Michelin vs. BFG

[Onthego]

I had planned on getting new tires when we got to Oregon. We joined FMCA and come to fine out the XZE tires I want are on back order until the end of the month. I can get the same size tire in a BFG which is made by Michelin this week. The BFG's are $60 a tire cheaper. There is 70k+ miles on the RV and I've always had Michelins on it. We don't really want to stay in Oregon until the end of the month. Does anyone have info on the BFG tires? The size is 225/70-19.5 LR G. Thanks.

 

Jeff

[Jimalberta]

FYI....one of our local tire shops ( i know the owner personally) has decided to drop the Michelin line. His reason....too much cracking and weather checking.

[lenp]

Have you tried other tire dealers? One may not have them in the warehouse but others may.

 

I am guessing your dealing with a Les Schwab store. Try a local Tire Factory - probably get a better price too!

Lenp

[fly2low]

I just replaced a set of BFGs with Michelins. I believe better ride and handling - or placebo effect

 

Got mine at a truck tire dealer in WA

 

this place might have them

http://www.michelinrvtires.com/dealer-locator/#/

[SWharton]

Have you thought about Toyo? We put them on an MDT and thee ride was so much better.

[jc2]

Hankooks are also a possible option along with Yokohama. To many options out there as GY and Michelin have become a little pricey IMO.

[Onthego]

I belong to FMCA and trying to use their Michelin tire program. Les Schwab is not part of the program. I thought it would be also. I have had no handling problems with the Michelins so that is why I'm reluctant to try another brand.

 

http://www.fmca.com/benefits/michelin-advantage.html

 

Jeff

[cactus]

Jeff,

Remember, no sales tax in Oregon!

[Onthego]

Jeff,

Remember, no sales tax in Oregon!

 

It was the plan to purchase the tires here for that reason but if I can't get the tires I really want it will have to wait. Bummer.

 

Jeff

[mrschwarz]

I replaced my Michelins with Yokohamas on the front and Generals on the back. After about 10,000 miles, the only difference I have found was on the invoice.

[Pat & Pete]

Goodyears were on our Monaco when we bought it . We had Toyos installed and haven't had a single problem in 6 years . They handle very nicely and wear even better . Still look very close to new . Not a crack or check to be found .

 

And , they were about an arm and half a leg cheaper than Michelins .

[2gypsies]

Have you compared prices with Les Schwaab even if they're not on the FMCA deal?

[Smitty77_7]

>I had 8 Michelin XZE* tires (12R 22.5). They're very robust tires, with extra meat in the sidewalls to help in those incidental curb, and other items, encounters. That extra meat, meant to me, extra safety on rough roads. But, they came at the price of a rougher riding tires. And, the had less Rolling Resistance then I would have preferred.

 

>About 18 months or so ago, I hit a pot hole in California. Broke an outside passenger side Dully tire cord. And had a slipping (bulge) the passenger side tag tire. This was during the then Michelin shortage. I was in Denver, after limping along on damaged tires, and finally located two young enough (I will not purchase tires over 6 months of age.) BF Goodrich ST230's. These had been my second choice, when I bought the Michelin XZE*'s. And, they were FMCA Michelin program helped on the price, as Michelin makes these tires.

 

> I shuffled the tires around, and put the newer ST230's on the Steers. I felt they made an improvement in road transfer to the front end feel. And, I feel they are a very dependable, well known, and respected tire. A bonus, is they had less Rolling Resistance then the XZE*'s.

 

>About a year later, I replaced the other 6 tires. I elected to alter my tire size, to 295/80 22.5, so that I could get the Michelin XZA2 tires. These had less Rolling Resistance then either the XZE*'s, or the ST230's. I place the ST230's on the tag position, and the 6 new tires went to the Steer/Dully positions.

 

>I feel the ride improvement of the XZA2's over the ST230's, was even more dramatic then the change from the XZE*'s to the ST230's. Much less road transfer of say expansion joints, DOT's, and other rough riding roads.

 

==========

 

I'll stop here on my input on the tires themselves. Stop here if the is all anyone is interested in. If anyone is buying tires in Oregon. Below is a bad experience I had with Bob Dicman's Les Scwaab Tires. That ended up costing me both anguish, and money. Read on if you're interested. OK if you're not. Warning. It is long, even though it is attempted to be a short version. I probably spent 15 hours on phone calls an emails on this, as a matter of principal. Still hoping to get a better resolution when I visit with them in person in the next few weeks.

 

=========

 

And after a very bad experience with Bob Dickman's Les Schwab - I can not recommend them to any other RV'er. (And that is a shame. As they had a great reputation, and I called them while in Oregon for help with an open request to help me replace my remaining 6 XZE*'s. They always see to push Tokyo's, assume that is where they make their highest profit. They, not they, the Salesman Paul, the 'Professional Tire Salesman' that I had heard good things about, did not waste even 30 seconds before he recommended I go with Toyo's. This is after I told him my three criteria for this new set of tires: 1) Better Rolling Resistance then the Michelin XZE*'s: 2) If possible, a better, softer ride. Especially on the steers; 3) Tires that were under 6 months of age. Well, the Toyo's, a good safe tire, have higher Rolling Resistance and as harsh as ride, or even harsher according to two fellow RV'ers I networked with, then the XZE*'s.) So needless to say, not a great start. I had researched some tires, in the 12R size, with less then a large populations of tire models available in that size. I asked about Yokohama's, and Bridgestone. Specifically two models of Bridestone. Paul said one of the Bridgestone's was not even listed in his computer, so they must be 'newer' in design. (Escopia 268), put me on hold to go check some books, and came back to say the 268's met my needs. So, I ordered them at that time. While placing the order, I again explained my requests for tires under 6 months of age. He said they could not guarantee this, and had not control on what the warehouse would send them. And, that 'Tire's don't age in the warehouse.', and that RV'er's need to learn this. I explained that it mattered to me. So 'We'd need to agree to disagree.' on the importance of tire age at time of purchase. He said he would request that the warehouse pull as young as stock as possible. But that he did not think it would be a problem, as 'They must be a newer model tire, as they were not in his computer.'. Deposit made by me, tires ordered. And, Paul took my email to send me and invoice, which I never was sent.

 

(A few things happened in between. And I'll shorten the story to the final part.)

 

When I asked Paul, on two different calls to confirm the Born on Dates on the tires the had come in. He finally on I think it as the third call (May have been the second.) took the time to go out and get the dates. Yep, they were all over 6 months of age, with a few being over a year of age. I had also asked him to double check the Bridgestone Escopia 268's, as I was told by another forum member on IRV2, that they were an older design, at least 5, maybe 6 years old, and had HIGHER ROLLING RESITENCE then the Michelin XZE*'s that I was replacing. Did a bit more research on this myself, and determined that was true, they had HIGHER ROLLING RESTENCE...

 

Well this resulted in a rapidly spiraling downward experience with Bob Dickman's Les Schwaab tires. I told Paul I would not accept the tires, as they did not meet two out of my three requirements (Higher vs Lower Rolling Resistance. And the tires were over 6 months of age.). In the middle of this, due to scheduling problems due to a medical issue in the family, I was not going to be able get to store for another 2-3 months. So I asked them to sell them to someone else, for all of these reasons.

 

Again, a shorter story then the process took resulted in:

 

-A refusal to return my deposit

-My having American Express reverse the charges

-Bob Dickman's refusing the reversal, as they had 'Ordered them for me' - and wanted a pretty high Restocking Fee.

-American Express, when pushed by me as 'The customer of both AE and Bob Dickman's, again reversed the chages

-The Bob Dickman's Tire Manager, sent AE a copy of the invoice, where i stated 'No guarantee of tire age' in the remarks. And, sent an in his email to them with this invoice, called me a liar. (In writing. Having never talked to me. Or proactively called me to see what was going on from my Customer viewpoint.).

-I explained to AE that I had never been sent a copy of this Invoice. That I had never seen the remark about 'No guarantee of tire age'. That if I had been sent the Invoice, as the Tire Professional Paul said he would do, I would have called back at that time and either canceled the order, or, had him remove the remark from the invoice.

-AE approach Bob Dickman's Les Schwaab on this again. And, they stuck with 'No deposit refund'. ($1,000)

-I asked AE what was next? And that is where it became a 'They said, I said.' situation. It was clear, that they would reverse the charge one more time for me. But after that, if the 'Merchant disputed' the reversal, it would stick. And I would be responsible for it.

-I asked how was the fair? To ask Bob Dickman's Le Schwaab to send them proof, that they had ever emailed me the invoice? Show anywhere where I had signed and invoice? (Could not, as it was over the phone.) And, the AE Supervisor said they were following procedures. And that if reversed by the Merchant. I was responsible. And would need to seek 'further recourse' on my own. (FURTHER RECOURSE? I was not in the State of Oregon. So I could not go to Small Claims Court. WHERE WAS THE CONSUMER PROTECTED IN THIS PROCESS?)/

-This was now two-three months after the tires were ordered. I decided to call and try and talk with the Bob Dicman's Lee Scwaab Tire Manager. Yep, the one that called me a liar to AE. I got him on the phone, and tried to explain my view of what happened. Well, he knew Paul very well, and what Paul said is what mattered. When I asked him if he had ever seen proof that Paul, or his company, had sent me an email of the Invoice? He said it did not matter. As they had a shipping expense that needed to be covered. That these 12R tire were not a high demand tire, and he'd have trouble selling them. And, he then lectured me about how the 'Tire's don't age in the warehouse.'. That we RV'er's needed to learn more about tires. (His ego, and his preaching, was very difficult to absorb thru the receiver of a phone. At the end of his lecture. I asked a simple question. Does not a customer have the right to set the conditions of what they are willing to accept? That I had told Paul that 'We'd need to agree to disagree.' on the importance of tire age. And, that it was important to me. Nope. Did not sway him at all. Said he knew Paul, and trusted Paul.

-Getting no where. I asked 'So what do we do?' here on this purchase? He again offered me a 'restocking fee' vs losing the full deposit. I sat and thought about it - and decided to cut my losses, and said 'OK'.

 

Oddly, I'm in Oregon now, of my yearly maintenance. I will be going into their shop to look them in the eye, both Paul and the Manager. And ask them again for a refund on my restocking fee. Expect the answer will be no. But, I will at least be able to look them in the eyes. And, I will explain that I would no longer be as quiet about this as I had been.

 

I can see both sides of this. Truckers wear out tires rapidly by miles driven. And they are the primary customer of tire dealers with these bigger truck tires. RV'er's very seldom wear out tires. We usually replace them due to age and or condition. So to us, the born on date, younger tires at time of purchase, is important. And I strongly believe we have that right as a customer, to state what we will purchase. Sure, we may be a PITA to some tire dealers. Other tire dealers are willing to work with us, and I suggest we all move on until we find one that will work with us.

 

And yes, many here on the Escapees, and other forums, have had great success with Bob Dickman's Les Scwaab. Glad of you. And I assume, many were recommended to buy Toyo's - the go to tire they recommend to RV'er's. And I'm happy for those that have had success.

 

Why repeat this long story? Well the OP mentioned Oregon. And I personally feel it is important that a Tire Dealer that does not do their best to help a customer purchase the tires they requested (Less Rolling Resistance, and More Efficient tires, and under Six Moths of age.), not be rewarded with our 'seeming nuisance RV'er's business'. To call a customer a liar. To not provide them with the tires they asked for, and gee - they were supposed to be the 'professionals' - why reward them with ongoing RV'er's tire sales.

 

For those who cared about Oregon tire purchases and read all of this. Sorry for me being so long winded. Not he first time I tried to share this. And, I'm not the best writer trying describe things. So thanks for getting this far...

 

And of course, we all make our own decisions. I have. Bob Dicman's Les Schwaab has lost my future tire purchases. And obviously I feel earned, my non recommendation as a tire dealer that will treat a customer fairly. (Customer's are not 'Always right.'. But in this case. Bob Dickman's was not fair, nor honest, with me. (No invoice emailed to me. Why? I feel the salesman was concerned I would call back and Cancel the order, if I saw the remark about 'No guarantee about tire age'. Talk about credibility... Knowing that it was important to me...)

 

$.02!

 

Best to all,

Smitty

[dons118]

Bob Dickman is not on my high list of suppliers. The last tires I bought on the FMCA program was from Superior Tires in Eugene. I had a very good experience.

 

If you can wait for a month or so, there is a possibility that Continental Tires will be offered on a FMCA discount program. This should be decided within this next week.

[Forest Grump]

Smitty:

 

Reading through your entire post my reaction was I wouldn't want to sell you anything. So imagine this happening to you, I being the tire dealer and you being the customer. How would you have reacted if they just said no thank you? Or to take it a step further we think you are just going to be a big problem so no!

 

Looking at it from this point of view would it change your response at all?

 

Another question, how to you determine the rolling resistance? Accurately? Why did you wait to make this determination after your ordered the tires?

 

So I don't agree with your actions. I think they are unreasonable and put the tire dealer in an unfair and unreasonable financial position. The dealer in good faith ordered the tires that you asked for. As far as there being a difference between a tire that is 6 months old from date of manufacture to a year old and the major issue being this is important to you, it's equally important to them that they sell the tire.

 

So I just respectfully disagree. I think you are being very unreasonable. Just my opinion! Oh, also the tire dealer, their managers and your credit card company. Some people and companies are just very hard to satisfy.

[Onthego]

I've had Michelin's on my RV it's whole life ( XRV's and XZE's) and that's probably what I'll put on it. It drives great and I don't want to spend a lot of money on tires and not get the same performance. We've left Oregon and will put new tires on before next spring. Thanks for the input.

 

Jeff

[dons118]

The FMCA executive board has now accepted the Continental offer and will be offering the tires as a discounted program as soon as a contract is signed which should happen shortly.