Yokohama AVID ENVigor (H- or V-Speed Rated)
Follow-Up Review: 23,000 miles on tires
I'm about to change these tires out due to wear.<br><br>Overall these tires have been excellent to drive/own for the past 25 months.<br><br>If my BMW X5 didn't have such severe negative camber on the rear tires AND these tires were not directional, they would have lasted another 20,000 miles for sure.<br><br>What I learned: if you have a BMW X5, these directional tires (as well as any directional tire) will have a reduced life span due to inability to rotate tires around the vehicle. Directional tires only allow you to rotate from say, left rear to left front.<br><br>And with the alignment of the BMW X5, with both front tire toe in and rear tire negative camber (all for driving performance and stability), directional tires are not your best tire for driving anything more than 20,000+ miles per set.<br><br>I religiously rotated around every 3500 miles and can say that I was very happy with these tires.<br><br>Great grip, ride comfort, response and durability all around. Definitely a tire worth owning and driving on.<br><br>Total cost per mile came to around 3.6 cents per mile (for all for tires combined). That's not bad when compared to the Michelin Latitude Tour HPs I replaced which had a total cost per mile of 3.1 cents per mile. Not really a huge difference between them.<br><br>In summary, I still recommend the Avid Envigor. The only thing I will do differently next purchase is move back to a symmetrical tread tire which will give me greater flexibility in rotations. <br><br>Doing so I hope to get another 40,000 miles on my next set of tires which will either be the Bridgestone Alenza or back to the Latitude Tour HPs.
Initial Review: 20 miles on tires
Just put these on my 2003 X5 3.0 Sport this morning. Took them out for adrive to get a feel for them having come off of Michelin Latitude Tour HPs. I ran the Latitude's for 42k miles which is high for this tire on the X5 (negative camber kills inside treads).
While early, the difference between the Latitude and Envigor is, the Michelin has a slightly softer sidewall giving a more supple ride whole the Envigor has a slightly stiffer feel. Turning is super easy on the Envigor and you can easily feel the tread set in a full turn while accelerating.
On bumps, again the Envigos is slightly more stout while the Latitudes has a little more cushion. Having the Sport suspension on the X5 I am okay with this difference as it does not make the ride uncomfortable or harsh.
Braking grip feel good, very similar the Latitudes. Acceleration felt normal, good grip and no squealing or slippage.
I bought the Envigor base upon what I was reading online about the tire and it abilities. For $100 less per tire than the Latitude's I believe Yokohama is delivering high value to the market with the Envigor.
Being a business person, one can assume that 30% the cost of a product is advertising expense. So with the Latitude costing around $260 per tire for my car, that means $75 per tire can be advertising which means the value proposition difference between the Latitudes and Envigors is pretty close.
Overall, with such a short ownership experience to date, I am happy with my initial impression and will report back over time. If I get another 42k miles from these Envigors I will consider my choice fabulous as I saved over $300 choosing the Yokohama Envigors over the Michelin Latitude Tour HPs.