Customers less satisfied with run-flat, low-rolling resistance tires

In non-April Fool's news, customers who buy cars shod with run-flat tires are nearly twice as likely to have to replace them as people with more conventional tires, according to a J.D. Power and Associates study. The poll also found that customers are also less satisfied with low-rolling resistance tires.

Nearly one-third of customers with run-flats have had to replace at least one tire, compared with 19 percent for standard tires. Also, standard tires last an average of 22,559 miles, which is 6,000 miles more than run-flats.

Elsewhere in the study, owners of performance sports cars with run-flat tires say they “definitely will” recommend their tire brand to friends just 14 percent of the time, while drivers with traditional tires recommend those at twice that rate.

"Automakers are trying to reach the next level of fuel economy, and are looking to their suppliers -- in this case, tire manufacturers -- to help them get there," said Brent Gruber, director, global automotive division at J.D. Power and Associates. "The challenge is doing this while finding tires that meet customers' expectations. Run-flat tires are not currently meeting those expectations."

Autoweek can offer some anecdotal evidence to back up the study's findings. In our experiences with our long-term 2011 BMW 550i xDrive and 2009 BMW 750Li with run-flats, we replaced 11 tires and at least three rims in short stints with each car. However, it should be noted that Autoweek HQ is located in Metro Detroit, where the roads are probably worse than most.

The logic behind run-flat tires is twofold. One, they save the weight of having a spare in the trunk, making the car more efficient; and two, that extra space can be used for cargo room.

As for the low-rolling resistance tires, the study found that many customers are apprehensive, concerned with the compromises those tires offer.

"While the marketing of low-rolling resistance tires has primarily focused on fuel efficiency, tire manufacturers may also benefit from advertisements that help educate consumers about the traction and dependability of the tires," said Gruber. "Consumers don't fully understand the benefit of low-rolling resistant tires. They believe they are forfeiting important aspects of tire performance by opting for low-rolling resistance tires, yet don't know how much improvement in fuel efficiency they should expect in return."

A recent study claimed low-rolling resistance tires could lower fuel consumption by 1.5-4.5 percent.

For overall satisfaction, Michelin rated highest in three segments -- luxury, passenger car and performance sport. Pirelli ranks highest in the pickup truck/utility segment.

The survey is based on responses from more than 30,000 new-vehicle owners who purchased a 2011 or 2012 model-year vehicle.

By Jake Lingeman