The good news, is that the crappy Dunlops that came with my 2010 Honda Fit Sport.....are already worn down enough to justify getting rid of them...I take this as a good thing.

But now I face the usual dillema Honda Fit Sport owners face. I don't want to go anywhere near OEM tires in the original size of 185/55/R16. So my choices in original size are very, very limited.

I'm thinking Yokohoma Avid Ascends if I stay with original size.

But research here and on the internet, tells me 205/50/R16 is a popular and possible alternative size, with many people choosing Continental Extreme Contact DWS.

My priorities would be a tire that exceeds the OEM Dunlops, in the area's of tire wear and tire noise, this should be easy to do, as the bar is set very low. I also would like to keep the gas mileage as good as possible.

I like the idea of upsizing the tires, but I'm afraid of the possible MPG hit.

So I'd just like some feedback from both parties. If you are running 205/50/R16 what MPG hit have you took if any?

If you happen to have the Yokohoma Avids...how do you like them?

Thank you all in advance.

 

I upgraded to a 205/50/16 well before the stock dunnies needed to be replaced around 5K on my 2012 sport

I was going for performance and max grip without using a summer tire.I have the Kumho Ecsta 4X and they are very good in both dry and wet conditions.

They are not super quiet but not loud at all and my mpg did not change compared to the stock tires.

I think you may be happier with a LRR tire like the Avids but there are plenty of good all season tires to choose from in the 205 and the mpg hit is very small if any at all.

 

Here's a thread that I found that has some good comments about a few tires for the Fit in the 205/50/R16 size:

https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/2nd-...t-sport-2.html

Once my stock Dunlops wear out I'm leaning toward going with the Kumho's that Zilla has because I'd like to get better handling and traction along with the other advantages. If you want to get better gas mileage the Bridgestone Ecopia in the 205/50/R16 size looks good. There is a post about those in the thread I linked and the guy reported getting substantially better gas mileage along with some other benefits over the stockers. Good luck!

-Dustin

 

If you get something fairly sticky, and wider, you will take a mpg hit. Since my daily driving patterns changed a lot right around the time I upgraded, it is hard for me to say, but several MPGs lower. I have the DW model of those DWS tires. It's the dry/wet without the "snow" part. A little stickier than the other model, but the rain performance is amazing for a high performance model. I love these tires, despite them being a little softer sidewalls than stock. They are quieter and more plush. With all the mods I've done, the car drives completely different on the highway, and it's so much more of a relaxed and stable feeling that I'd gladly take a mpg hit. Now that the lighter wheels are on, the MPGs are climbing by 1-2 mpg again in mixed driving. Getting started from a roll with these wheels is more effortless, I guess.

 

205 50 16 if MPG isn't a primary concern and better cornering is.
185 55 16 if you want the best fuel economy and performance comes second. Personally i wouldn't run a 205 on the stock rim, its quite narrow so it allows alot of sidewall roll with the 205 on a 6" rim. Id recommend at least a 6.5 wide wheel for a 205. If youre stock wheels is what youre sticking with, id get the oem sized Hankook Ventus V2 Concept, they are aroudn $68 each and weight 1.5lbs less then the oem Dunlops.

 

I am leaning toward the Continental DWS's based on reviews on this forum and Tire Rack.

 

We have about a dozen Fit fanatics here and these are unaminous recommendations from them. We pass these on to everyone; they are posted on our walls.
First, the OEM Dunslops are so poor that no matter what you buy they will be better tires. But Dunlop makes some very good tires too, like the Direzzas.
Second, visit tirerack.com to check the specs, noise levels, tire wear, the performance rated by users, and tireracks own autocross type testing. Not just their opinions, but the actual times for wet and dry autocross tests. And then you can choose the one that best fits your budget. Remember as the tire gets heavier you should reduce the diameter a trifle, as much as a half inch. The odo and speedo error is only 2% and you can't really see that. Copos wonm't either so watch your speed.
When changing tire size most have gone with 205/50 section tires; about half are using Continental tires, a few Michelins, and the rest on Direzzas or sticky tires like Hoosiers with less than 140 UTOG wear ratings. In the rain there are Corvettes who fear their appearance. And with good reason. Yeah, their're the ones with fangs to their navel. Not noisy, but seaky mauraders they are. ( No, I'm too old to do that anymore.)
cheers and good luck.

 

I'll second that, but I'll add 195/55/R16 to the mix. I bought a set of Goodyear Eagle GT's to replace my stock Dunlops, and I've never been happier. Took the suggestion after my dad bought a set to put on his turbo PT because he had big problems with putting the power down safely. Amazing tire in the dry, and equally amazing in the rain.

 

I've decided to go with the Yokohoma Avid Ascends, and I'm waiting to see if there'll be a discount available at Tire Rack anytime soon.

The Conti DWS look to be great tires, but they I suspect that achieve this by using a softer rubber, which wears out quickly and, apparently, costs more to manufacture. Also, I suspect that, because of their greater width and softer rubber, they'll lower the mpgs somewhat. You also have to add the cost of installing another set more frequently than with the Yokohomas. All this will add up moneywise.

That said, if cost is no object and you want the peace of mind that might come with the tire that gives the best grip, by all means go with the Contis. But if you're like me and on a tight budget, and suspect that the small increase in grip in extreme conditions (which I'll not likely encounter) that comes with the Contis won't make a practical difference, then go with the Yokohomas.

 

STAY AWAY FROM EGALE GT there a great tire there just toooooooo dam heavey lol belive me i own them on my fit right now hat them 2k 4 months now i lost alot of mpg i get 25-30 now : / i was getting 44 hwy at times on stocks DWS are my next tire now since im having a baby lol need a lil softer ride since on my buddy clubs DWS are great for comfort and sum handeling and u keep ur same mpgs because there not even heavy there 1 lb light then stock per tire and the tire supports more weight but there soft so yeah cant handle to much great tire tho for normal driving and as for Yokohoma Avid Ascends there ok tire not all that but ok better then stocks and if u run a summer tire run the RE-760

 

I'm running GE wheels on my GD3. I took a 1-2 mpg hit when going from the stock 185's to Falken Ziex ZE-912 205/45/16's. They're sticky, soft, and have treated me well. However, they've also only lasted me about 2 years, <30K miles. And they're not the quietest...

I went through your dilemma a few months ago when I was shopping for tires. Wanted better mpg, better comfort, and still maintain good performance since I'm a spirited driver, so I went with the Kumho Ecsta 4x in a 195/50/16. Will be mounting the tires at the end of the month. We'll see if I made the right decision.

 

After "bubbling" the sidewalls on 10 different Continental 225/45R-17 Continental ContiProContact XL tires (on a 2005 VW Passat TDI; 3,490-pound car), I can tell you that I will never own another Continental tire of any kind.

The fact of the matter is Continental is "known" for weak sidewalls in their tires (simply peruse Tire Rack's customer reviews on various Continental tires).

Admittedly, this is probably less of an issue for a car as light as a Honda Fit but I would check the sidewalls if I was rolling on Continentals and ever hit a pothole.

My advice?: go with the Yokohama Envigors or General AltiMax HPs, or spend the money and spring for some Michelin Primacys (fantastic tire).

 

Ive been very happy with Yokohama Avids, both on the Fit and the BMW 325i that I had before.

 

I'll admit, this is true about their tires. But you are also correct that in a car as light as the Fit, the chances of failure go down hugely. I would say that the chances of the car being blamed on a tire failure without an extreme scenario in something this light would be due to manufacturers defects only, which are not exactly a good thing to have in the tire industry (anyone remember THAT scare back in 2000?)

The benefit is a softer ride, and lighter tires. I would put these DW tires on any light car, as they really do offer a "best of both worlds" driving (comfort/performance.) If I had coilovers, or at least better dampers, I might do with something a little stiffer, more agressive, and thus heavier. The stock suspension has a hard time negotiating bumps with the Swifts, as is, but the lighter wheels (~13 lbs.) helped.

 

That's funny you say that because my 2005 Sentra SE-R SpecV came with 215 45 17 Continental Sport contacts and sidewall did bubble and give out.

 

Thanks everyone for your advice.
I haven't made a decision yet. I think I can probably go a few months in any case, it's not yet an "emergency" situation.

I will say, when I bought my Fit, I had read about the oddball tire size and the limited amount of replacement choices in the OEM size. But for me that was over 2 years ago, I was really hoping that with the passage of time and the growing popularity of The Honda Fit, that more replacement tires would be manufactured.

I'm kind of surprised and disappointed that more OEM size choices don't exist.

I appreciate the feedback and haven't yet come to a decision. I'll post a closing note when I decide what tire and size I'm going with...

 

I had the OEM Dunlops on my 2009 Fit Sport MT and recently (November) replaced them with Yoko Avid Ascends. So far (~3,500 miles) I like the Ascends just fine, but perhaps I should also admit that I didn't have a problem with the Dunlops. My OEM Dunlops lasted 60,531 miles. By the end, they were almost at the wear bars and there was a noticeable (negative) difference in wet traction/hydroplaning. I didn't want to chance winter weather on them so I replaced with the Avid Ascends.

I have tracked every gallon of gas and mileage in my Fit since I bought it new in a spreadsheet. My experience so far has been:

Dunlops (60,531 miles) Ave: 36.79 mpg
Avid Ascend (3,432 miles) Ave: 36.89 mpg

So essentially no difference. I'm actually encouraged by this though, because I typically seem to get worse mileage in the winter, so I am hopeful that over a longer time period the Ascends will get better mileage than the Dunlops.

Regarding noise, I honestly haven't noticed much difference. I keep the radio going almost constantly though - in part because the engine/valve noise annoys me and in part because I generally listen to something in the car anyway. I haven't really noticed the road noise with either tire.

Handling-wise, both tires have been fine. I'm not an aggressive driver though, which was probably obvious by the fact that I got >60,000 miles out of the OEM Dunlops! (My days of hard driving have been over for a while...) I have now driven both the old Dunlops and the new Ascends in dry, wet, and snow conditions and both seemed appropriate for an all-season tire on a front wheel drive car. The Ascends have been a definite improvement, but that's probably just because there is so much more tread depth than I have been used to for the last year or so.

Bottom line is that I'm happy I purchased the Avid Ascends, but I probably could have been happy with another set of the Dunlops too. I bought the Ascends because of the expectation of better tread life (too early to tell), the LRR (no difference in mileage yet), and my previous very good experience with Yokohama tires on my Integra GSR. So far they have been fine, but I'm withholding final judgement until I get more miles on them.

Hope that helps.

Keith

 

Thanks for sharing your experience. I'm leaning towards getting a set of the Yoko Avid Ascends.

My biggest concern however, is I've read numerous reviews of the tire, with a percentage of people saying it's just fine in wet conditions but also a percentage of people saying it's absolutely horrible in wet conditions.

I live in the Pacific Northwest, I don't drive at a level that necessarily demands the BEST wet conditions tire, but I do drive in an environment that would demand a tire at least "average" in that category.

I knew when I bought my Fit that there were few options in the OEM sized tire. I guess I was hoping that in the 2-3 years while the OEM tires were wearing out...that more manufacturers would start to make more tires available. That really hasn't become the case.

I would have to put difficulty and limited choice in obtaining OEM sized tires as drawback to Honda Fit Sport ownership. The only tire anyone seems to even have in stock, is the OEM Dunlop, and my experience with it has been very poor. I absolutely refuse to put another set of those on.

Any other option in OEM size, including the Avid Ascends are a must order it scenario.

 

Yoko Avid Ascends just get them there fine in water there not that bad not like u drive crazy

 

What PSI were you running your GT's at? Initially I was running the stock 33 PSI, but noticed it had lazy handling. Bumped them up to what my dad ran them at, which is 38 PSI, and they feel fantastic. No real drop in Mpg to note (averaging something like 30.7 now, where before it was 31.8) I can still get mine to chirp under moderate acceleration, and they're wearing within a millimeter of eachother from inside to outside.

More annoyingly though, my speedo is off by 1.3 percent. Honda wants to charge 190 dollars to correct it, so I'll just live with it.