It sort of depends on how much snow you're talking about, and how much tread depth you have. They didn't seem too bad when they were new in three or four inches or so (some of such experience I came by in the Oswego area not quite 3 years ago), but in 6" or more last winter it was a different story.

With the wear bars not quite showing at ~27,000 miles or so, it's getting rather easy to overwhelm them under acceleration in wet conditions in 1st gear even from a slow rolling start. Fortunately, the braking side of the coin isn't affected as much. And my wife didn't notice any difficulty driving them even at that severe level of wear in the inch or so of snow that we just had (trust me, with a stack of RE960AS Pole Positions sitting in the exercise room, I'd have heard right away about any shortage of grip).


Norm

 

I travel alot between Binghamton, NY (where I am) and Syracuse, NY along I-81. So a good portion of my Winters are spent in some sort of snow. That being said since I do alot of highway driving, I've been turned off on the idea of dedicated snow tires, because I've heard they wear rather fast when not on snow. I just know I need to get my OEMs off this car and quick, before I get stuck somewhere.

 

Dom, you'd be surprised abou the wear of dedicated snows. I bought a set of Dunlop WinterSport M3s after my disappontment with the horrid feedback of the Falkens. The M3s wore about 2/32nds (from 13) in the first season. I'm on my second season and don't regret getting the dedicated snow set. I've gone thru foot deep snow covered roads, something I'd never try with A/S tires. The icing was the better steering response and cornering stability the M3s ever had over the 512s (on a minus one size, mind you).

 

I still have significant tread left, but they're already awful. I suspect that there's little cleaning action, since my tracks aren't as deep as others who have even less tread than I. If the snow hasn't yet been packed down, they're OK, but not on slush or packed snow.

Dom, is the Continental ContiExtremeContact an option? I've read that, for an all-season, they're excellent in snow, and my coworker (with a RSX-S) has been happy with them.

 

I looked them up, but I didnt find them in the OEM 225/50R17 size. TireRack has 225/45ZR17 which is the closest I could find. I'm obviously a bit of a Tire novice, so I didnt know if those would work or not. The 45 means a shorter sidewall, correct? They are also back ordered on tirerack, I was looking for something sooner rather than later.

The other sizes in this tire are listed http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Sizes....ExtremeContact

I'm not sure what the best size would be to buy them in.

 

Load capacity-wise, it's a bit small. Like most 225/45-17's, ExtremeContacts are three Load Index numbers "lighter" in terms of maximum rated load capacity than the 225/50-17, which amounts to about 120 lbs per tire. That's more of a discrepancy than I'd be willing to "make up for" by inflating the tires to a slightly higher inflation pressure than is on the car's sticker. That would be do-able in an emergency for substituting between these sizes, but I can't in good conscience recommend it for normal use.

If you can find a 225/45-17 in an XL load rating, that tire model will almost certainly carry the necessary 94 Load Index.


Norm

 

You can go as low as 91 load rating safely. Just keep them properly inflated. The few 2002 GXEs out there came with 215/55R16 91H tires. The 03s did not become that fat a pig from MY02.

 

So if I am understanding this correctly 235/45ZR17 (93W) or 245/45ZR17 (95W) would be a good fit because the load index is higher than 93W? Are those too wide for OEM rims?

I've been trying to read up on these numbers, etc, but I still don't know that much about tires in general. The Conti's are the second highest rated for A/S on TireRack; I read all of the reviews from 5th gen maxima owners, so they must be doing something right to be enjoying them.

 

OT, but OEM tires for the 5th gens were 91 and 93 load rating. You can use anything above 91. Size OTOH is an issue. Both 235/45 and 245/45R17s are off spec on the OEM rim, but many, myself included, have gone 235/45R17 withouth a problem. There's only one guy who claimed seeing an off spec tire roll off a rim. Few have gone 245/45R17 on the OEM rim and nobody has reported a problem, so you can say that data would be inconclusive.

Here's some reading on 235/45R17s on OEM rims:
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?postid=1022066
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=123257
http://forums.maxima.org/showpost.ph...3&postcount=17
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=180710

The only claim of an off spec 235/45R17 rolling of a rim.
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=279273

 

I have these tires on my stock 15"s... and i loved them up until i purchased new wheels/tires... great price too!

 

Most people have good reviews and from reading everything on this post, my only concern is the loud noise after a few thousands miles regardless of rotation, correct? Is there anyone out there that does not have this problem or have any last words before I order them? They are currently $88 at discountiredirect. I appreciate anyone input... thanks!

 

I never noticed any noise issue.

My intake and exhaust systems are still 100% OE. And my wife and I have outgrown the "necessity" for playing the music loud (most of the time, anyway).


Norm

 

Get ready for some really s l o w steering and vague handling. Other than that, no. Good luck with your purchase.

 

how many miles have you gotten out of them so far?

 

AMen! I'm wishing I had ponied-up and got the Yoko Avids or Even some Toyo Proxes TPT's....at least they'd last longer and have better wet/snow traction!!

As far as the noise is concerned - I don't know of too many tires that aren't susceptible to this malody. Obviously, some more than others - but really, just because you spend $50-100 more per tire doesn't guaratee it won't happen.

gr

 

They went on almost 3 years ago, at something like 38,000. There's about 66,000 on the clock now, so about 28,000.


Norm

 

I had the Ziex on my last car with 15's. It was soooo much better. I hardly spun, and cut right through water. When I get my new rims I'm putting Falcons on them.

 

I went with the Avid V4's since they were only $100 more for all 4 then the 512's. I have 2 Avid's now and they did last 27k miles with me only rotating them twice and they were on the front most of the time so I think if I take care of all 4 I could get at least 40 even though they are rated for 60. Good choice, right? Any opinions on your experience with the V4's?

 

Just recently went with the falkens as well. I have Falken 615's on my Spec and like them a lot so I got decided to go with the falkens for the Max as well.

 

I hope you're not disappointed. The 512s are nothing like the Azenis....unfortunately. The 512 sidewall is quite...er....mush. They're very good in the rain though, at least.

You're gonna bring down the wrath of Abe Frohman by bumping this thread though

 

I just put them on my new rims, 225/40ZR18, they ride like heaven. plus 30k mile warranty

 

Heaven

 

About 20k miles into my 2003 Max, I put a bubble in the sidewall of the drivers side front tire. To replace the two front tires, I had two 512s put(at Sears) on the back and rotated the back tires to the front(so front tires were still stock). About a month ago at about 60k miles, I rotated the tires w/the 512s now in the front(as you can imagine, the stock tires have very little tread left but were still running ok). With the 512s in front, I immediately noticed a lot more noise. The steering has a slight shake and loose feeling which I feel is from the balancing. At higher speeds, the front tires makes a real fast wobbly sound on the road. It seems to me you get what you pay for.

 

I've heard much about the soft sidewalls but when checking for suitable sizes for my 4th gen with 17x7 wheels, I found:

225/50-17---> 94 V
225/45-17---> 94 W reinforced sidewall

So I wonder, for those who voiced concerns/reviews of soft sidewalls, did anyone run a size with reinforced sidewalls? Still googling, trying to find something about the ze-512's reinforced vs normal sidewalls.

ZE-512 size chart here, look on right for sizes which come with reinforced sidewalls

 

I'm not entirely sure just what the reinforcement entails, but the end result is that the load capacity goes up from 90 or 91 in the standard load rating for that size (it seems to vary slightly) up to 94. At least one other tire mfr uses the designation "XL" to the same effect. So, mostly, it's a means of increasing the load rating. You might be able find differences in carcass construction between "XL" or "Reinforced" tires and "SL" tires in the same size (some of that "fine print" on the sidewalls), although the additional capacity may be due to different cord material or size rather than an extra ply.


Norm

 

I also noticed the gooey feel w/my 245/40/18 512s. more pressure helped though. The only real beef I have with them now it that they follow grooves in concrete really bad, much worse than the potenza re750s I had on it before. they are much quieter though.

 

Had mine about a year now and the noise has been an anoyance, I read a lot of the reveiws and thought the set I was getting would be different but guess what.... they weren't. The noise is not to bad but much louder than the stocks.... when I rotated them.... man it got real bad so I rotated them back. Overall good tires for what you pay but I won't buy them again. Pay a little more and get some better tires.

 

I am hoping for a quick reply, I am going to buy 1 of the 2 sets listed below for my wifes 03 Titanium SE. I was gonna go 235/50/17 or stick stock.

Falken ZE-912 in 225/50/17 - $384 shipped via discount tire on ebay

or

Pirelli P-Zero Neros M&S - $628 shipped from Tirerack

I can't really justify the extra cost for the Pirellis, wished there was more feedback on the 912's, would you go for the savings here of $245?

 

This tire is the replacement for the falken ZE-512, which was a poor tire. I'd check the
the UTOG ratings on them because the ZE-512 because they had a rating of 360 on treadwear. My wife also drove the car so I know she wasn't doing burnouts to wear the tires. The plain just didn't last. Sounds like falken has just renamed the 512 to 912. I bought Yokohama AVID 4VS and I have been very pleased with them so far.

 

Actually I was happy with the 512's in past, had a set on my Spec V and on an Integra, Yoko's I do not really like but then I had a terrible set of Avid H4's on an Integra as well and my wife just dispised them as well,

The 912's are slightly different, you would think they would have improved them, poor thing is there is not enough user reviews on them and I am choosing between them or the P Zero Neros

The reviews on the Avids do look good, I may look at them as well , grr just when I thought I had my mind made up I find a review oof an 03 SE driver who loves em..... Are they worth $145 more than the Falken's ?
Where did you buy and what they cost shipped? May be you have found cheaper than the $490 shipped I found.........

The NT NeoGen ZR look real nice as well..god now I am reading and surfing more on tires

 

Well, I finally ran those things into the wear bars at somewhere around 36,000 miles. Wet braking ability held up to the end, as long as you weren't traveling through standing water more than about 1/4" deep.

The RE960's are on, and there is a clear improvement in steering response (this is related to tire lateral stiffness).

I'll eventually post more about the B'Stones, and I hope that we start seeing some reviews of the Falken 912's, as $150/tire may still be a little too steep for some.


Norm

 

I've probably got about 15k on my 512's now, and they're holding-up decently....certainly what I expected.
I ran thru some of THE WORST rain recently, and i can say that these tires are EXCELLENT in the wet! -especially for hydroplane resistance-

I've been trying to run 35lbs. pressure in all 4 daily, and more when on ext. highway tours.
I noticed this morning that my outer edges are down to the wear-bars, while the centers are still far above.

I can only conclude that these tires would wear more evenly with about 38-42 lbs in daily driving.

Granted, I drive agressively, and I have many susp. mods -- but just fyi for everyone running these, to ext. your mileage. I'll be lucky to get 25k out of these now....but again - what I expected.

Pretty sure I'm going to buy Toyo Proxes TPT's next, or Yoko Avid V4's. I'm DONE with stiff sidewalls.

gr

 

Ended up getting about 34,000 miles out of the ZE512's, right at/just into almost all of the wear bars.

I'm much happier with the Bridgestone RE960AS tires that I finally put on (225/50-17's on the OE rims).

Much crisper turn-in and better cornering behavior.


Norm

 

I'm pretty much on track to get 35-40k out of the 512s the ride is a has a bit more noise than they did before......the outer treads are down to the wear bar and the center wear bars still have life left in them...35 psi or so....they still handle good int he rain...but in the deeper puddles not so much...which is expected of any tire...but much better than the stock potenzas which were down right scary

I have a set of vs4's in the garage lined up

 

I just bought falken tires, I hope they last me a long time...

 

got 19s of these on my 04 - great tire.

far far better than the stock goodyear rsa POS tires

 

since the replacement for this tire is now on the market, I'm going to un-sticky this thread...

 

I just got the Ziex-Ze 912s on my car on Saturday.

 

I have them on my Z and my max. The main thing I've noticed is that they are louder than my stock Z tires.

 

I haven't had a chance to take the car out on the highway, but we'll see how they sound. I could care less about how they sound though. How does the grip feel?