Looking for direct comparison opinions between OEM Bridgestones & Pilot Sport A/S 3+

[ksvtguy170]

An infrequent poster here who's searched many tire threads and feels more confused than ever. Hoping someone here can give some thoughts on my very specific tire situation:

I have a '17 FiST with 18K, and live in the Seattle metro area. The stock Bridgestones are terrible in the winter--useless in snow/slush, obviously, but also really unpleasant in cold weather, which of course they're not made for. Even in the summer, after two years they ride and sound like they're made of concrete, and though they still have some tread life, I'm ready to ditch them...plus winter isn't that far off.

However, my current financial situation doesn't allow for the more expensive wheel-tire option that would be my first choice, which would be to downsize to lighter 16" wheels and get new tires (and store the Potenzas on the 17s for future autocross/track day use), and I don't want to mess with changing the stock tire size/rolling diameter/etc., even though I know going to a thicker sidewall on the 17s would help the ride. The car has no performance mods--maybe someday in the future--and I love its steering and handling as is, so I just want to find a tire that keeps the core feel of the car while providing more all-season utility and (I hope) a slightly less jarring ride.

So, my question is for people who've kept the stock tire size and wheels and replaced the summer Bridgestones with Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3+ tires. Your observations on:

(1) Ride quality of A/S Michelins vs. Bridgestones?
(2) Noise level " " " "?
(3) Tread wear " " " "?
(4) Summer performance of Michelins--I expect less ultimate grip, but is steering feel and turn in comparable?

Any thoughts on this are much appreciated--thanks!

 

[alex7]

I noticed no one answered and I have had both. The Bridgestones started out life well. Initially quiet, great initial grip/response, but they began to hum around 17k miles. I had 1 very conservative track day with them because the car was 2 months brand new and I didn't want to "break" anything. The Bridgestones did seem to have better turn in.

The Michelins were quiet for 25k+ miles. I have daily driven on those for almost 3 full years now and they are still on the car ! They need replacement of course, (per the penny test, no chording) but it's only been the last 5k miles or so where they've begun to hum and trace imperfections (the bad way). I am leaving them on for another 2k just because I think they can go. They never saw the track, but dry grip on some spirited driving was great, but turn in was slightly less immediate/responsive as the Bridgestones.

As a recommendation based on your post, I would say go Michelin make sure they are the A/S 3+ and not the old 3 in case anyone is still selling those. They will be great for wet months. It might have rained 2 or 3 times in the last couple of years but they were great then. I suspect they would last even longer than my set if you keep up with rotations and have a conservative alignment (I did neither but still have gotten 30k+) They will be awesome for roughly 20k miles for everything you'd want to do on the street, and will daily drive great for any miles after that until roughly 30k. Hope that helps.

 

[ksvtguy170]

Thanks! That's a really helpful comparison. Interesting to hear your similar experience with the Bridgestones--that they started going bad around 17k. The turn-in and grip are still tremendous, but everything else about them annoys me at this point. The Michelins sound like exactly what I need.

 

[SST]

i have the AS3+ as well on my car right now, but i bought the car used so the Bridgestone was bald when i bough it.

I can tell you AS3+ sucks on snow, dont even bother, if your current financial situation only allow you to buy one set, then not the AS3+, I am in Canada, i have dedicated snow tire, i was late on swapping the tire, and the AS3+ made me swap to winter the same night.

acceleration was ok on flat, but i had problem with stopping and climbing with just a bit of snow.

in the same category, definitely look at the Continental DWS or their latest offering, they are winter-able performance all season. I have also read the General version is capable in snow too, but these two are not as comparable in dry to the Michelin thou.

I track the AS3+ once, 205 wide, stock suspension, they are ok, but i wouldn't do more than 4 hot laps on those.

 

[ksvtguy170]

I can tell you AS3+ sucks on snow, dont even bother, if your current financial situation only allow you to buy one set, then not the AS3+, I am in Canada, i have dedicated snow tire, i was late on swapping the tire, and the AS3+ made me swap to winter the same night.

acceleration was ok on flat, but i had problem with stopping and climbing with just a bit of snow.

in the same category, definitely look at the Continental DWS or their latest offering, they are winter-able performance all season. I have also read the General version is capable in snow too, but these two are not as comparable in dry to the Michelin thou.

Hmm, interesting. Too bad I went ahead and ordered the A/S 3+! Thing is, snow is fairly rare in the Seattle area and usually it's mild slush that melts away quickly, so I just want something that can deal with those conditions and winter cold. The Potenzas were like damn Flintstones car tires in temps below 50 degrees or so. Down the road, I'd like to get some 15" steelies with snow tires just in case we get socked in like we did this past February.

I've had Continental ExtremeContact DWS tires on a couple of past cars and they were very good, but it sounded like the Pilot Sports were better. I could have saved a few bucks by getting the Continentals...

 

[4DGC]

I know this is a bit old but I just stumbled onto it. I am in the Seattle area as well and would like to know your impressions after having the Mich's for a couple seasons. I still have the stock Potenza's and ran them since Sept. We only got a hint of snow this year and I just drove my truck instead of the Fist so no concerns there.

I have ben considering the Generals and the Michelins as replacements. I was sold on the Generals because they are MUCH cheaper and have very good ratings. Then I saw some advice from RAAMaudio saying to check the specs on the tires since a 205 is not always a 205. According to Tire Rack the General in our size has a tread width of 6.9" wide while the Mich is 7.8" wide. That's damn near an inch wider in the same supposed size. It would seem the Mich would have better grip with that much more tire on the ground so now I am torn.

Sorry for the ramble. Anyway please post your impressions on MIch's. Thank you.

 

[ksvtguy170]

I am in the Seattle area as well and would like to know your impressions after having the Mich's for a couple seasons.

I've been really happy with the Michelins. They're much quieter than the OEM Potenzas and have a slightly more compliant ride. As you know, we had next to no snow this past winter, so they never really got tested in that regard, but they're much more livable in sub-50 degree temps. (The Potenzas felt like they were made of concrete when it was really cold.)

In terms of grip, I don't think the Michelins give up much to the summer Bridgestones. They really stick. What is different is that they're just a smidge less razor sharp--it feels like the car has a tiny bit more body roll and the steering is a hair less quick. It took me a couple of weeks to get used to the difference in feel. My car's just a daily driver, so it's fine with me; someone more hardcore might not like it so much.

As for tread width, I had a look at Tire Rack, and Michelins have 0.2-in more tread width than the OEM Potenzas. It's a difference you can see on the stock wheels--they look meatier, which is a nice side benefit. I don't know anything about the cheaper General tires, but 6.9-in tread width sounds unpromising. I think the Michelins are worth the money, and a good PNW tire!

P.S. We may have met--I've chatted with a couple of other Magnetic owners in the Safeway and Thriftway parking lots in this area (I'm in LFP).

 

[M-Sport fan]

Yeah, the Pilot Sport AS/3, and 3 pluses are exceptionally wide in ONLY our factory all season option size for some reason.
It's almost as if Ford requested that Michelin build them that way as a 'favor' for them being chosen as the all season OEM supplier, or something.

They are actually a bunch narrower in tread width than their competition in the 205/50-16 all season sizes (as well as most other sizes across the board), besides not being XL load rated, like our factory size ones are.

I might have even considered these for an aftermarket, 17x8 wheel setup IF they would have offered us a 215/40-17 with that extra wide tread width (like OVER 8" wide in that case!) included.

 

[4DGC]

Thanks for the reply. I haven't met another Fist owner IRL. I just bought mine from Harris at the end of Sept. so I haven't had it that long and then Covid hit and we're all cave people hiding out at home now days. It's funny you live just down the road. I'll definitely put the MIch's back on the top of the list. Thanks.

 

[Frunobulax]

Not trying to hyjack the thread but I replaced the stock RE050's with Firestone Firehawk Indy 500's and am really impressed. The RE050's are noticeably better but cost $170 each and the Indy 500's were around $50 each in my area, Charlotte, NC. The Indy 500's are quiet in the turns, I don't need any more attention from the cops while drifting interstate on and off ramps and random corners. I got 25,000 miles on the RE050 and there were threads showing. I have 20,000 miles on the Indy 500's and think I will get at least another 20,000 miles out of them. So bang for the buck is amazing even if I am giving up some performance. Both tires are horrible below 40 degrees F, winters around here are mild. Both tires are awesome in the rain unless its deep enough to hydroplane, hard to go above 70mph on the interstate highway during a decent rain. If its light rain and only wet pavement, not standing water, handling with both tires is amazing. One last thing is the Indy 500's are way heavier than the RE050's. Bang for the buck on my daily driver, I will be getting the Indy 500's again.

 

[Dpro]

Not trying to hyjack the thread but I replaced the stock RE050's with Firestone Firehawk Indy 500's and am really impressed. The RE050's are noticeably better but cost $170 each and the Indy 500's were around $50 each in my area, Charlotte, NC. The Indy 500's are quiet in the turns, I don't need any more attention from the cops while drifting interstate on and off ramps and random corners. I got 25,000 miles on the RE050 and there were threads showing. I have 20,000 miles on the Indy 500's and think I will get at least another 20,000 miles out of them. So bang for the buck is amazing even if I am giving up some performance. Both tires are horrible below 40 degrees F, winters around here are mild. Both tires are awesome in the rain unless its deep enough to hydroplane, hard to go above 70mph on the interstate highway during a decent rain. If its light rain and only wet pavement, not standing water, handling with both tires is amazing. One last thing is the Indy 500's are way heavier than the RE050's. Bang for the buck on my daily driver, I will be getting the Indy 500's again.

Sorry man but IMO Firehawks are nothing more than a cheap person or poor mans compromise . I think one gives up way too much performance to claim its a bang for the buck. Now if you want a bang for the buck tire that will not give up as much as the Firehawk’s start looking at Federals they have some tires that do quite well handling wise and are less than 100 per corner.

 

[GreyGhost]

Look at the UTQG rating and that will tell just about everything you need. The racing tires are 100, the REO50A is a 140 that's why you hear a lot of complaints about them not lasting, They are race tires. The Firestone Firehawk is a 240 that isn't bad.The Pilot Sport A/S 3 that I have, I live in Chicago and there' a this thing called Winter here, They have that in PA. as well, are 500's. Their not that bad because of the compound but you will pay for it over other 500's, Personal statement now, There is no such thing as a all season high performance tire, I grew up in Neb. Min. and SD. which means SNOW,SNOW,SNOW, I know how to drive in snow. I hit packed snow in those things, Pilot A/S 3, and well $3500 later. So the Firestones will stick better per the UTQG than the Pilots. I've heard some muscle car guys say the like them as well. Buy a second set of wheels and run everyday on one and race on another. I go for a little less sticky because I LIKE TO SLIDE.

 

[Frunobulax]

Sorry man but IMO Firehawks are nothing more than a cheap person or poor mans compromise . I think one gives up way too much performance to claim its a bang for the buck. Now if you want a bang for the buck tire that will not give up as much as the Firehawk’s start looking at Federals they have some tires that do quite well handling wise and are less than 100 per corner.

I certainly qualify as a poor man, why I got this awesome little car, its cheap to run. I will look into the Federals for the next tire, hopefully these Indy 500's last a while though. Thanks for the suggestion! I do enjoy smoking other more expensive cars around town and in the mountians.