken-...res/1534060054

    I am not willing to pay those prices when I can get a 500AA/60,000 mile tire for under $70/tire -

    https://www.walmart.com/ip/Kumho-Sol...4?athbdg=L1600

    If the Falken was their Sincera SN250 tire with a 700AA rating & 70,000 mile warranty, I would highly recommend them. But it's not those tires. An "A" added to their name makes them 320BB & no warranty. Likewise, very expensive Dunlop tires come with no warranty.

    I jumped on the Quatrac 5 when I saw the $100 off a set, which made them under $70/tire. I have no expectation of them being better than the Nexen or Kumho tires I already have, except when it comes to winter driving. If I can use them year round once they wear down some, that's what I am looking for. If they do OK in the economy department, that's even better!

  6. #126
    Senior Member Dark Magenta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    195
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked 55 Times in 48 Posts
    Name:  A6BC9705-21CF-4388-8578-AA885E086BC0.jpeg
Views: 224
Size:  19.4 KB I think I’ll use the old Enasaves another warm season and put these on for next season.

  7. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    SW, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    7,402
    Thanks
    594
    Thanked 2,688 Times in 2,106 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Magenta View Post
    Name:  A6BC9705-21CF-4388-8578-AA885E086BC0.jpeg
Views: 224
Size:  19.4 KB I think I’ll use the old Enasaves another warm season and put these on for next season.
    I ordered a set when I saw the $100 instant rebate (making them $68.07/tire with free shipping).


    The "out-of-stock" until March 31st has been posted on their site for a couple weeks now. A Tire Rack representative called shortly after my order was placed. He wanted to make sure that I still wanted them. I told him, "at that price I do!"


    I still hope they come through with them! I don't plan on using a pair until next November/December.

  8. #128
    Senior Member Wallythacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Niagara region
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    2,453
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 541 Times in 433 Posts
    i guess I better start shopping for some new winter tires myself.

    because of illness i left my winter tires on for at least 2 if not 3 years. now, there's hardly any wear on my tires as that time frame covered maybe 35k. i'm fairly certain my tires are hard as rocks being driven in 90f temps for long hiway stretches.

    this also gives me a chance to go for skinny winter tires i can inflate to 51psi and hopefully keep my mpg UP.

    I have a question, i hope basic chimes in. what pressure should stored tires on rim be kept at?

    Maximum pressure to keep the rubber and belts taught so they don't shift?
    Minimum pressure like 5PSI so the stress on the tire structure is minimal?
    Deflated so there is ZERO stress on the tire?

    I know tire shops just stack the tires, no real regard to it, no rims of course but is that the best approach?
    Zero, 2014 ES Plus 5MT, written off but not forgotten.
    Zero II, 2014 SE, 5MT, climate She's HOME now!
    Shelby AKA "Cute", 2017 ES 5MT, A/C.

    Mirage owners look at the world differently than everyone else, but in a better way
    We're driving the Beetle of the 21st century, the greatest small car now available!

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2017 Mirage ES PLus 1.2 manual: 39.0 mpg (US) ... 16.6 km/L ... 6.0 L/100 km ... 46.8 mpg (Imp)


  9. #129
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    SW, WI
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    7,402
    Thanks
    594
    Thanked 2,688 Times in 2,106 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Wallythacker View Post
    i guess I better start shopping for some new winter tires myself.
    I tend to compare prices/deals @ Walmart, Tire Rack, simpletire.com, tires-easy.com, Discount Tire Direct, and Priority Tire.

    Since I will only buy narrow winter tires, I only look for 165/65r14 tires for my 14" steel rims.

    Walmart has 1 Dunlop Winter Maxx 2 in stock (for several weeks now).
    Tire Rack has the Vredestein Quatrac 5 on backorder (not really a dedicated snow tire choice).

    Out of the 6 tire vendors listed above, that's the extent of available winter/snow tires in stock. Shopping for snow tires sort of ends there for now.

    Anyone in need of new 165/65r14 all-season tires, Walmart has the Nexen N'Priz AH5 on sale for $56.89. That's a tire that lists for $85-90 most of the time. Of all the all-season tires, I have tried so far these tires on sale are the ones I have liked the best. Some of their specs are 460AA, 50,000 mile warranty, 51 maximum psi, and I like the thread pattern on them.

  10. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Atlanta Metro
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    3,527
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 1,389 Times in 1,007 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Wallythacker View Post
    I have a question, i hope basic chimes in. what pressure should stored tires on rim be kept at?

    Maximum pressure to keep the rubber and belts taught so they don't shift?
    Minimum pressure like 5PSI so the stress on the tire structure is minimal?
    Deflated so there is ZERO stress on the tire?

    I know tire shops just stack the tires, no real regard to it, no rims of course but is that the best approach?
    It's an interesting question. I'll first state what Hyundai-Kia did. Now, this isn't in reference to storing, but is interesting. Due to shipping, truckers tended to strap down on the tires (which I agree with) and use about 10,000 pounds of pressure to hold down the cars at the tires. They would sometimes damage a tire. So from the factory they would run the tire pressures up to some ludicrous psi. Way above even the max inflation pressure.

    The dealers were supposed to receive them, and immediately lower the pressures to you know, about 35 psi. This was frequently overlooked and customers would take ownership with cars running 80 psi and the like. This is probably not exclusive to Hyundai-Kia.

    As for storing them, on the rims. If I were to guess, I would say a bit under normal pressure (say, 20 psi, to hold their design shape). And laid over on their side, not stacked, if possible. I wouldn't rest them standing up as this may lead to a flat spot. But Basic may say different, and his word is the final verdict.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2020 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 42.4 mpg (US) ... 18.0 km/L ... 5.6 L/100 km ... 50.9 mpg (Imp)


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •