Within two months, I will be getting and receiving my long awaited Skoda Yeti SE, which we ordered without a spare wheel, and fitted with a tyre repair kit.

What I would like to know is:

• Will Skoda provide tyres that are of type “run as flat†with the new vehicle, or some other types of tyres of size 225/50 R17 94W?
  
• When the time comes to changing tyres, would it be better to go for a “run as flat†tyre or a “reinforced†tyre?
  

So far what I found out about “run as flat†tyres, is that they are less economical on for fuel consumption.

However I do not know about the noise level that these types of tyres, produce.

A few years ago, the name “contact tyres†was introduced to refer to tyres that were rated as all weather/ all year tyres, yet it looks like no one refers to these anymore. Can contact tyres no longer be purchased, or have they been replaced by another name?

It may sound strange to ask these questions when one is acquiring a new vehicle, however, having looked at the prices of services and spare parts including tyres, prior to committing to purchasing this vehicle, it is normal that I look in advance for the one item that everyone will have to change several times during the course of life of a vehicle. And since each medium quality tyre for this vehicle can be quite expensive one better be sure of what types one needs to get at the best possible price, when the time comes to replacing one or more of these.

Also as a last question on this topic, is it true that on a 4x4 vehicle, all 4 tyres need to be changed at the same time, not only because of wear and tear, but also because of the electronic features of the car like ESP and its components?

Any information on these would be much appreciated.

Run on Flat Technology (RFT) Tyres do give a harder ride, due to the thicker side-walls. - This is common across the range. - i Would not like to change to RFT for my car.

A reinforced tyre can legally cope with more weight, they are not RFT. (The Superb must use Reinforced due to higher weight)

I always thought that "Contact" was a trade name of Continental, as in "Sport-Contact" and "Eco-Contact" for example.

Why not just pick up a spare on eBay? Jack kit's are less than £20 on the Bay, and spares from Golf's etc come up regularly.

The older skool 4x4 vehicle didnt appreciate new tyres on an axel and not everywhere else, but the Haldex system does not seem to mind. On a + point, my Superb 4x4 is wearing the front and rear at a close rate.

Al.

Hi,

to echo to some extent the points made by ukcruiser, RFT do give a less compliant ride and tend to be more expensive. Skoda as far as I'm aware don't authorise there use on any of their cars either.

Reinforced or Extra Load (XL) have as suggested above, strengthened side-walls for heavier vehicles and will go flat the same as any standard tyre.

Regard tyres, then with the Haldex 4 system (again as above) can cope with different tread depths on all four wheels, however it is advisable to have the same brand, tread pattern and speed rating of tyre on all four wheels.

The Yeti from previous experience does even in 4x4 guise, wear the fronts more than the rears but probably by no more than 1.5mm over the life of the tyre.

More info on tyres and rims can be found in the guide My link

Regards,

TP

I will reiterate all that has been said previously, and add that true "run flat" tyres can only legally used if the vehicle is fitted with a tyre pressure warning system. As Tim said, Skoda do not fit or recommend their fitment.

The requirement to fit 4 tyres because it is a 4x4 has not been true for many years, but is continually promulgated by the tyre companies; it gives them greater sales and profits. It is however very important to only fit them in pairs and not singly. If you do fit 2 then it is recommended that the new ones are fitted to the rear axle.

If you do fit 2 then it is recommended that the new ones are fitted to the rear axle.

Why would this be? It is what I do much the the amusement of my local tyre fitters, but I understand the reason is so that the back doesn't overtake the front....but I stand to be corrected....

If you do fit 2 then it is recommended that the new ones are fitted to the rear axle.

What's the thinking behind that? I'd always believed that the 'newer' tyres, the ones with more tread, were best fitted to the driven wheels, because that is where most grip is needed. Hence on a rwd car you'd put them on the backs, and on a fwd car on the fronts. I can see that on permanent 4x4 they might also go to the rear, but since for most of the time even a 4x4 Yeti is predominantly fwd, the rears only being driven when needed, then putting new tyres to the front seems more logical. Not saying you're wrong, and willing to be convinced ... but would like to hear the reasoning.

Edited 22 April, 201115 yr by Bobdog

Thank you for the advise, I will stand clear for the Run on Flat Technology (RFT). I however do not understand why Skoda does not recommend them, as they would appear to be a good alternative, and why should this be exclusive to vehicles fitted with Tyre Pressure Monitors, especially when people like myself check their tyres regularly every two to four weeks, depending on the mileage covered.

It is also good to know that not all four tyres need to be replaced at the same time too.

I personally have seriously thought about getting a spare wheel, but not having it was the condition of buying this vehicle in the first place, because the boot space with a spare wheel (being it a space saver, or full size spare wheel) made the volume of the boot storage much smaller than our current Fabia estate (which incidentally does have a full size spare wheel). If only Skoda had designed a spare wheel that could have been kept outside the cabin, like some vehicles have on the outside of the vehicle, this would have been smashing. Therefore, purchasing a spare wheel, is not an option for me, as this would dramatically reduce the boot space.

In terms of tyres, I have used many in the past as I used to do very high mileage in excess of 10K every four months, and was basically driving 40,000 miles per year, so, I have experimented with different brands, and I must admit that I do have a preference for a specific mid range brand. However, because the new vehicle will be different and considerably higher, the choice of tyres to use many not be as simple. For instance looking at specific sites, for tyre sizes of 225/50 R17 94W, returns a number of different types (some rated for 4x4, and others not), does this make a difference?

1) I believe run-flat tyres have to be fitted to specially designed wheels, and has been mentioned they give a harsh ride - my daughter-in-law has them on her Mini and wishes she hadn't.

2) As far as I am aware, there is no legal requirement for cars to carry a spare wheel. My son's TVRs have never had a spare wheel, and many years ago the Post Office realised they could save money by not buying spare wheels for their postal delivery vans as they usually only travelled a short distance from the home depot and so it would be cheaper to send a mechanic out with a spare wheel should one suddenly suffer a flat tyre.

Chris

The reason that run flat tyres have to have a tyre pressure monitoring system fitted is so that the owner actually knows the tyre has gone flat. There were several cases of drivers not realising for long distances, therefore it was introduced as part of the Type Approval. It appears that several car manufacturers are moving away from the system, mostly due to the harsh ride and increased vibrations they cause.

The recommendation for new tyres to be fitted to the rear axle, of all vehicles, is because it is believed that most drivers cannot deal with rear wheel skids (probably true) so the best grip is needed at the back. If the front starts skidding most drivers will instinctively take the power off, stopping the skid, whereas the back will continue sliding. There is plenty of examples of the reasoning on the tyre manufacturers sites. Having seen some examples of people in exactly this situation this winter I actually agree with it.

Spare wheels have NEVER been a legal requirement, although many people seem to think they are. Likewise they are not an MOT item though they can raise an "advisory" if they are visible and obviously poor. An MOT inspector cannot open the boot or remove any coverings to check.

The fitment of rear mounted spares is decreasing, for several reasons. They are too easily stolen from external mounts, in many cases too heavy to lift safely or comfortably, plus fitted and secured inside the body shell they can help with rear crash protection. However Land Rover have stopped providing them on the Freelander and Disco, and other manufacturers are going the same way. Modern tyre technology has improved so that punctures are now not common.

The recommendation for new tyres to be fitted to the rear axle, of all vehicles, is because it is believed that most drivers cannot deal with rear wheel skids (probably true) so the best grip is needed at the back. If the front starts skidding most drivers will instinctively take the power off, stopping the skid, whereas the back will continue sliding. There is plenty of examples of the reasoning on the tyre manufacturers sites. Having seen some examples of people in exactly this situation this winter I actually agree with it.

So I was right. Thanks Graham

I had run flats on my last car (bmw 320d) and would not want them again. They're expensive to replace and definitely do not ride as well as conventional rubber. I'm glad Škoda do not fit them to the Superb and would not recommend them.

This is the frst car I have had without a spare, and I have recently had my first blowout in many years. (i have had slow punctures, but never enough to stop me pumping them up and getting to a tyre depot). Near instant flat at speed on the front on a dual c'way, had to drive on for about 3 miles before there was somewhere safe to stop, fortunately the tyre stayed seated on the rim.

No way was the tyre worth trying to reinflate.

Waited 40 muinutes for the AA to come, they took the wheel adn me to a nearby Kwik Fit, which I have to use as it is a lease car, replaced tyre and taken back to the vehicle. All in all a 2 hour delay. It turned out the Kwik Fit was only 2 miles away, I would have tried to drive there slowly if I had known it was so close. (and because of the delay, then got held up by a bad accident for another hour!) I could have fitted a space saver and got home in the time taken even at 50mph.

Interesting conversation with the AA patrolman. This is now their bread and butter work as modern cars are virtually impossible to fix at the roadside. He considered it crazy to supply vehicles without spares. Had it happened 2 hours later the car would have had to be trailered back to my house 100 miles away. Then picked up again the next morning to go to a tyre depot as it could not have been repaired at night. This would have wiped out any saving in CO2 probably for the life of several vehicles.

When you drive a lease car you have to have the tyres approved by the owner, I now have mismatched tyres in both make, style and tread depth as the other tyre has done 12000 more miles, and there is no question of replacing both to keep them the same. Whilst its nice to have a company car with repair costs and tyre replacement funded by the lease company, it is frustrating when basic safety like matchiung tyres goes by the wayside.

I do regret not specifying the spare, but on many occasions have needed the full boot depth. Have even considerd buying one off e-bay but they seem to go for too much money £80+ for the right hub with 5 bolts. Loads of 4 bolt wheels around but hey are obviously useless. I now realise I could have kept the uinused spacesaver and jack kit from my last car, a superb, as it was the right size, the collection driver wasn't bothered whether it was there or not and it was going straight to an auction. inow

Edited 22 April, 201115 yr by kenfowler3966

Thank you all for the very good advice, I shall take note.

Now, within the tyre size references of 225/50 R17 94W, is it best to go for tyres that are rated for 4x4, or not?

I must say that the majority of the driving will be done on normal roads (motorway or country roads), only a fraction of time will the vehicle be used on non asphalted roads / terrain that may be almost passable with normal vehicles.

What's the thinking behind that? I'd always believed that the 'newer' tyres, the ones with more tread, were best fitted to the driven wheels, because that is where most grip is needed. Hence on a rwd car you'd put them on the backs, and on a fwd car on the fronts. I can see that on permanent 4x4 they might also go to the rear, but since for most of the time even a 4x4 Yeti is predominantly fwd, the rears only being driven when needed, then putting new tyres to the front seems more logical. Not saying you're wrong, and willing to be convinced ... but would like to hear the reasoning.

If you assume that the new tyres give the better grip then thie thinking is understeer caused back lack of grip at the front you can do a bit about with engine, but if the back comes around your pretty much screwed.

Thank you all for the very good advice, I shall take note.

Now, within the tyre size references of 225/50 R17 94W, is it best to go for tyres that are rated for 4x4, or not?

I must say that the majority of the driving will be done on normal roads (motorway or country roads), only a fraction of time will the vehicle be used on non asphalted roads / terrain that may be almost passable with normal vehicles.

I take mine off-road lots, mostly using rough gravel forestry tracks but with occasional more severe useage. I looked at the specific 4x4 tyres and won't be bothering. I've not had a problem with the Dunlops Dewi came with but will replace them probably with some Continentals. If they were available I would really like a complete set of proper All Terrain tyres, however........

I noticed that over the years that I was doing and average of 40,000 miles per annum, the Dunlop tyres although very good just lasted, a little under a year, I used budget tyres of lower quality and they did not last very long. The Continental Eco Contact tyres, I would say were very much average, nothing special, but they did the job, however when I switched to mid range Bridgestone or Firestorm, goodness what a difference, in all weather, being it winter as well as summer, very good grip, of course in the snow they were not particularly better than other tyres, because these were relatively wide (as thin tyres work better in the snow). What won my respect with the Bridgestone and the Firestorm tyres, is that both brand lasted nearly twice as long as the previous tyres, hence in the region of 18 months, before I knew that it was nearly time to change them (because the drive was not as accurate as it should have been, even though the threads were still OK). This means that for the 18 months I would have travelled 45,000 miles, on a mixture of 50% motorway and 50% A/B roards, and driving on non gritted B roads as well in the winter. I have not tried the big brands like Michelin, although I have heard that their tyres are of very good quality, I have avoided them, mostly because their UK prices are a little bit outside my budget, especially when there is more than one tyre to replace. I normally replaced two tyres at a time, and occasionally, like the last time, changed all set of four tyres at the same time.

I have also relied on the expertise and advise of Kwick Fit as their prices were reasonable, and their advise was good.

For the Yeti tyres, though, I do not know which model or series of tyres from Bridgestone or Firestorm would best suite my needs. The specific that I would be looking for would be:

• stability, cornering, summer and winter tyres
  
• low noise level
  
• good fuel economy
  
• In a mid range set of tyres
  

Having, stated the sort of tyres, I would like to look for, can anyone recommend models and series of tyres that would best suite what I am looking for within the Bridgestone or Firestorm brand. So I could start looking for good offers on these?

Such information would be much appreciated.

You haven't got your car yet and you're already thinking replacement tyres?

Check your warranty/insurance if departing from factory fit spec - the XL load weighting is there for a reason.

As for Kwik Fit - if I want to see monkeys I go to Twycross

Sorry, but never heard of Firestorm tyres. Do you mean Firestone?

A very small point. If you have a puncture in the Merseytunnels and dont have a spare, there is a fine of £70 and the you have to pay for private recovery.

Thank you all for the very good advice, I shall take note.

Now, within the tyre size references of 225/50 R17 94W, is it best to go for tyres that are rated for 4x4, or not?

I must say that the majority of the driving will be done on normal roads (motorway or country roads), only a fraction of time will the vehicle be used on non asphalted roads / terrain that may be almost passable with normal vehicles.

SWMBO's xtrail came with dunlop all season m+s tyres which handle all conditions very well. When the fronts needed replacing it got a pair of pirelli scorpion all season m+s which seem just as good. Her dad also has an xtrail and he has the pirellis all round with no complaints.

Our xtrail has handled the last two winters, motorways, a roads and everything in between with no tyre issues.

Edited 23 April, 201115 yr by Slinksuperb

SWMBO's xtrail came with dunlop all season m+s tyres which handle all conditions very well. When the fronts needed replacing it got a pair of pirelli scorpion all season m+s which seem just as good. Her dad also has an xtrail and he has the pirellis all round with no complaints.

Our xtrail has handled the last two winters, motorways, a roads and everything in between with no tyre issues.

Unfortunately, the Xtrail uses a different size tyre to the Yeti, and I can't find the Pirelli's in the relevant size. (225/50R17)

• Yes I meant Firestone, sorry.
  
• And yes, even though I have not got the car yet, I am thinking of replacement tyres.
  

The name of the game is called “being prepared, and readyâ€, so that when the moment comes that tyres are to be replaced, there are no surprises in terms of costs. By doing a little bit of research in this way, I will know exactly brand and model to get, possibly were to get them from, this may not necessarily be Kwick Fit this time round, but most importantly for me, if I find the tyre types that suit my needs, and if I find out their most common prices, I can start saving for these. Changing one or two tyres in one go, may be within my budget, but four, may be difficult, especially if this is part of a servicing of a vehicle. As you must have noticed, the prices of tyres for a Yeti, are in a different league of price ranges than those of a Fabia. And for those owners that are a little bit careful, being prepared may save them a bit of worry later on.

• I like to say to Slinksuperb thank you for trying, as what I am looking for is some honest advice, as this is the sort of thing I am looking for, however, if as Llanigraham says these tyres are not the right fit for the tyres that I am looking for, I will have to wait and hope for a correct fit answer by someone else.
  

Please note that I am not only going to limit myself to the Bridgestone and Firestone brand, if someone else has had good experience of other brand of tyres, I would be happy to give it a try, however, I would not want to dish out £200 per tyres. My upper limit price for a brand new tyres would be up to £150, but more likely in the region of £120 per tyre, as it appears that there are no / (not many) quality mid range tyres below the £120 price. Unless someone here knows better?

I had to replace one of the Dunlops SP01 supplied with my car. Prices c£130-£180.

Andy

You need to be looking at at least replacing 2 tyres at a time. Having one new one on an axle is considered dangerous by many people, due to the grip differential across the axle.

The problem with the tyre market is that costs vary by the hour. I use Blackcircles as we get a discount through the CSMA and looking the other night at work the price of one particular tyre varied from one end of the shift to the other.

Consider who your supplier is. I have found that the big chains are rarely the cheapest or give the best advice. I get the price from Blackcircles and then go to one of my local independents; they can invariably beat that price without any haggling, plus they are keen to keep your custom so are more willing to put themselves out for you. As an example BC were quoting Conti Contact 3's at just under £150 each whereas my local bod will do them for £140 fitted. Certainly KF don't have a good reputation. Also remember that other chains are owned by tyre manufacturers so will "push" their makes over others.

Also worth taking into account is that the cheaper tyres do not have such good wear rates. My Dunlops look like I will get 20k out of them before they are near the wear strips. Will the cheaper makes get the same? From past experience on my Freelander I found Kumho's good but Hankook's didn't last as well.

Sometimes cheap isn't really! In the 4x4 world the best All Terrain tyre was reckoned to be the BF Goodrich AT, where there were stories of people getting 40 or 50k on a tyre, but they were twice the price of all the others.

I agree with the Welsh Wizard. If you can find a good, local, independent tyre dealer and build a relationship with them it pays in all kinds of ways. They'll put themselves out over little, but helpful, things in ways the big boys never will.