Others have discussed how tires need to be warmed up to perform best. When Ambient Temps go below about 40-F, High Performance Summer tire Traction is like a Hockey Puck. Since I live in the Mountains where morning temps often dip, and it sometimes snows in the Summer, I decided to take a different approach to selecting my Tires. I installed Michelin Pilot Sport A/S3. (F)245/40R19 and (R)285/35R19. As "Luck" would have it, last summer I got caught in a freak snow storm with about 3-inches on the Road and had no problem whatsoever continuing up the mountain and down the other side.

 

Here in the US, all tires have a DOT (Department of Transportation) identification number, which includes a date of manufacture.
Just make sure the tires you put on your car haven't been sitting in a warehouse gathering dust for years.
FYI, recommended maximum shelf life for tires these days is about 5 years-so don't accept anything made before 2010.
I don't know what tires sold in New Zealand would have as far as identifying markings.

 

So is it possible our cars are tuned differently for each country? My son matched the Lexus ride for our country's conditions. Maybe AM for the US market have a different suspension tune because of the preference for a gentler ride matching many of that county's automobiles using long straight roads and better surfaces?

If so, we could be arguing forever and defending our country's position without any real conclusion. Wish we could hear from an Aston Martin factory technician on this one.

There's a lot of discussion about Bridgestone being an old tire. If so, why are they still using the same compound, wall stiffness etc and not moving with the times? I find it unlikely a large company like them would stop working on improving the best tire for their brand, especially when their reputation for Aston Martin is at stake.

Don, thanks for the heads-up on tire age. Before I ordered the new ones I looked at my old Bridgestone rears to discover they were the original tire, 8 years old! Just about any brand is going to improve the ride after these cart wheels.

I'm learning a lot about Michelins from this thread and I'd like to consider a change, but a couple of things have put me off. First, my tire guy - a shop that fits Porsche, Lambo, Bentley etc - agreed the Michelins were as good as everyone says but had a softer compound and didn't last that well here.

Our terrain is the problem - think San Francisco hills for much of our driving. We get tremendous edge wear as a result and it's well known my city has the highest rate of tire wear in our country. And yes, I live on top of a winding road. And no, I don't want to change my tires annually like I do with our Lexus SUV.

All things considered, I'm still ahead in favor of my original selection!

 

No. If it were this way, the parts manual would have different part numbers for those components based on country. They do not.

 

While some manufacturers go with the "best" tire they can from the get-go, it might be worth remembering that when AM first started building the DB9 and V8V, they were owned by Ford and cost was an issue. Passing costs along to consumers brings a higher sticker price, which was something AM was aiming to keep reasonable (read: low) on the V8V.

 

Since $$$$ are involved, I find it quite likely. As for reputation, well, I doubt most people would notice the difference, so Aston probably isn't too concerned on that front. And 6speed forum members are not most people.

 

Sure Bridgestone continues to improve their tires, as all other manufacturers do. But when they do, they give that tire a new model name. That tire is the Potenza S-04 Pole Position and it is ranked 3rd out of all 29 tires in the Maximum Summer Performance category. The standard tire that AML supplies with the Vantage (Potenza RE050) is ranked dead last. Whereas the Michelin Pilot Super Sport is ranked first.

Keep in mind that, if AML signed a contract with Bridgestone to be the supplier for a certain tire model for a number of years, then that is what they are stuck putting on the car. I'm sure they probably got a good deal at the time even though tire technology has evolved immensely since then.

 

No question that cost is one of the factors that went/goes into choosing the OEM tire for an Aston Martin. However, I don't believe that Aston Martin would put a crap tire on the car to save a few $$. These are performance cars, and the car's handling is a major component of its performance, it will be tested and compared to other cars in the auto mags, and the tire is the thing that touches the road, so it's more than a little important. I'm not suggesting that they select the very best tire available, but I do not believe that cost is THE criterion. IMO, that's just too cynical.

The notion that our seat of the pants impressions are anywhere near as accurate as those of the cars' and tire's engineers is, well, hard to believe, and we are comparing old vs new -- not an even playing field. That doesn't mean that we each don't have valid subjective impressions of a tire, and surely seat of the pants feel is very important, but there are so many more parameters. Still, our seat of the pants comparison is comparing that old, worn, dry Bridgestone (or whatever) to a fresh Michelin -- of course the Michelin will feel better. Also, some of us prefer a softer ride, some don't, some prefer sharper response, some don't, some prefer max grip, some would rather have on-limit predictability, etc.

That said, obviously the OEM RE050 is not a latest-tech tire anymore, and it's quite likely that performance measurements would favor the new Michelin. Nonetheless, a fresh set of RE050s would make a Vantage feel like it did when it was new, and that can have its own appeal.

One size may not fit all...

 

Advances in tire technology and construction got mentioned, so rather than comparing an old tire (OEM RE050A) to a new tire (MPSS), let's look at the tires available at the time (2005)

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

First: Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3
Second: Continental ContiSportContact 2
Third: Yokohama Advan Neova AD07
Fourth: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2
Fifth: Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212
Sixth: Dunlop SP Sport Maxx
Seventh: Pirelli P Zero Rosso Asimmetrico
Eighth: Toyo Proxes T1R
Ninth: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A
Tenth: BFGoodrich g-Force T/A KD
Eleventh: Kumho Ecsta MX

From the article:

The Bridgestone performed a lot better in the wet than the BFGoodrich. In two wet tests, the autocross and the skidpad, it placed third. Those were its highest finishes, and for the most part, this tire didn't shine in any one area.
In performance terms, the Bridgestone was midpack. It fell to ninth in the overall ranking because its 140 tread-wear grade was the lowest of the group, and compounding that, at $178 it was the second-most-expensive tire.
Our subjective comments seemed to back up the midpack performance. Geswein said it felt "dull and disconnected" and that it was "somewhat soft and imprecise when driven hard." Although we didn't test the ride characteristics of this tire, we wondered if its lazy feel was a result of being designed for a compliant ride. If performance is your goal, there are better choices.

 

Thank you Telum!

As I stated, it was not even a top 5 tire BACK THEN, and that was almost a decade ago. I think some people in this thread are trying to over think the counter intuitive argument int his thread. The simple fact is they are forced to use the RE050A due to contractual obligations, nothing more. It really is that simple.

Karl Franz put it best, RE050A is dead last, Bridgestone S04 is 3rd, Michelin PSS is 1st.

Even a new set of RE050As are pure junk by today's standards so don't try to make the argument they are not. Not trying to ruffle feathers, it's just the honest truth.

You can put lipstick on a pig... But that doesn't make it pretty

 

Some people like driving on rocks, apparently...

 

The reviews need some thoughtful analysis before they are useful in this discussion. The Tire Rack user reviews for both Bridgestones and PSS are by owners with a huge variety of cars ranging from an R8 to a Ford Fiesta.

Some cars in the reviews have either brands as OEM, but very few of those are for staggered sizing which as we know makes a huge difference to handling.

There is only one review for a DB9, out of around 1,300 for both tire brands.

I can't see how anyone can make an Aston Martin tire recommendation based on these disparate viewpoints.

 

I agree totally, but then I'm strongly biased toward the manufacturer as experts, and the more I delve into this subject the more I'm convinced they know what they're doing and I don't.

It's rather turning out like the old loudspeaker cable debate where there's a product for every pocket despite the scientific fact that most cables push out the same digital signal. Tires may be a different field with more variables, but I believe the same hokum logic applies.

A few posts back I mentioned the difference between countries as a variable. So it could be that Aston Martins are built for Europe's roads and conditions, and this doesn't translate well to the US with its long straight roads and gentle turns. Harley's are a good example of a vehicle specifically built for a country.

 

That's OK, you just keep on ridin' on your rocks while the rest of us go a different way.

 

Do you think an extra couple hundred bucks would have made a difference to a buyer back then? AM have had two strong marketing points in their pricing arsenal... cars priced well above competing brands to the point where everyone still wonders why today. And the 007 following which they have said had a continuing boost to their sales.

I agree as a boutique manufacturer AM just didn't have the cash to play round with, hence their rollercoaster bankruptcies and buy-outs, but they also had a marque that was revered round the world by passionate buyers who would pay the price.

I wonder whether tire price was really an issue here.