We found the following complaints for BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL42 (Unknown)
Read complaints for BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL42 (Unknown)
Traveling on the interstate, the car lost traction and began to fish tail down the road as left and right front tires lost grip with the road intermittently back and forth.there was some very minor puddling in the ruts on the highway and it was raining lightly on and off.the onboard vehicle stability systems (abs, vsc) did not activate.the vehicle speed was within speed limits and consistent with other vehicle speeds on the highway at the time. The vehicle is equipped with bridgestone turanza el42 tires.
I purhcased my 2005 nissan altima 3.5 se not 3 weeks ago. Since that time there has been a vibration in the steering wheel and the entire vehicle. I have had the tires balanced by nissan 4 times, and they replaced one tire that was supposedly bad. But the problem still exists. Dealer keeps saying each timethat it will be fixed. Now i am turning the car back in. The vibration is above 70 mph.
No accidenttires, over drive, quick to pull to the right is a big saftey fault. I feel there are all problems related to the horsepower, front wheel drive, transmission, and humming and vibration through out the car and most notable at speeds between 50-60mph.
I have a 2004 acura tl with 2000 miles on it.it has been at the dealer twice for 7 total days, trying to correct a vibration between 45 and 60.it is also evident at 75-80.vibration is felt in seat, steering wheel and pedals dealer replaced front tires twice and front rims once.we still experience the vibrationfrequently.i contacted honda of america.the representativeinformed me that this was a torque converter problem known for approximatel 4 months.i asked about returning the car and was told i was not going to get my money back.he stated that engineering is looking at modifying engine mounts.i told him that was only masking the problem.he stated all 04 and 05 models have the problem!i was floored they knew it and were still pushing cars out the door and the dealership was blaming the problem on tires.i asked about inherent vibration impact on the life expectancy to the driver train seals and bearings.the honda of america representative became very rude.i got his name and hung up.not what you would expect from honda or a $35k car!the dealership service centerwas appalled that honda america stated there was widespread problems with the torque converter, stated they never heard of it and insisted this is a tire issue!it is desheartening to get two different stories.i believe the tire story gives the honda corporate offices some relief of liability by leveraging off of firestone for defects.should the torque converter be openly pursued as the culprit and johnq. Public knowing about it, this could be a drive a costly recall funded from the pockets of honda of america!
Increased road noise and vibration effecting the steering.
I have owned this 2004 acura tl since jan. 2004. It has been at the dealership on at least 4 occasions due to a significant vibration. The vibration is most noticeable at about 60 mph. One can feel and see the steering wheel vibrate. The dealership replaced the tires (at no charge) with less than 20,000 miles due to premature wear. However, the vibration problem has never been corrected. In reviewing web sites it appears the vibration problem i am having is not an isolated incident, but one common to many acura tl owners. It seems that honda has an obligation to identify and correct the problem.
My car has been to the dealer twice for replacement tires due to vibration throughout my car.the second time my tires were replaced with the updated el42, and the vibrations still persist, along with the fact that the car now pulls to the left.when i called criswell acura of annapolis, i was told that the pulling to the left was not an alingment problem it was a tire pressure issue.so i took mycar back to the dealership and they properly inflated my tires. And of course my car still pulls to the left.
Historical summary of noise and vibration caused by irregular (uneven) tire wear (feathering) on 2006 330i bmw withbridgestone turanza el 42 225/45/17 run flat tires: european delivery 9-12-2005, arranged bydealer.at about 16,000 miles, began to notice front tire noise (roar) and vibration at 15-30 mph, especially upon braking.the noise became progressively worse and could feel vibrations in driver's and passenger's floor pans. The noise continued to increase and the vibration began to sound like worn front wheel bearings. I took to dealerat 18,500 miles around7/ 31/2006.vehicle test driven at 18,775 miles. Sa advised that the front tires had uneven wear which caused the noise and vibrations, and tires not covered by neither bmw nor bridgestone. No other advice or remedy was given. Wrote to president bmwna, on 8/04/2006 requesting bmw perform wheel alignment (to correct the factory defective alignment) and to replace the front tires.customer relations rep instructed me to take car to dealer for alignment check. On 8/14/2006, alignment check performed by dealer, and determined that three wheels alignment were out of factory specification range.charged $225 for this alignment. Service manager advised that they would not replace the unevenly worn and noisy tires. On 8/16/2006, message from customer relations that bmw would pay for the alignment.had tires inspected by the local bridgestone tire dealer, and manager advised that vehicle was miss-aligned causing all four tires to exhibit irregular wear (feathering) causing the excessive noise and vibration.he said the dealer should replace all four tires. On 08/29/2006 wrote 2nd request to president of bmwna for replacement of all four tires and for reimbursement of $225. 09/18/2006 received letter from cr rep promising reimbursement for alignment, but denying request for replacement tires on the basis that vehicle was aligned to specifications at the factory prior to delivery.
While driving 50 mphvehicle vibrated with such a force that consumer had to slow the speed down to almost a stop to getvibration to stop. It occurred mostly in the mornings when vehicle just started out.consumer took the vehicle to the dealer, who said that it was a tire problem and not a mechanical defect. Consumer then put on a set of bridgestone turanza el42tires which were the same tires that were on the vehicle. The next day the same problem occurred at the same speeds. In other words, nothing changed.
I purhcased my 2005 nissan altima 3.5 se not 3 weeks ago. Since that time there has been a vibration in the steering wheel and the entire vehicle. I have had the tires balanced by nissan 4 times, and they replaced one tire that was supposedly bad. But the problem still exists. Dealer keeps saying each timethat it will be fixed. Now i am turning the car back in. The vibration is above 70 mph.
Dt:the contact stated when hitting a bump the rear end the vehicle skidded out.causing abnormal tire wear.he replaced the rear tires twice, every 7,000-8,000 miles.the vehicle has been taken to two different dealerships, and they were unable to diagnose theproblem.updated 12/7/2005.the consumer's vehicle is now on it's third set of tires.the dealer stated that since the rear tire were worn evenly that alignment was not the problem.
My 2005 acura tl el42 bridgestone rear tires went completely bald on a 3000 mile trip(19000 miles total) from dallas to colorado and back. It appears that there is a suspension/tire problem where the rear alignment under full load of 2 passangers and luggage in the trunk degrades and causes severe tire wear. This causes severe loss of control on wet pavement with rear hydroplaning at even <50 mph. Acura has a tsb and replace tires at lowered cost but only with the suspect el42 tires. After further internet searches this seem not to be isolated incident.
Rear tires on new honda civic lx 2008 began thumping and shaking at 12000 miles and kept getting worse until 15k, so i took it to the dealer.honda dealer said the "c" arms that corrected the problem with 2007 civics were installed in my car, and the problem may be because i did not have tires rotated. (?)they wanted $381 for tires and alignment with only 9 months and 15k miles of new car use.
The sidewall blowout of the left rear tiredodge caravan 2005bridgestone turanza el42b298t215/65r16.
I own a 2004 acura tl with original equipment bridgestone el-42 tires.while the tire preformed acceptably during the summer the preformance on wet roads and particulary in snow and ice was absolutly terrible.my family and i took a 500 mile trip in michigan over the christmas holidays and i almost had to park the car and get a rental to get home.i replaced the tires 2 days after getting home.the tires had only 12k miles on therm.
These tires (bridgestone turanza el42 ? 215/65r16) were oem on my 2007 dodge caravan with a firestone/bridgestone warranty.at 10,000 miles i noticed a pull to the right.i purchased a lifetime alignment and rotated the tires at b/f.after another 1300 miles, the pull was a harder right. F/b checked the alignment, stating it was good and told me this was a "belt" issue....put the "bad" tires to the rear and ordered two oem tires.i am awaiting 2 new tires of the same oem (one to be warranted the other self pay).the f/b store, where i purchased the lifetime alignment, tells me you can check a belt problem by cross rotating the tires.until that test is completed, they cannot consider replacing a damaged tire under the warranty.both tires are under the 12 month-2/32 depth warranty provided with my new car.i think f/b should cover the warranty on both damaged tires without any need to test for a belt issue.either the ?bad? belt damaged 2 tires or an improper alignment damaged 2 tires.after reading numerous reviews abt this particular tire on www.nhtsa and www.tirerack.com, i do not want to pay a dime for a turanza el42 replacement tire.reviews of these tires on bmw's, acura's, and dodge/chrysler products show numerous problems from blow-outs, poor tread wear, flat spots, cupping, and belt issues.addendum: while the original f/b store (who initially aligned and rotated my tires) will not consider honoring the tire warranty, i did find another f/b store in my area (20 miles away instead of just 4 miles away) who will replace the 2 worn tires without question and under the warranty.i will speak with the district manager of f/b about both local stores and the good and bad behaviors of each store manager.
Driving on a mountain highway at about 50 mph.temperature outside was around 10 degrees fahrenheit.rear driver side tire blew out (360 degree rip in sidewall).there was about 25,000 miles on the tire and the tread was in good condition.i measured the remaining tire pressures at about 36 psi. Fortunately, the road at that point was straight and there was no snow on the road.we were able to safely pull over.the only correction that has been done, is the bridgestone tires were all replaced with goodyear tires (even though all the treads were still in good condition).note:the entry form didn't allow me to specify exactly what size my tires were. They were 215/65r16!
Consumer noticed that after having the tires rotated at 10,000 miles and while driving at 60 mph vehicle vibrated uncontrollably.consumer was able to maintain control of the vehicle, and pulled over.the vehicle was taken to the dealer for inspection, andmechanic determined that the tires needed to be replaced due to tread separation.
No accidenttires, over drive, quick to pull to the right is a big saftey fault. I feel there are all problems related to the horsepower, front wheel drive, transmission, and humming and vibration through out the car and most notable at speeds between 50-60mph.
This complaint refers to the original equipment tires (bridgestone el-42, 235/45-17 93w ) supplied on the 2004 acura tl with 6 speed manual transmission. After just a short time i have found this tire to be entirely unsafe and unsuitable to this vehicle. I believe that both acura and bridgestone should be held responsible for replacing this tire on all existing vehicles. This tire exhibits unsafe characteristics in wet weather, with noticeable drift and hydroplaning in any amount of standing water, even as little as 1/16 inch. In heavy rains, even with no standing water present, the tire seems incapable of dispersing water as quickly as it falls, again leading to vehicle instability. From a ride quality point of view the tire is also unsatisfactory in that it flat spots every morning, especially in cool weather but even in warmer weather as well, leading to vibrations in the initial miles of any drive. It is also especially harsh over roadway expansion joints, and is so loud on concrete pavements that it poses a safety hazard due to driver fatigue induced by the continuous noise. I also understand that there may be an issue regarding the rating as an "all season tire" with many owners reporting that this tire is virtually useless in any kind of snow conditions.
My 2004 acura 3.2 tl uses bridgestone turanza el42 tires (235/45r17), w speed-rated. The el 42 tires had a so called "flat spot" problem and they were worn out only at 15,500 mile.there has been many complaints about this type of tires on the internet.many of them mentioned that "flat spot" problem could become a safety issue.
Excessive premature tire wear on a 2006 bmw 330i.i have made numerous complaints to the dealer and they say they are working on a fix or a tire replacement but that i should continue to drive.this has been going on for 2,000 miles and it has progressively gotten worse.i drive my 3 year old son to day care and i really would like to feel safe while driving him.having given the dealership over 2 months to correct the problem i feel it is time to look into other avenues to get a resolution.
I have called the acura customer service number and did not get through with anyone. My 2004 acura tl has a consistent vibration problem when the car is running between 50 and 60 mph.the vibration seems to come from the front of the car. I reported the problem to the acura dealer and they have assured me the problem was with the tires.i also had a second opinion from another dealership whom also assured me the problem are the tires. I find that this is a very common issue with the bridgestone tires, and i feel that these tires are unsafe and acura/bridegstone should recall and replace these tires. The consumers should not have to pay to replace these tires.my car has about 10,000 miles and this is a real problem for consumers who just purchased a brand new vehicle to have to worry about tires, which i feel may have a design or manufacturing defect causing a vibration in the car.this may lead to accidents and i also know that there are many other 2004 acura owners complaining about the same problem. I hope this problem gets resolved as soon as possible.
- the contact owns a 2006 325xi bmw. The tires on the bmw were bridgestone, turanza el42, size 205/55/r16 dot# is # ej8kcnk4005.while driving the contact heard a loud noise coming from all four tires.when the vehicle's odometer reached 7,000 and again at 10,000miles the tires began to vibrate. Both bmw and bridgestone were aware of this failure, and bridgestone offered a 25% discount toward the purchase of a new set of tires. The vehicle's current mileage was 10,200.tire size rft el42 205/55/16 updated 01/19/07.
Oem tires on05 acura tl'sat 5000 wet weather driving is downright dangerous. Driving in snow even when new was impossible..yet these tires are marked m/s all season. Dealers are aware but have no incentive to do anything about it...except sell you a new set of tire for $800 we have had two very close calls in the rain are in the process of replacing tires at our expense before someone gets hurt. Rf tire has developed a major sidewall blister and was removed from service before catastrophic failure.
Made appt. With mazda service , regarding excessive tire wear on cx-7 suv. I have a firestone tire protectionfor this suv, according to firestone it does not cover wear. At my last oil change by firestone, they told me my tires need to be replaced, gave me a price, etc. I told them i would contact dealer and see what they have to say. Appt. Was 8/1/08, i was told my tires are only half worn@20,113 miles.tread wear was measured @ 5/32 on front and 4/32 on rear. Firestone rotated and ball. Tires @ 5,000 mi. Oil changes.i was told to come back when 50% more wear. Told service adviser this was a safety issue as there is no tread to wear, and mentioned what firestone had told me. His comment was they just wanted to sell you tires ". Took my cx-7 to ntb tire service, they checked my tires, rear @ 2/32" and front @4/32", they suggested i not drive with these worn-out tires, they need to be replaced. Purchased a set of take-off's for $160.00 and had ntb align and ball tires.i sent a e-mail to mazda cust. Service and explained , dealer measured 4/32" not 2/32".i wanted to meet with mazda rep at any ne ohio dealer, and have him check tires, etc. They never returned my e-mail. Followed-up with phone call to mazda cust. Service, they will check dealer, etc. Mazda called back and suggest i take up problem with dealer, they would not set up meeting with rep, etc.if mazda service dept at dealer can't measure tire tread, and be concerned with cust safety, i would never buy another mazda vehicle.
I lesseea bmw 2009 3 series vehicle equipped with bridgestone turanza el42 rft 225/45r17run-flat tires. I have 9,000 miles on the car and it sounds like a four wheel drive, plus the tires are cupping so bad its dangerous to drive. I have taken it to a bridgestone dealer and was told that they are defective but he can't replace them because it was only tires in 2005 ' 2007. They have lost a class action lawsuit for these tires before, why cant i get mine replaced? by them'.."the lawsuit alleges that defendants should have known that the tires were defective and prone to excessive noise and/or irregular wear, resulting in the tires needing frequent replacement and causing the vehicles to ride roughly."...and it goes ona nationwide class action settlement ('settlement') has been reached in a class action lawsuit against bmw of north america, llc ('bmw na'), bridgestone americas tire operations, llc ('bato') and bridgestone corporation ('bridgestone') (collectively 'defendants'), according to the bmw bridgestone run flat tire rft class action settlement notice.the bmw bridgestone run flat tire rft class action lawsuit reportedly concerns bmw 2006 and 2007 3 series vehicles originally equipped with bridgestone turanza el42 rft 205/55r16 or 225/45r17 run-flat tires ('turanza tires,' 'turanzas' or 'tires').the bmw bridgestone run flat tire rft class action lawsuit (chandran v. Bmw of north america, llc, et al., case no. 2:08-cv-02619-ksh-ps) reportedly alleges that defendants should have known that the tires were defective and prone to excessive noise and/or irregular wear, resulting in the tires needing frequent replacement and causing the vehicles to ride roughly.
I am the owner of 2008 acura tl which i purchased back in late november of 2008 i have about 3000 miles on the vehicle and have had one blow out during regular driving (on 12/24/08 with only 2200 miles) on residential streets without and warning i contacted bridgestone on regards to this and the covered only 80% of the cost to replace the tire. I now have what appears to be a bubble about the size of an egg now in the side wall of the driver side tire. I believe that the tires that came with the car are defective. My concern in not with the over line of tire but that the lot of tires that was provided on my vehicle is defective. All the driving that i have done has been under normal conditions and have had no accidents nor come in to contact with any roadway hazards. I feel this matter needs further looking into by another authority. Feel free to contact me.
We experienced a sidewall blowout of a bridgestone turanza el42 (21565r16 98t) on our 2003 dodge caravan (only 20,800mi) when i drove to the home. When i check other tires. I found a same problem on another tire --- few cracks on the sidewall.
The contact owns 2008 toyota sienna. The contact noticed that his tires aren't lasting long. The tires are generally suppose to be good quality tires andshould not experience wear and tear until at least 25,000 miles. As of 16,000 miles the tires seemed as if they were on the vehicle for years.the manufacturer of the tires were contacted and they referred the contact to the vehilce manufacturer.the vehicle manufacturer informed the contact to contact an authorized dealer. Authorized dealer informed the contactthat they would have to wait until thedistrict manager came in to see what they could do to assist him. As of now the contact still has yet to get assistance with the tire failure. They also informed the contact that he would have to wait until all the recalls were taken care of before he would be assisted. The vin was not available. The failure mileage was 16,000 and the current mileage was 21000.
I have 2006 bmw 325xi with only 15,000 miles. The car has bad batch of tires put on and it makes loud road noise. And dealer asks me to pay 50% of its cost to replace. I think bmw should pay for whole thing.
I'm very upset about the oem tires on my 2005 acura. I've had it since march of this year and complained from the beginning that the tires should be replaced because of the flat spotting and vibration.i complained to acura in california who had my car in twice so far. They acknowledge the vibration in many of their tls but won't replace the tires. They placed a small dampening rubber by the engine mount but it's still very obvious and very annoying.we as citizens come to you as a last resort many times to voice our concerns over safety issues. I cannot believe that with all the numerous complaints for over two years now about these tires failing, vibrating and very premature wear from new car buyers all over the country, nobody there is doing there job!acura and bridgestone should be made to replace all bridgestone turanza el42 tires immediately.
The vibration in the bridgestone el42 turanza tires on 2004 acura tl resulted in accident in february 2004 and $1500 worth of undercarriage damage.flatspotting and vibration in tires caused loss of control of the vehicle when attempting to stop the vehicle in inclement weather.flatspotting and vibration started 1 week after purchase of vehicle.have documentation of numerous attempts to get the problem resolved by dealer, but dealer was complacent in dealing with the issue thus resulting in the aformentioned accident.loss of control caused vehicle to end up in oncoming traffic lane almost resulting in head on collision.car slid into curb causing the 1500 damage.tires have been replaced with michelin pilot sport tires.america honda/acura and bridgestone needs to be held accountable for their complacency in dealing with this issue.please investigate quickly as lives can beat stake.
Noise caused by tires while driving making uncomfortable in 2006 3 series bmw.
I own a 2007 bmw 335i coupe. At 9,000 miles i started noticing a strange sound coming form the tire area. It gradually got worse. At 10,000 miles i noticed physical signs of "scalloping" and actual uneven (quite dramatically uneven) wear. It looked as though the leading edges of some, just some, treads were actually as much of a quarter in lower than the back side of the same tread and of course the back side of the tread it was adjacent to. It almost looks like rubber has literally been thrown off the tire. That's how big the difference in heights is of the random treads. This was true on both the inner and outer edges of the tires and even the middle. This would explain the thrumming noise. I made an appointment to get it into the dealer and without even looking at the tires the service manager said, "bridgestone will replace the tires up to 20,000 miles and pay half the cost". I said that these tires weren't worn out, they were wearing extremely unevenly. Cupping and scalloping like i have never seen. He said it was the design of the cars, that bmw makes them very aggressively to handle the way they do and any tire would do that. I asked if i could get them replaced with continentalssince i have heard they had less problems with those. He said no, only what was on there as bmw wasn't warranting the tires, bridgestone was. They didn't offer to rotate them, look at the alignment, nothing, just replace at half cost. So 9 months and now 11,000 miles into a $50k car i am forced to pay about $5-600 dollars just so i can talk to my passengers and be heard over the tire noise. I really feel that this is a huge safety issue as only part of the tire is in contact with road at any time.
Bridgestone turanza e42 oem tire on 2004 acura tl have flat spotting issues and were worn out after 15,000 miles. Very poor traction in rain and snow for an all season touring tire. Acura and bridgestone should recall and replace these tires.
Excessive road noise and abnormal (premature) wear of bridgestone-firestone turanza el42 run flat tires 205/55r16.excessive road noise started before 10,000 miles and all tires had to be replaced after only 1 year (approx 14,000 miles).car was a 2007 bmw 328i.bmw has a service bulletin (si b 36 06 06) regarding this issue and is replacing all tires (upon complaint) if < 10,000 miles.if tires have between 10,001 to 20,000 miles, replacement is at 50%.tires were "cupping" and demonstrating very abnormal wear patterns.upon complaint to bridgestone firestone, they agreed to 100% replacement costs.old tires are not available.
Dt:the contact stated when hitting a bump the rear end the vehicle skidded out.causing abnormal tire wear.he replaced the rear tires twice, every 7,000-8,000 miles.the vehicle has been taken to two different dealerships, and they were unable to diagnose theproblem.updated 12/7/2005.the consumer's vehicle is now on it's third set of tires.the dealer stated that since the rear tire were worn evenly that alignment was not the problem.
I purchased a bmw 330i in may 2006.shortly after purchase the tires were making noise.initially, the noise wasn't terribly objectionable, but it continued to worsen.i took the car to hendricks bmw in charlotte, nc ,and was told that the tires were cupping or feathering.they offered a 50% discount on the purchase of 4 new tires at 11,500 miles.i called bmw consumer affairs,and was told to contact bridgestone for a resolution of this problem. Later, on the web i found bmw technical service bulletin sib 36 06 06 which addressedthis specific problem.however, the information in this bulletin was not made available to consumers that purchased a vehicle with bridgestone turanza el 42 rft tires.bmw was still researching the problem.however, i am not optimistic they will address it.
My 2004tl came with bridgestone turanza el-42 tires. The dealer stated tires would be acceptable when i stated concerns with what i had read about flat spotting. On my first long distance trip (500+ miles) my front passenger tire blew off the rim. I had to have it replaced at procter acura in tallahassee which in formed me to take tire to a tire manufacturer since it is warrantied thru its manufactururer. As of this date nothing has been done. I bought a new tire ($225) and am waiting to hear what elsebridgestone will do to compensate me.
215/55/17 bridgestone turanza el-42 tire on fron driver side begin to split on side tradwear. Only 15000 miles on the tire. Exper tire care would not replace the defetive tire for free.
I have a 2004 acura tl with 2000 miles on it.it has been at the dealer twice for 7 total days, trying to correct a vibration between 45 and 60.it is also evident at 75-80.vibration is felt in seat, steering wheel and pedals dealer replaced front tires twice and front rims once.we still experience the vibrationfrequently.i contacted honda of america.the representativeinformed me that this was a torque converter problem known for approximatel 4 months.i asked about returning the car and was told i was not going to get my money back.he stated that engineering is looking at modifying engine mounts.i told him that was only masking the problem.he stated all 04 and 05 models have the problem!i was floored they knew it and were still pushing cars out the door and the dealership was blaming the problem on tires.i asked about inherent vibration impact on the life expectancy to the driver train seals and bearings.the honda of america representative became very rude.i got his name and hung up.not what you would expect from honda or a $35k car!the dealership service centerwas appalled that honda america stated there was widespread problems with the torque converter, stated they never heard of it and insisted this is a tire issue!it is desheartening to get two different stories.i believe the tire story gives the honda corporate offices some relief of liability by leveraging off of firestone for defects.should the torque converter be openly pursued as the culprit and johnq. Public knowing about it, this could be a drive a costly recall funded from the pockets of honda of america!
My 2005 acura tl el42 bridgestone rear tires went completely bald on a 3000 mile trip(19000 miles total) from dallas to colorado and back. It appears that there is a suspension/tire problem where the rear alignment under full load of 2 passangers and luggage in the trunk degrades and causes severe tire wear. This causes severe loss of control on wet pavement with rear hydroplaning at even <50 mph. Acura has a tsb and replace tires at lowered cost but only with the suspect el42 tires. After further internet searches this seem not to be isolated incident.
Our 2008 honda civic coupe developed a road noise in the rear tires at about 12k miles. Tires have been rotated every 5k and i have service order requests to back this up. At 15kmiles the noise had gotten unbearable. I asked my local mechanic to check and see if there was anything obvious before i took it to the honda dealer and he noted that the rear tires appeared to have the belts slipped and that the right tire appeared worn out. I called honda and they directed me to bridgestone who told me the tires were worn out because honda has a chassis problem and that the tires were not warranted for wear. Honda said there is no technical issues with their suspension and they couldn't help me. So i have a car with tires that are worn out at 15k miles and i have no recourse but to eat it and hope that the next set of tires wears better. This is unsafe inmy opinion. Poot tire wear can only come from so many things. I have air pressure monitoring system, so it wasn't improper inflation, the vehicle is new so it isn't suspension issues, the tires were rotated twice in first 10k miles (documented).i guess having unsafe tires on a one year old automobile is not a big deal for honda, but it is for me. Having a 1 year old auto in the drive way that we are scared to drive out of the neighborgood isn't a good thing.
Have owned a 2005 chrysler t&c for 7 months since may 2006 and the bridgestone turanza el42 tires have experienced abnormal outside edge tire wear as well as severe abnormal vibration when accelerating.vibration is felt in gas pedal, seat and steering wheel.had tires rotated/balanced/alignment check and 5 separate service garages look at vibration issue but no solution.chrysler dealer told me back in july 2006 they did not feel the vibration but every other person that has driven vehicle feels the abnormal vibration and this is a serious safety issue.tires also have had "indentations/lines" in all tires since i bought the vehicle new with less than 200 miles on it.i now have 8,200 miles on vehicle and am concerned about reports of dozens of other complaints about tire failure/blow out as valid registered complaints.i would like to replace these tires with another brand but not at my expense since it should be a tire manufacturer safety issue.tire size is 215/65r16 even though the pull down box did not let me select my correct size.
The contact owns a 2006 bmw 3 series.the vehicle has bridgestone (model unknown), size 205/55r16 tires.while driving 45 mph, the tire warning light illuminated.the contact stated that there was a loss of air pressure on the driver side front tire.furthermore, the passenger side front tire was blistered.the dealer would not diagnose the failure and referred the contact to the tire manufacturer.as of october 22, 2007, the manufacturer had not inspected the tires.the failure mileage was 1,608 and current mileage was 16,700.updated 12/12/2007 updated 12/12/07
My car failed a vehicle inspection today for "safety reasons" because i'm told the 2 front tires are worn out. I have a 2007 bmw 328xi that came with bridgestone turanza el 42 run flat tires.after 8114 miles in response to my complains with the handling, and noise, the tires were found to be scalloped and all 4 were replaced (with same make and model) free of charge in 2007.at 22k miles (14k on new tires) the noise became unbearable and at 28,555 (20k on tires) i took the car back in and was told to replace the tires for close to $1000 (since the dealer said they could only replace tires once) with advise to shop for a better price.given that my state inspection guidelines consider this a safety issue, and i'm asked to change tires twice under 29k miles, i would have hoped bmw or bridgestone would have done something about this.but i'm requesting the nhtsa to look into it.
While on a trip to attend a wedding in grand rapids, michigan, we experienced a sidewall blowout of a bridgestone turanza el42 (21565r16 98t) on our 2006 dodge caravan.the blowout occurred pulling into a parking place at a low angle, at a low speed, and with a relatively low curb height' just pulling in at walking speed. This is the second bridgestone turanza el42 that has been replaced on a car that had 13,278 miles on the odometer at the time of the incident. The last routine service (12,000 miles) was at 10,970 miles.the first replacement was on 5 november 2007 with 7,107 miles on the odometer.this tire had a pronounced sidewall bubble and was clearly 'an accident waiting to happen.' it was replaced by the dealer, marty cancila dodge, at our expense despite the 'tires for life service plan' and extended warranty we have on the automobile. At this point, we purchased a tire safety warranty expecting, of course, more difficulties with these tires.unwilling to trust neither my safety nor the safety of any of my passengers, i proceeded to purchase two new tires. I could not obtain two bridgestone turanza tires in the grand rapids, mi, area so i purchased two michelin's of the same size and similar tread pattern.i drove the car home with the turanzas on the front but will have the michelin's switched to the front to reduce the probability of death, dismemberment, or other pain and suffering due to tire failure.to get some sense of the problem with the turanza tire, i have included a recall notice that i found at the following web site: http://www.usautoinjurylaw.com/cases/tires/failurefirestone.htm: bridgestone turanza el41, p19565r15.the el42 may be a renamed el41 which was notorious for blowouts and is now a subject of a class action lawsuit.in other words, lipstick may not transform a pig it to a princess.i kept the failed tire and actually carry the other tire in the car to have a replacement readily available.
Vibration and shaking of steering wheel during normal driving.replacement of the tires and numerous rebalancing have had no effect.acura dealer is not responsive and acura customer care has informed me this "a charateristic of the car" while at the same time admitting that "we have received numeous complaints about steering wheel vibration and our engineers are investigating the problem"i was also told there we was no timeline for resolution.given the situation, i am growing concerned about the handling and stability of the vehicle in its current state.acura has admitted there is a problem but has not fully disclosed the details.i am also worried because this seems to be a widespread issue affecting many tl owners given the number of web forums i have visited on the subject.
El42 bridgestones that came with my new 2004 acura tl are unsafe.they flat spot and hydroplane in the rain.the tires are very unsafe in rain and they are considered "all season" they are not all season in my opinion.i lost control on a number of occasions with the el42 bridgestones because of hydroplaning.the faltspotting causes the tires to vibrate and bounce until they warm up.the car came with the original pvc type (early build) and the dealer refused to put the new "tu@" on my car.ratings on this tire are terrible as shown on "tirerack.com"acura dealer refused to replace my el42 pvc original tires with acceptable safe tires.i have no choice but to put michelin pilot sport all seasons on my car quickly because i do not feel safe driving this car with the el42.please advise- i know many people with the 2004 acura tl are unhappy with the el42's that came with them.the el42's are unsafe in the rain and snow they are not all season and should be investigated agressively before people lose control and get in accidents.*la
Serious problem, i can not drive and can not replace blowout, broken run flat tires from bridgestone on my '08 bmw 328i.it's the 4th warranty coverage replacement in 6months but this time it is out of stock at my costco tire where i purchased them and was told by the maker, bridgestone tires that there's 18,000+ backorders on these tires and they have no idea on eta.
My husband and i purchased 2 mazda cx-7's in oct 07. In sept 2008 1 vehicle after just 13,000 miles on it had excessive and abnormal wear on all 4 of the tires. We have been advised not to drive much on these tires in the condition they are in by 4 separate opinions we received from the dealership, tire manufacturer and 2 additional tire retailers.we have had 1 flat tire during the process of getting these tires replaced however neither the dealership, car manufacturer nor the tire manufacturer would stand behind the faulty equipment. All agreed that the tires should not wear that excessively however each blaming the other for the problem. Several posts on the internet state the same problem with this tire and this vehicle!i feel i have the right to have safe equipment on my vehicle and i am looking for support to keep my passengers as well as other's who may be driving this car with these tires safe.i would like to mention that the other vehicle of the same make and model bought on the same day has a different tire on the car and that car has normal wear and tear.. To me this is evidence that something is not right with this car and this tire.
All tires has sidewall cracking causing slow leaks.
I have a mazda 2007 cx 7 with bridgestone tires.i have 25,480 miles and do not carry anything heavy.the car is usually used for local travel wih 1 person in it and no more than 2, both of us together weigh less than 300 lbs.two of my tires have to be replaced and another one within the next 1000 miles.people who have purchased this model have been complaining about tires wearing out at 22,000 miles and mazda nor bridgestone will do anything about it.this is a potential problem in which tires will blow out causing either property damage or loss of life.i have not replaced the tires yet, so they are available for insepction.people purchasing these automobiles should have been told that these tires wear out at around 22k miles, since i would have either asked to have the tires replaced or i would not have purchased the car.when you purchase tires from a auto shop, they indicate the normal wear of the tire.all new autos should have the same requirement.i think that bridgestone used inferior rubber to make these tires since the weight of the auto may have an effect on the wear ofthe tires.
The mazda 2007 cx-7 shows excessive wear on tires after 12,000 miles. Dealer said he red lined tires and to replace them. The tires are bridgestoneel-42p235/60r/18 102h. Front tires showed outer tread wear as if under inflated. Rear tires showed al around wear evenly . Dealer refused to make any concessions on these tires . But got a mailing from dealer to sell me tires..
Oem tires (bridgestone el42) completely worn out after 10,000 miles.from very beginning, "all season" tires would routinely hydroplane at speeds as low as 40mph and were unusable in the snow.
-the contact owns a 2005 acura, and complained about the tires.the contact had 3 incidents with the tires that were on the vehicle at the time of purchase. During the first incident, the driver's side tire lost air due to a nail.the tire was repaired on may 6, 2006.in july the contact noticed the same tire was losing air, and was repaired on december 1, 2006.also, the contacthad the tires rotated, aligned, and the tire pressure checked.on december 31, 2006, the contact was driving and noticed the vehicle was slowing down . She then accelerated, but the vehicle continued to slow down.suddenly a cloud of smoke appeared on the front passenger's side . The police escorted the contact to a safe location.the tire was burnt, and the rim was damaged.on january 2, 2007 all 4 tires were replaced at the dealer.the contact felt that acura should not use this type of defective tire.
Premature tire wear on my 2007 mazda cx-7 at 16,000 miles.
I have owned this 2004 acura tl since jan. 2004. It has been at the dealership on at least 4 occasions due to a significant vibration. The vibration is most noticeable at about 60 mph. One can feel and see the steering wheel vibrate. The dealership replaced the tires (at no charge) with less than 20,000 miles due to premature wear. However, the vibration problem has never been corrected. In reviewing web sites it appears the vibration problem i am having is not an isolated incident, but one common to many acura tl owners. It seems that honda has an obligation to identify and correct the problem.
Treadware at 13k miles, tires need to be replaced.
I purchased a 2007 mazda cx-7 from diamond mazda in baton rouge, la. I have always been under the assumption that a set of tires on a new vehicle would last me at least till i paid off the loan which would be 5 years. I have purchased other vehicles and never had this probably before now. This is the first time that i have bought a mazda and probably my last. I am very disappointed about the run around that i am getting from bridgestone/firestone tire retailers. I was told that this mazda cx-7 is a heavy vehicle and that the tires are only warranty for 16,000 miles i have never heard anything like that before in my life. If i have to buy tires every year i will go broke. My mazda cx-7 has 16,000 miles on it and the tires are worn to where they are slick. They are very dangerous and for me to buy some new tires will cost me $750.00. I had no idea that this would have happen to me after only having the car for one year. I see there are other complaints on the same issue. There should be a recall on these tires.
In my opinion the manufacturer is knowingly was selling the 2004 acura tl with the bridgestone/firestone el-42 tires knowing that these tires had a design or manufacturing defect causing them to flat spot without warning the buyer first about the problem.not only this is deceptive and in my opinion violates implied warrantly but it was dangerous as it forced us to drive the car at slow speeds because of the vibration in high speed roads.
While driving 50 mphvehicle vibrated with such a force that consumer had to slow the speed down to almost a stop to getvibration to stop. It occurred mostly in the mornings when vehicle just started out.consumer took the vehicle to the dealer, who said that it was a tire problem and not a mechanical defect. Consumer then put on a set of bridgestone turanza el42tires which were the same tires that were on the vehicle. The next day the same problem occurred at the same speeds. In other words, nothing changed.
I recently purchased a dealer-certified used 2005 acura tl with new, dealer-installed bridgestone turanza el42 tires.in my first experience driving the vehicle in rain, i nearly lost control of the vehicle at 60 mph when i hit a shallow standing water (~1" deep) in the roadway.being a front-drive vehicle, i was very surprised to feel the front tires distinctly hydroplane and cause me to almost lose control of my vehicle.these tires only have 2,000 miles on them and i find their lack of hydroplaning resistance to be well below normal expectations and therefore distinctly dangerous.
My car has been to the dealer twice for replacement tires due to vibration throughout my car.the second time my tires were replaced with the updated el42, and the vibrations still persist, along with the fact that the car now pulls to the left.when i called criswell acura of annapolis, i was told that the pulling to the left was not an alingment problem it was a tire pressure issue.so i took mycar back to the dealership and they properly inflated my tires. And of course my car still pulls to the left.
I own a 2006 bmw 325i with oem bridgestone turanza el42 run flat tires. The tires have been making a loud noise for quite some time with 18k miles on them. I took the car in to the dealerfor my first 15k mile service and was informed the tire was not wearing properly and that this has been a common problem with that model tire. The dealer was only willing to pay for 2 new tires. If the tire has a problem i feel it is fair to get 4 of them replaced. I was not able to find a recall on this tire but i felt like it deserved to be investigated based on the amount of people having problems that are posted on various websites. After 6,000 miles on the new tires i notice that the front tires are showing excessive wear and tear and i am going to take it back to the dealer. I believe these bridgestome turanza el42 run flat tires have serious manufacturing problems and neither bmw or bridgestone would admit it. I think this model tire needs to be investigated before we buyers have to replace these every 6,000 miles are so. Bmw should own up to the problem with these tires and replace them with better tires at no cost to the consumer. Given the price of these cars dealing with tire issues every six months is unacceptable.
I purchased a new 2005 acura tl in august 2005. My car is a non-navigation 6 speed manual transmission model delivered with bridgestone el42 tires. The first time i drove the vehicle in the rain, i noticed that even at low speeds on wet roads, the tires do not have any traction at all. On ramps at 20 mph the front tires loose grip. As of today, the weather is getting colder and the tires are flat spotting on top of that. These tires are all season rated and delivered on a $35,000 vehicle. They are absolutely unsafe in anything but dry weather, but are rates all season. I fear for my safety on the highway at freeway speeds and even more fear the first day of snow. Acura has so far refused to do anything and referred me to the tire manufacturer. They do deliver other tl models with michelin tires that are rated by customer much much higher. While the el42 tires present a big problem from wet weather traction, over flat spotting to premature wear, acura has chosen not to do anything about it yet. How shameful for otherwise such a great car, putting on tires that will land them a lawsuit if anything happens at all! it it their choice to put these tires on some of their cars, so their responsibility to fix the problem!!
New vehicle with bridgestone turanza el42 tires. The car reported low tire pressure. I was driving the vehicle (mazda cx-7) to the dealership from my home. 5 minutes after i entered the freeway, the tire on the rear passenger side had a blow out. The tires only had 3,000 miles on them.
My dodge van has four "slow leak" bridgestone tires. What should i do? i had this problem since i got this van.do not buy bridgestone tires.bridgestone 215/65r16 98t m+s el4213zdot 7x6v cto 2203 c19ltubeless radial .
Bridgestone turanza el-42 tires that are oem on my new 2004 acura tl have serious problems with "flat spotting". This perfect car runs like a flintstone car until tires warm up and round out. Acura is replacing with same brand and model tires that are supposed to be fixed.
Traveling on the interstate, the car lost traction and began to fish tail down the road as left and right front tires lost grip with the road intermittently back and forth.there was some very minor puddling in the ruts on the highway and it was raining lightly on and off.the onboard vehicle stability systems (abs, vsc) did not activate.the vehicle speed was within speed limits and consistent with other vehicle speeds on the highway at the time. The vehicle is equipped with bridgestone turanza el42 tires.
Approximately three weeks ago, i noticed increasing difficulty maneuvering my car and two weeks ago, as i turned onto my street, (traveling at approximately 5 mph), my car actually slid across the intersection and into the curb on the opposite side of the street. Fortunately, no pedestrians were nearby and neither my car nor i sustained any injury. Curious as to why this would have occurred, my husband investigated and much to our dismay, we discovered that my bridgestone turanza tires ' with just 18,800 miles on them ' were bald except for the grooves that run along the circumference of the tire. At this time, we called two area bridgestone dealers who jointly consented that the tire had no tread wear warranty which further served to reinforce the fact that bridgestone is aware that the turanza is a poor quality tire not worthy of warranty. When questioned about the poor state of the tires after just 18,800 miles, they indicated, that other than the fact that the turanza was a 'cheap' tire (their specific verbiage), it could also be due to poor driver habits or an out-of-alignment vehicle or both.because i am the sole driver of my vehicle and commute just 21 miles round-trip to my job via a state-maintained road with a maximum speed limit of 50 mph, poor driver habits is eliminated. Furthermore, investigation also revealed that the car was, in fact, not out-of-alignment, as we have now replaced all four tires on the vehicle and confirmed that the alignment was fine. Frankly, we find it nothing short of despicable that bridgestone continues to sell these tires when fully aware of its poor quality and it is particularly dishonorable that you are willing to risk peoples' lives because they are unknowingly driving on inferior, non-warranted tires.
Traveling on a well-maintained interstate in the rain at a speed between 50-55 my rear driver side tire blew out.damage is limited to the outer wall of the tire.tire had only 27,800 miles on it and was in good condition.
In spring 2004 i purchased an acura tl with bridgestone turanza el 42 high performance tires.after 6,500 miles one of the tires had a flat.although the garage attempted to repair the flat, it continued to lose air and i was informed that i needed a new tire.it seemed odd that a tire would not be reparable after that short a use, but i was advised that it had to do with the location of the puncture and was not a defect.in november of this year, after putting 14,500 miles on the car i had a more serious problem with another tire.on this occasion, while traveling at 65 miles per hour on an interstate highway, my car began to shake.i managed to pull over to the side of the highway and stop.the tire sidewall had disintegrated and was completely separated from the rim.the following day i took the tire into a firestone shop where the service manager, tom curry, advised me that the problem was due to a road hazard and was not a defect.he inspected the tire for a puncture, and after not finding one, assured me that it must have been in the disintegrated sidewall.i then asked him if he had ever seen a tire that was damaged in the absence of a road hazard, and he told me he had not.it is clear to me that these tires are defective and that bridgestone refuses to take responsibility for their products.
Increased road noise and vibration effecting the steering.
My wife drives a 2006 bmw 325xi sport wagon.the car came equipped with bridgeston touranza e42 runflat tires.due to rapid tread wearing, all four tires were replaced by the dealership at 15000 miles. The tires were replaced with the same brand and model "touranza e42". With approximately 10,000 miles on these tires, we have experienced the same wear problems. The car drives very loud, and doesn't seem stable.bmw refuses to take any further action, claiming it is the consumer's problem. The dealership has "acknowledged" other bmw driver complaints with the bridgeston touranza e42.
Ireplaced the tires on my 2005 nissan altima with anew set of bridgestone turanza el-42 tires in july of 2007. Within 3 months thevibration in the steering wheel was so bad the tires had to be rotated and balanced every 45-50 days. I got the run around from the dealer ie: excuses as to why i had to rotate so often which none applied to my driving situations and the car was not out of alignment at all. Finally took a credit from dealer and replaced all 4 tires with new michelin energy series in may 2008 car drives just like it did off the show room floor!!!!! firestone needs to address the issueswith these tires. They have flat spots, cupping problems they are out of round. I finally took it to another dealer(not firestone)who confirmed that they could not get them to balance out properly because of all the problems with the tires and the vibration was still there.
This complaint referred to the original equipment tires (bridgestone el-42, 235/45-17 93w ) supplied on the 2004 acura tl with 5 speed automatic transmission. After just a short time i have found this tire to be entirely unsafe and unsuitable to this vehicle. I believe that both acura and bridgestone should be held responsible for replacing this tire on all existing vehicle. This tire exhibits unsafe characteristics in wet weather, with noticeable drift and hydroplaning in any amount of standing water, even as little as 1/16 inch. In heavy rains, even with no standing water present, the tire seems incapable of dispersing water as quickly as it falls, again leading to vehicle instability. From a ride quality point of view the tire is also unsatisfactory in that it flat spots every morning, especially in cool weather but even in warmer weather as well, leading to vibrations in the initial miles of any drive. It is also especially harsh over roadway expansion joints, and is so loud on concrete pavements that it poses a safety hazard due to driver fatigue induced by the continuous noise. I also understand that there may be an issue regarding the rating as an "all season tire" with many owners reporting that this tire is virtually useless in any kind of snow or ice condition. I have tried to resolve this issue with both acura and bridgestone to no avail.
I brought my car in for scheduled inspection appointment. While at the dealer i was told the tires on my bmw 325i needed rotating. I agreed and i was charged $165 for the service. While driving home, i noticed a loud humming coming from the tires. It was loud enough that i made a second appointment to have it checked out. I was told by the service specialist, ely, at hassel bmw of freeport n.y., that everything was okay. I asked her what was the source of the noise and she stated the tires were "feathering." i informed her that i was concerned because the noise was so loud that i could not have a normal conversation inside the car. She told me that it was normal wear and if i wished to have the tires rotated to the original position. I have since found out that there is a problem with this particular brand and model of tire, what concerns me is the fact that hassel bmw of freeport ny did not bother to inform me of the problem. They knew, i found out, and they still put this brand of tires on their vehicles. I spoke with the manager of the service department,john, and informed him of my findings.i was told that there was an si bulletins, which i had already obtained from a tire specialist, about the irregular tire wear of this type of tire. John informed me that i had no recourse with hassel bmw because my car had more than 20000 miles on it. I told john that i purchased the car with 14775 miles and the car had four new tires installed, and since the car has 28375 miles on it, the tires have about 15000 miles. This seems to be a common problem and hassel bmw seems to think that by quoting the car mileage instead of the tire mileage they do not have to honor the si recommendations. According to the si b 36 06 06 i should be, at a minimum, able to purchase tires at 50% of the value. John told me that i should take this up with bmw of north america, since they are the ones that build the car or the tire manufacturer. His demeanor was very unprofessional.
I purchased a 2007 bmw 328i on 2/22/2007. It came equipped with bridgestone turanza el42. In december of 2007, i found out that these tires are not wearing properly. In my searches on the internet, i have found that this problem has been ongoing for at least 2 years. Bmw refuses to pay for replacing all the tires if you are over 10k miles. My tires arewearing horribly and causing a safety risk. Bmw knew of this problem in january 2007 when they issued a service info bulletin to all the dealers. However, they did not inform the owners and they actually sold my car to me without mentioning the problems they are having with the tires. No tires should wear out after 10k miles. I actually took the car in for service in early sept to have a tire replaced and no one still mentioned the sib to me. My husband found a copy of it on the internet and it basically says, don't replace these unless the customer complains. However, its difficult to detect the uneven tread wear until there are huge flat spots on your tires. This is so reminiscent of the firestone/ford debacle and i feel that bmw is playing the odds to keep from having to help fund a huge recall. They kept putting these same tires on these cars despite the complaints.
Brand new acura tl 2004 (vibration )bridgestone teranza tires el42 flat spotting.acura national customer service notified ,has had several complaints fail to do anything.many users complaining see edmunds .com new model 2005 no longer uses bridgestone changed to michelins. Dealer no help.
This complaint refers to the original equipment tires (bridgestone el-42, 235/45-17 93w ) supplied on the 2004 acura tl with 6 speed manual transmission. After just a short time i have found this tire to be entirely unsafe and unsuitable to this vehicle. I believe that both acura and bridgestone should be held responsible for replacing this tire on all existing vehicles. This tire exhibits unsafe characteristics in wet weather, with noticeable drift and hydroplaning in any amount of standing water, even as little as 1/16 inch. In heavy rains, even with no standing water present, the tire seems incapable of dispersing water as quickly as it falls, again leading to vehicle instability. From a ride quality point of view the tire is also unsatisfactory in that it flat spots every morning, especially in cool weather but even in warmer weather as well, leading to vibrations in the initial miles of any drive. It is also especially harsh over roadway expansion joints, and is so loud on concrete pavements that it poses a safety hazard due to driver fatigue induced by the continuous noise. I also understand that there may be an issue regarding the rating as an "all season tire" with many owners reporting that this tire is virtually useless in any kind of snow conditions.
During light rain my 2004 acura tl with bridgestone turanza el-42 tires hydroplaned and lost control. It hit the center divider and spun and ended up on the right shoulder. The front left wheel broke off. Fortunetly my car or the broken wheel did not hit another car. There were quite a few cars on the freeway all at normal freeway speed. I was actually following my wifes 2003 honda accord lx in the same lane at the time of the accident. I have filed a complaint with acura (800) 382-2238 and my case # b012005-02-2300320. So far the complaint has accomplished nothing for me.
Reinstalling tires on to rims after winter tire stoarge, the tire beadcame apart on inflation of tire.
My husband and i purchased 2 mazda cx-7's in oct 07. In sept 2008 1 vehicle after just 13,000 miles on it had excessive and abnormal wear on all 4 of the tires. We have been advised not to drive much on these tires in the condition they are in by 4 separate opinions we received from the dealership, tire manufacturer and 2 additional tire retailers.we have had 1 flat tire during the process of getting these tires replaced however neither the dealership, car manufacturer nor the tire manufacturer would stand behind the faulty equipment. All agreed that the tires should not wear that excessively however each blaming the other for the problem. Several posts on the internet state the same problem with this tire and this vehicle!i feel i have the right to have safe equipment on my vehicle and i am looking for support to keep my passengers as well as other's who may be driving this car with these tires safe.i would like to mention that the other vehicle of the same make and model bought on the same day has a different tire on the car and that car has normal wear and tear.. To me this is evidence that something is not right with this car and this tire.
Major safety problem with tire air pressure system.normal tire pressure is 35 psi. Because of the tire design, you can run with very low air pressure and not feel it (on a normal car, it is very obvious). That is why toyota had to put in the tire pressure warning system/light.twice the tire pressure warning system did not come on until a tire had ~10 psi. That is a dangerous level. The first time i did nothing and the tire was replaced by the tire manufacturer (nail issue) and the tire was less then 7 months old.the second time, i brought it to the dealer. They tested two ways: 1) on the computer and it passed; 2) test drive where alert light came on below 18 psi. In my testing it came on between 10-15 psi and in real life closer to 10-11 psi (based on my 2 problems).checking tire pressure daily does not help because in real life, if you take a trip you can drive for 3-6 hours which if something happens to the tire during the trip, you will not know until it fails (again this is because unlike normal tires, you can not tell the tire has lost significant air pressure. You can read here and other places about the catastrophic failures others have had in just this situation. I spent many many hours on the phone with toyota to get the specification on when the system should alert you. I was once told it is a difference of more then 5 psi. However, it seems that toyota has no published spec for how the system should work in real life.this is defective and toyota is not telling us the truth. All systems have to be designed to a spec. This system was and there is somewhere at toyota a spec. They are not sharing with consumers because of the implication it would have (they will have to recall/fix them). I do hope someone at the nhtsa will pursue this since it is a safety issue for families.
Low tire pressure monitoring systems must be reprogrammed by the dealer if wheels are rotated, if a full size spare tire replaces a wheelthe reprogramming is at consumer'scost.this forces consumers to have to go back to the dealership for something which used to be done at home.i blame nhtsa for pushing tire pressure monitoring systems, without enforcing manufacturers makingit possible for consumers to set their own tire pressures , and this added unnecessary cost to regular maintenance which used to be free.
The majority of the owners of 2004 and newer acura tls know that there is an existing problem with the bridgestone turanza el42 tires that the vehicle is equipped with.there is an issue with vibration with these tires.in 2005, acura started selling the tl with michelin tires because of the complaints.those of us who still have the bridgestones are still experiencing problems.currently, my vehicle (2004 tl) has cracking on the sidewalls of the tires now.i am required to fill it with air approximately every 2 or 3 days.i have contacted the dealership, they inspected the tires and acknowledged the cracks, and they refuse to do anything about it.they wanted me to handle the warranty claim with bridgestone and sent me off on my way, with a potentially unsafe vehicle.i have no doubt that a blowout of the tire is unpreventable and it's only a matter of time before it happens, but they do not care.i am suggesting that a recall be placed on the bridgestone el42 tires and that all acura tls with these tires be replaced with the michelin tires, which the current year tls come equipped with.
We experienced a sidewall blowout of a bridgestone turanza el42 (21565r16 98t) on our 2003 dodge caravan (only 20,800mi) when i drove to the home. When i check other tires. I found a same problem on another tire --- few cracks on the sidewall.
This complaint refers to the original equipment tires (bridgestone el-42, 235/45-17 93w ) supplied on the 2004 acura tl with 5 speed automatic transmission. After just a short time i have found this tire to be entirely unsafe and unsuitable to this vehicle. I believe that both acura and bridgestone should be held responsible for replacing this tire on all existing vehicles. This tire exhibits unsafe characteristics in wet weather and on snow.at about 14,000 miles we just had a flat tire on a highway and when we took it for fixing we were told that the sidewall has collapsed (and looks like a bubble) and that we can no longer use it as it will explode.we must replace it after riding over a nail.we believe the sidewall should be reinforced more to withhold driving on a flatto safety without having to replace it.from a ride quality point of view the tire is also unsatisfactory in that it flat spots every morning, leading to vibrations during our drive. I also understand that there may be an issue regarding the rating as an "all season tire" with many owners reporting that this tire is virtually useless in any kind of snow conditions.
Traveling on a well-maintained interstate in the rain at a speed between 50-55 my rear driver side tire blew out.damage is limited to the outer wall of the tire.tire had only 27,800 miles on it and was in good condition.
My 2004 acura 3.2 tl uses bridgestone turanza el42 tires (235/45r17), w speed-rated. The el 42 tires had a so called "flat spot" problem and they were worn out only at 15,500 mile.there has been many complaints about this type of tires on the internet.many of them mentioned that "flat spot" problem could become a safety issue.
All tires has sidewall cracking causing slow leaks.
I own a new acura tl whichhas bridgstone turanza el 42 235/45-17 tires as oem.from the beginning it became clear the tires are dangerous. They hydroplane on wet surfaces, skid easily on residual road sand.the right front and rear sidewalls failed--one with an egg shaped bubble and the other with a deep cut--despite no evidence that i struck a curb or pothole etc. Both tires were likely to blow out with continued driving.surveys by tire rack indicate these tires are also very dangerous in the winter, which is about to happen here in the northeast where i live.these tires also "coldspot" after being parked for a while, sometime causing the car to steer poorly.the dealer could only replace the bad tires on a "road hazard" warranty, despite my many complaints to both acura and the parent company honda usa.
Oem bridgestone turanza el42 tire disintegrated on drive side rear wheel of 2004 acura tl.driving on highway at approx 55 mph.vibration and then suddenly tire fell apart.sidewall completely separated from bead.tire size p235/45 r17.
While on a trip to attend a wedding in grand rapids, michigan, we experienced a sidewall blowout of a bridgestone turanza el42 (21565r16 98t) on our 2006 dodge caravan.the blowout occurred pulling into a parking place at a low angle, at a low speed, and with a relatively low curb height' just pulling in at walking speed. This is the second bridgestone turanza el42 that has been replaced on a car that had 13,278 miles on the odometer at the time of the incident. The last routine service (12,000 miles) was at 10,970 miles.the first replacement was on 5 november 2007 with 7,107 miles on the odometer.this tire had a pronounced sidewall bubble and was clearly 'an accident waiting to happen.' it was replaced by the dealer, marty cancila dodge, at our expense despite the 'tires for life service plan' and extended warranty we have on the automobile. At this point, we purchased a tire safety warranty expecting, of course, more difficulties with these tires.unwilling to trust neither my safety nor the safety of any of my passengers, i proceeded to purchase two new tires. I could not obtain two bridgestone turanza tires in the grand rapids, mi, area so i purchased two michelin's of the same size and similar tread pattern.i drove the car home with the turanzas on the front but will have the michelin's switched to the front to reduce the probability of death, dismemberment, or other pain and suffering due to tire failure.to get some sense of the problem with the turanza tire, i have included a recall notice that i found at the following web site: http://www.usautoinjurylaw.com/cases/tires/failurefirestone.htm: bridgestone turanza el41, p19565r15.the el42 may be a renamed el41 which was notorious for blowouts and is now a subject of a class action lawsuit.in other words, lipstick may not transform a pig it to a princess.i kept the failed tire and actually carry the other tire in the car to have a replacement readily available.
Tire blister issue(turanza el 42 p215/55r17 93h m+s)---i noticed a tire blister on my front passenger tire.i visited my dealer for assistance but was only redirected to bridgestone/firestone.however, bridgestone/firestone did not address the matter and simply ignored the failure of the tire integrity.i am worried as bridgestone/firestone has a histoy of ignoring problems with its products and has sacrificed the safety of the consumer in order to gain a profit.no one answered the phone when i contacted the bridgestone/firestone warranty number (800-847-3272). I eventually located another number via directory assistance (800-582-0962).however the sole tech support representative simply dismissed the matter.the representative did not complete a claim form or provide a claim number.he directed me to seek the advice of a bridgestone/firestone retailer.however, the retailer could not provide assistance without a claim number, which the manufacturer tech representative should have provided to me. I am very concerned with the way bridgestone/firestone handled this matter given its previous history.i wished that nissan never placed this brand of tires on its new vehicles, especially if nissan does not plan to protect its consumers from bad manufacturers.***please note that your system will not allow me to insert the correct tire size.my tire size is p215/55r17 93h m.
Dt the rear driver's side tire separated from inside top on october 1, 2005. Had not contacted the dealer at this point.the rear end had been making a roaring soundat 65 mph, slowed down to 50 mph, and then a few seconds latercould hear the plopping sound. These were bridgestone/firestone tires, turanza el 42, p215/55r17. The tireswere serviced regularly.there was no vibration, and there was no abnormal bulging in the tires.
Acura tl suffered from sidewall failure of one of the bridgestone el 42 tires.***no answer required***. *mr
The contact owns a 2005 lexus es.the front tires were bald on the outer area of the tires.the rear tires were dry and cracking.there was no front end vibration or loose steering experienced.the vehicle was not looked at by a dealer and the tires were not changed.the tires were bridgestone turanza el42 size p235/45r17.the failure mileage was unknown.the current mileage was 16,642.
Toyota camry solara convertible equipped with 17" wheels and bridgestone turanza p215/55r17 mud and snow tires have experienced two sidewall failures at approximately 800 miles and 1700 miles requiring tire replacement.unsure of exact cause of failure,potentially road imperfections or curb bumps, (no damage to alloy wheels) . Both happened at low speed ramifications if high speed could be significantly worse.these "low profile" tires are not appropriate for all driving conditions and can be potentially dangerous and should be replaced.
I have had to replace 3 bridgestone el42 tires due to them having small pinholes in the sidewall.the first tire was on 2005 chrysler town & country and the second and third tires on a 2006 town & country.each tire had small pin holes in the sidewall.i told the bridgestone dealer that i thought the tires were defective and that three tires with the same problem was a lot more than coincidental.he told me that there was no recall on the tires and that i had to pay for new ones since side wall leaks cannot be repaired.i told him that bridgestone didn't recall the ford explorer tires until forced to.
215/55/17 bridgestone turanza el-42 tire on fron driver side begin to split on side tradwear. Only 15000 miles on the tire. Exper tire care would not replace the defetive tire for free.
Vehicle has had two tire fail since purchased. *mr the failure occurred in the sidewall.the vehicle only driven in normal driving conditions and at low speeds.related to odi#10081223.the consumer requested to be reimbursed. *sc
Apparent sidewall failure on bridgestone turanza el42 tire at 4622 miles on a new minivan.
The contact owns a 2006 bmw 325i.the vehicle has bridgestone turanza el42, size p205/55r16 tires.while driving between 10-35 mph, the steering wheel would vibrate and the two front tires made a loud humming sound.the tires were replaced, but the failure recurred with less than 13,000 miles on the tires.the dot number was unknown.the current mileage was 30,000 and failure mileage was 12,000.
My 2005 acura tl has 21,000 miles and already the tires need to be replaced due to wear. The bridgestone turanza el42 tires are rated for much higher wear and i have noticed many, many complaints on the internet. Some on this website but the majority on other websites. It seems to me that the tire is defective.the dealer says we need to replace them, i reached out to bridgestone but have not received their comments yet.
When i had my tires rotated on my 2005 chrysler t&c at 18,000 miles they said i had radial pull.chrysler didn't suggest to replace tires, so i rotated them at 23,000 miles and still had the same result.now they say i should replace them to correct the pull.i don't think tires should wear out at 24,000 while they have plenty of tread left.the tires are bridgestone turanza el42.
During routine oil change on our 2004 acura tl at 12,000 miles, excessive tread wear was noted by acura mechanic on front oem bridgestone turanza el42 tires.tire size is p235/45r17 (this complaint form did not have the correct size option to select).said tires should be replaced.finding it hard to believe these tires would last only 12,000 miles, we got a 2nd opinion by a non-acura garage and they agreed tires were worn and should be replaced.acura said premature wear was most likely due to "front end being out of alignment" or possibly "wrong tire pressure" (later found not to be the case when acura replaced the tires).no mention of any problems with tires themselves.trusting acura's experience and expertise, we purchased and had them install two new el42s.since then, we have learned that we are just one of many to have quality and safety problems with these tires.read the many bad customer reviews/ratings reported on www.tirerack.com (enter "2004 acura tl" in the "shop for tires" section, and read "tire reviews for this vehicle").luckily, we have not experienced the poor traction, hydroplaning, noise, flat-spotting, etc that others have experienced.
Excessive tire wear on 2006 bmw 330i. Firestone says that the cupping of the tires (starting at about 8k miles) causes less traction on the road and will get worse. The tires started to make load noise at about 8k miles and they now have 13k miles on them and the noise level is very bad. I have contacted bmw several times and they say that they will consider replacing the tires only if i will agree to pay half of the cost(about $600 my cost for 4 tires). I feel that this is a safety issue only with this brand and type of tire and firestone needs to replace the tires. The tires in question are bridgestone turanza el42, size 205/55/r16 run flats. This cupping on these tires causes the tire to loose contact with the road and may cause an accident on wet roads.
Rear tires on new honda civic lx 2008 began thumping and shaking at 12000 miles and kept getting worse until 15k, so i took it to the dealer.honda dealer said the "c" arms that corrected the problem with 2007 civics were installed in my car, and the problem may be because i did not have tires rotated. (?)they wanted $381 for tires and alignment with only 9 months and 15k miles of new car use.
Our 2008 honda civic coupe developed a road noise in the rear tires at about 12k miles. Tires have been rotated every 5k and i have service order requests to back this up. At 15kmiles the noise had gotten unbearable. I asked my local mechanic to check and see if there was anything obvious before i took it to the honda dealer and he noted that the rear tires appeared to have the belts slipped and that the right tire appeared worn out. I called honda and they directed me to bridgestone who told me the tires were worn out because honda has a chassis problem and that the tires were not warranted for wear. Honda said there is no technical issues with their suspension and they couldn't help me. So i have a car with tires that are worn out at 15k miles and i have no recourse but to eat it and hope that the next set of tires wears better. This is unsafe inmy opinion. Poot tire wear can only come from so many things. I have air pressure monitoring system, so it wasn't improper inflation, the vehicle is new so it isn't suspension issues, the tires were rotated twice in first 10k miles (documented).i guess having unsafe tires on a one year old automobile is not a big deal for honda, but it is for me. Having a 1 year old auto in the drive way that we are scared to drive out of the neighborgood isn't a good thing.
I purhcased my 2005 nissan altima 3.5 se not 3 weeks ago. Since that time there has been a vibration in the steering wheel and the entire vehicle. I have had the tires balanced by nissan 4 times, and they replaced one tire that was supposedly bad. But the problem still exists. Dealer keeps saying each timethat it will be fixed. Now i am turning the car back in. The vibration is above 70 mph.
Tires are extremely noisy at low vehicle speeds-2006 bmw 330i turanza el42 run flat tire (rft), p225/45r17:i was told today by firestone that the cupping of the edges of all four tires will cause lack of traction in the winter months.therefore, he suggested that all four tires should be replaced.
This complaint is in reference to the bridgestone turanza el 42 tire supplied as original equipment on the 2004 acura tl. This tire is totally unsuitable for the vehicle and is unsafe for the intended conditions. Although it is rated ms as an all season tire, it can not maintain even minimal traction in light snow. Also, as the tread wears, it show significant tendencies to hydroplane in any amount of standing water. The flat spotting also creates distracting vibrations during cold weather. This vehicle is unsafe to drive with this tire installed, yet acura and bridgestone refuse to acknowledge or address the problem unless directed to by nhtsa.
I brought my car in for scheduled inspection appointment. While at the dealer i was told the tires on my bmw 325i needed rotating. I agreed and i was charged $165 for the service. While driving home, i noticed a loud humming coming from the tires. It was loud enough that i made a second appointment to have it checked out. I was told by the service specialist, ely, at hassel bmw of freeport n.y., that everything was okay. I asked her what was the source of the noise and she stated the tires were "feathering." i informed her that i was concerned because the noise was so loud that i could not have a normal conversation inside the car. She told me that it was normal wear and if i wished to have the tires rotated to the original position. I have since found out that there is a problem with this particular brand and model of tire, what concerns me is the fact that hassel bmw of freeport ny did not bother to inform me of the problem. They knew, i found out, and they still put this brand of tires on their vehicles. I spoke with the manager of the service department,john, and informed him of my findings.i was told that there was an si bulletins, which i had already obtained from a tire specialist, about the irregular tire wear of this type of tire. John informed me that i had no recourse with hassel bmw because my car had more than 20000 miles on it. I told john that i purchased the car with 14775 miles and the car had four new tires installed, and since the car has 28375 miles on it, the tires have about 15000 miles. This seems to be a common problem and hassel bmw seems to think that by quoting the car mileage instead of the tire mileage they do not have to honor the si recommendations. According to the si b 36 06 06 i should be, at a minimum, able to purchase tires at 50% of the value. John told me that i should take this up with bmw of north america, since they are the ones that build the car or the tire manufacturer. His demeanor was very unprofessional.
The contact owns a 2005 bmw x3.the vehicle has bridgestone turanza el42, size p235/55r17 tires.while driving various speeds, the contact's vehicle makes a loud noise underneath the hood.the vehicle was taken to a dealer approximately six times, but they could not duplicate the failure.the vehicle was then taken to another mechanic and they stated that the steel belts failed on both front tires, which was the cause of the noise.the current mileage was 13,539 and failure mileage was 200.updated 03-18-08
Historical summary of noise and vibration caused by irregular (uneven) tire wear (feathering) on 2006 330i bmw withbridgestone turanza el 42 225/45/17 run flat tires: european delivery 9-12-2005, arranged bydealer.at about 16,000 miles, began to notice front tire noise (roar) and vibration at 15-30 mph, especially upon braking.the noise became progressively worse and could feel vibrations in driver's and passenger's floor pans. The noise continued to increase and the vibration began to sound like worn front wheel bearings. I took to dealerat 18,500 miles around7/ 31/2006.vehicle test driven at 18,775 miles. Sa advised that the front tires had uneven wear which caused the noise and vibrations, and tires not covered by neither bmw nor bridgestone. No other advice or remedy was given. Wrote to president bmwna, on 8/04/2006 requesting bmw perform wheel alignment (to correct the factory defective alignment) and to replace the front tires.customer relations rep instructed me to take car to dealer for alignment check. On 8/14/2006, alignment check performed by dealer, and determined that three wheels alignment were out of factory specification range.charged $225 for this alignment. Service manager advised that they would not replace the unevenly worn and noisy tires. On 8/16/2006, message from customer relations that bmw would pay for the alignment.had tires inspected by the local bridgestone tire dealer, and manager advised that vehicle was miss-aligned causing all four tires to exhibit irregular wear (feathering) causing the excessive noise and vibration.he said the dealer should replace all four tires. On 08/29/2006 wrote 2nd request to president of bmwna for replacement of all four tires and for reimbursement of $225. 09/18/2006 received letter from cr rep promising reimbursement for alignment, but denying request for replacement tires on the basis that vehicle was aligned to specifications at the factory prior to delivery.
Consumer noticed that after having the tires rotated at 10,000 miles and while driving at 60 mph vehicle vibrated uncontrollably.consumer was able to maintain control of the vehicle, and pulled over.the vehicle was taken to the dealer for inspection, andmechanic determined that the tires needed to be replaced due to tread separation.
My 2004 acura tl came equipped with bridgrstone el-42 turanza tires. Although we have not had an accident, these tires hydroplane like crazy and have zero snow traction and control. They are so bad that we paid to have all 4 replaced at 20,000 miles. I now find that this is a very common issue with this tire, although our dealer claims otherwise. I feel that these tires are patently unsafe and acura or bridgestone should recall and replace them.
I purchased a 2007 mazda cx-7 from diamond mazda in baton rouge, la. I have always been under the assumption that a set of tires on a new vehicle would last me at least till i paid off the loan which would be 5 years. I have purchased other vehicles and never had this probably before now. This is the first time that i have bought a mazda and probably my last. I am very disappointed about the run around that i am getting from bridgestone/firestone tire retailers. I was told that this mazda cx-7 is a heavy vehicle and that the tires are only warranty for 16,000 miles i have never heard anything like that before in my life. If i have to buy tires every year i will go broke. My mazda cx-7 has 16,000 miles on it and the tires are worn to where they are slick. They are very dangerous and for me to buy some new tires will cost me $750.00. I had no idea that this would have happen to me after only having the car for one year. I see there are other complaints on the same issue. There should be a recall on these tires.
I own a 2006 bmw 325i with oem bridgestone turanza el42 run flat tires.the tires have been making a loud noise for quite some time with 19k miles on them.i took the car in to the dealer (leith bmw-raleigh, nc) and was informed the tire was not wearing properly and that this has been a common problem with that model tire.the dealer was only willing to pay for 2 new tires.if the tire has a problem i feel it is fair to get 4 of them replaced.i was not able to find a recall on this tire but i felt like it deserved to be investigated based on the amount of people having problems that are posted on various websites.
Dt: the contact statedvehicle had a blow out. The three remaining tires were bald and needed to be replaced as well. The blow out occurred on the right rear of the vehicle. There was vibration before the blow out. The spare tire was in place at this time. The tire were not covered under warranty. The tires have been maintained regularly. The complete tire size is p235/45/17.
I own a 2007 bmw 335i coupe. At 9,000 miles i started noticing a strange sound coming form the tire area. It gradually got worse. At 10,000 miles i noticed physical signs of "scalloping" and actual uneven (quite dramatically uneven) wear. It looked as though the leading edges of some, just some, treads were actually as much of a quarter in lower than the back side of the same tread and of course the back side of the tread it was adjacent to. It almost looks like rubber has literally been thrown off the tire. That's how big the difference in heights is of the random treads. This was true on both the inner and outer edges of the tires and even the middle. This would explain the thrumming noise. I made an appointment to get it into the dealer and without even looking at the tires the service manager said, "bridgestone will replace the tires up to 20,000 miles and pay half the cost". I said that these tires weren't worn out, they were wearing extremely unevenly. Cupping and scalloping like i have never seen. He said it was the design of the cars, that bmw makes them very aggressively to handle the way they do and any tire would do that. I asked if i could get them replaced with continentalssince i have heard they had less problems with those. He said no, only what was on there as bmw wasn't warranting the tires, bridgestone was. They didn't offer to rotate them, look at the alignment, nothing, just replace at half cost. So 9 months and now 11,000 miles into a $50k car i am forced to pay about $5-600 dollars just so i can talk to my passengers and be heard over the tire noise. I really feel that this is a huge safety issue as only part of the tire is in contact with road at any time.
Made appt. With mazda service , regarding excessive tire wear on cx-7 suv. I have a firestone tire protectionfor this suv, according to firestone it does not cover wear. At my last oil change by firestone, they told me my tires need to be replaced, gave me a price, etc. I told them i would contact dealer and see what they have to say. Appt. Was 8/1/08, i was told my tires are only half worn@20,113 miles.tread wear was measured @ 5/32 on front and 4/32 on rear. Firestone rotated and ball. Tires @ 5,000 mi. Oil changes.i was told to come back when 50% more wear. Told service adviser this was a safety issue as there is no tread to wear, and mentioned what firestone had told me. His comment was they just wanted to sell you tires ". Took my cx-7 to ntb tire service, they checked my tires, rear @ 2/32" and front @4/32", they suggested i not drive with these worn-out tires, they need to be replaced. Purchased a set of take-off's for $160.00 and had ntb align and ball tires.i sent a e-mail to mazda cust. Service and explained , dealer measured 4/32" not 2/32".i wanted to meet with mazda rep at any ne ohio dealer, and have him check tires, etc. They never returned my e-mail. Followed-up with phone call to mazda cust. Service, they will check dealer, etc. Mazda called back and suggest i take up problem with dealer, they would not set up meeting with rep, etc.if mazda service dept at dealer can't measure tire tread, and be concerned with cust safety, i would never buy another mazda vehicle.
I have been complaining to bmw for 20,000 miles about noisy tires. They kept telling me that it needs rotation and did so. There was alot of road noise coming from the tires and bmw did not assume responsibility. Then my husband got into an accident (just a fender bender)on sept 8 or 9th of 2007 when the tires were making alot of noise and hit a cement pole. Insurance company told us there is a defective problem in the car regarding the "toe adjustment" and to why the tires are worn sooo badly. It is a chasis problem and not a tire problem. The front 2 tires were on the verge of a blowout. I have contacted bmw and have failed to comply and said i have to pay for new tires and alignment. There are thousands of complaints on this issue while i was researching on the internet. Bmw needs to find the problem and replace my tires and fix the problem in toe adjustment.
The sidewall blowout of the left rear tiredodge caravan 2005bridgestone turanza el42b298t215/65r16.
Treadware at 13k miles, tires need to be replaced.
I own a '06 3 series with the sport suspension and i have barely put 11k miles on the car when i started to notice a loud humming noise. I took the car to the dealer and i was told that it was a tire issue and that they needed to be replaced. I currently have an issue driving the car in rain or snow if the car continues to have cupped tires and i should not have to pay $1500.00 because of bad tires or suspension.
The contact owns a 2006 bmw 330ci.the vehicle has bridgestone turanza el42, size p235/45r17 tires.the contact stated that he felt as if he was driving a 4x4 truck because the tires were becoming worn.the failure has occurred on all four tires.he called bridgestone and they advised him to call the dealer.the failure mileage was 12,000 and current mileage was 24,500.
Toyota camry solara convertible equipped with 17" wheels and bridgestone turanza p215/55r17 mud and snow tires have experienced two sidewall failures at approximately 800 miles and 1700 miles requiring tire replacement.unsure of exact cause of failure,potentially road imperfections or curb bumps, (no damage to alloy wheels) . Both happened at low speed ramifications if high speed could be significantly worse.these "low profile" tires are not appropriate for all driving conditions and can be potentially dangerous and should be replaced.
Read more
