Bridgestone Tire Alert
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 45,846
Likes: 8,349
From: Mish-she-gan
Bridgestone Tire Alert
UPDATE: 10/28/20 - EXCESSIVE TIRE IS DUE TO HONDA'S FACTORY SETTING NOT BRIDGESTONE, see details at the end.
Our dealership says two of the tires on the wife's 2018 CR-V with 21,775 miles are at 3/32nds and must be replaced before winter. New tires start out at 10/32nds tread. Most of us know OEM tires on new cars are not made with the highest quality but I would say these Bridgestone Ecopia H/L 422 Plus are criminal in their manufacturing. The tires have been rotated three times by a Honda dealership and I am obsessed with keeping proper tire pressure for safety and wear. To use up 70% of a tire in less than 22k when Bridgestone rates tire wear at 700 for this tire (translates to 70k) means Buyer Beware.
I summarized various poster's comments with similar experiences at the Honda CR-V website for my generation of the car.
> I have a 2018 CR-V EX with almost 15,000 miles on it. It has Bridgestone tires on it and they already show considerable wear. I have friends who have 2017 CR-Vs and they had to replace the tires at 30,000 and they don't do any crazy driving.
> Some '17 & '18 Vs have excessive rear tire wear. Honda is aware and is investigating. They've put out a few notices about it. {I would love to have a source reference for this remark}
> Replaced our OEM Bridgestone Ecopias @ 19,000 miles when they were down to 2/32nds and maybe 4/32nds. Alignment was perfect, rotated regularly, and wear was entirely even across the tread.
> We are at 38,000 with the ecopias and bad on me but never rotated them. All look very similar, not down to the wear bars yet, but will be replacing soon.
> Same experience here: 20,000 miles on my 2018 and the factory tires were worn to the wear bars and had to be replaced. I know OEM tires are frequently garbage, but these are lower down on the hierarchy of garbage than most.
> 2017 EX-L AWD here, Ecopias are shot at 22,500 (3 front, 5 rear). They've been rotated properly.
> I am in a same situation with our 2018 EX-L with 21,500 miles...absolute crap tire. I live in the snow belt of northern Michigan and can not afford to live with these tires again this winter.
Looking at feedback on ConsumerAffairs.com there are numerous reports of bad experience; a couple with dangerous blowouts. I am not sure what Tire Rack or Consumers Report might have to say about these tires but I would highly recommend anyone with these OEM junk tires at least stop at a tire store and have the thread checked before winter!
Our dealership says two of the tires on the wife's 2018 CR-V with 21,775 miles are at 3/32nds and must be replaced before winter. New tires start out at 10/32nds tread. Most of us know OEM tires on new cars are not made with the highest quality but I would say these Bridgestone Ecopia H/L 422 Plus are criminal in their manufacturing. The tires have been rotated three times by a Honda dealership and I am obsessed with keeping proper tire pressure for safety and wear. To use up 70% of a tire in less than 22k when Bridgestone rates tire wear at 700 for this tire (translates to 70k) means Buyer Beware.
I summarized various poster's comments with similar experiences at the Honda CR-V website for my generation of the car.
> I have a 2018 CR-V EX with almost 15,000 miles on it. It has Bridgestone tires on it and they already show considerable wear. I have friends who have 2017 CR-Vs and they had to replace the tires at 30,000 and they don't do any crazy driving.
> Some '17 & '18 Vs have excessive rear tire wear. Honda is aware and is investigating. They've put out a few notices about it. {I would love to have a source reference for this remark}
> Replaced our OEM Bridgestone Ecopias @ 19,000 miles when they were down to 2/32nds and maybe 4/32nds. Alignment was perfect, rotated regularly, and wear was entirely even across the tread.
> We are at 38,000 with the ecopias and bad on me but never rotated them. All look very similar, not down to the wear bars yet, but will be replacing soon.
> Same experience here: 20,000 miles on my 2018 and the factory tires were worn to the wear bars and had to be replaced. I know OEM tires are frequently garbage, but these are lower down on the hierarchy of garbage than most.
> 2017 EX-L AWD here, Ecopias are shot at 22,500 (3 front, 5 rear). They've been rotated properly.
> I am in a same situation with our 2018 EX-L with 21,500 miles...absolute crap tire. I live in the snow belt of northern Michigan and can not afford to live with these tires again this winter.
Looking at feedback on ConsumerAffairs.com there are numerous reports of bad experience; a couple with dangerous blowouts. I am not sure what Tire Rack or Consumers Report might have to say about these tires but I would highly recommend anyone with these OEM junk tires at least stop at a tire store and have the thread checked before winter!
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,406
Likes: 2,628
From: Long Beach, MS
Are the EX-L's posters commented on also CR-Vs? That would be four. Not sure what other cars use the Ecopia as OEM, but maybe the problem isn't the tire. Maybe it's the CRV...factory alignment or other suspension issue...that is causing the crazy excess wear.
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 29,899
Likes: 5,437
From: Ontario Canada
That is horrible. I have 20,000 kms on my Subaru Impreza's tires and they are barely worn. They still look new and I haven't rotated them. At this rate they could easily go 60,000 miles. Even the sticky summer only tires on my WR-X will last longer than your CR-V tires, and I don't consider them as being long wearing tires by any stretch.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 45,846
Likes: 8,349
From: Mish-she-gan
This suggests its not just Honda (from Consumer Affairs posts)
> 20k on 2018 Camry and needed replaced.
> 20k on leased Nissan Leaf.
> 12k on 2016 Lexus RX 450 . . . says 3k or less left.
> 26k on 2017 Camry . . . all 4 shot
Mike after that many agreements with the other site and my experience I stopped reading and recording.
I sent an email with all this evidence to the Honda dealer I purchased it from and asked if Honda or Bridgestone was aware of a bad batch of tires. We will see if I get an answer.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,406
Likes: 2,628
From: Long Beach, MS
Ah, well, given the variety or cars with this issue, I would say it's the tires.
To me it is amazing that cars work at all. Take the average vehicle that goes maybe 100k miles on the original engine internals, not uncommon at all these days. If the car averaged 45 MPH over its lifetime the pistons in that engine would have gone up and down around eighty million times! If the original tires see just 20,000 miles they will have completed over fifteen million rotations over the road (for 205/45x18). We take modern mechanical technology for granted but in fact our achievements in engineering and material science are amazing.
Unfortunately our advances in quality management have a more mixed record. A set of OEM SUV tires should certainly last more than 21k miles.
To me it is amazing that cars work at all. Take the average vehicle that goes maybe 100k miles on the original engine internals, not uncommon at all these days. If the car averaged 45 MPH over its lifetime the pistons in that engine would have gone up and down around eighty million times! If the original tires see just 20,000 miles they will have completed over fifteen million rotations over the road (for 205/45x18). We take modern mechanical technology for granted but in fact our achievements in engineering and material science are amazing.
Unfortunately our advances in quality management have a more mixed record. A set of OEM SUV tires should certainly last more than 21k miles.
Last edited by tof; Oct 22, 2020 at 05:16 AM.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 45,846
Likes: 8,349
From: Mish-she-gan
Today 10/28/20 I learned that on 10/8/20 in Technical Service Bulletin 20-081 Honda acknowledged the rapid rear tire wear was due to bad factory settings for (1) rear wheel alignment and (2) rear wheel toe-in.
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/20...81080-0001.pdf
The TSB raises NEW issues:
1) Honda claims replacement of tires at 18,751 miles is Normal Wear according to the chart. How can anyone in Honda management say that with a straight face. That is a disgrace.
2) We get screwed because we rotated the tires three times and distributed the wear! If two tires were 2/32” instead of 3/32” we would get 25% off two tires; enough to get us through the winter.
3) Per Tire Rack, it's best to replace all of a vehicle's tires at the same time. Having the same tread design and tread depth promotes balanced traction and handling. This is to reduce the likelihood of drivers losing vehicle control when tires hydroplane on wet roads. Apparently Honda does not agree.
4) Honda is saying to do a four-wheel alignment using the new rear toe-in specification: 2.4+/-0.9mm.
5) The TSB inspection procedure says if all tires fall under Normal Wear, disregard this service bulletin. What! They expect me to spend hundreds of dollars on new tires and not offer a free four-wheel alignment using the new rear toe-in specifications.
Honda continues to give me more reasons why I shouldn't buy another one.
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/20...81080-0001.pdf
The TSB raises NEW issues:
1) Honda claims replacement of tires at 18,751 miles is Normal Wear according to the chart. How can anyone in Honda management say that with a straight face. That is a disgrace.
2) We get screwed because we rotated the tires three times and distributed the wear! If two tires were 2/32” instead of 3/32” we would get 25% off two tires; enough to get us through the winter.
3) Per Tire Rack, it's best to replace all of a vehicle's tires at the same time. Having the same tread design and tread depth promotes balanced traction and handling. This is to reduce the likelihood of drivers losing vehicle control when tires hydroplane on wet roads. Apparently Honda does not agree.
4) Honda is saying to do a four-wheel alignment using the new rear toe-in specification: 2.4+/-0.9mm.
5) The TSB inspection procedure says if all tires fall under Normal Wear, disregard this service bulletin. What! They expect me to spend hundreds of dollars on new tires and not offer a free four-wheel alignment using the new rear toe-in specifications.
Honda continues to give me more reasons why I shouldn't buy another one.
Trending Topics
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 11,364
Likes: 1,795
UGH! Sorry you are experiencing all these tire problems. I've only replaced the tires on my Element (2007), once in its life. Goodyear Assurance all-season. There must be something odd about the chassis setup, on those new CR-Vs?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 45,846
Likes: 8,349
From: Mish-she-gan
I found it interesting that many people who have been buying CR-Vs regularly think 18/22k miles is normal for the OEMs needing a replacement. My A6 made it to 35k and the Outback to 39k. Honda must put really cheap OEMs on the CR-Vs.