20" Inch Best 20" Tire for Max Efficiency (R1S): On-Road with Occasional Snow Driving

[s0ysauce]

After years of lurking on tire threads here, I've also narrowed it down to those two. I have less than 15k on my 20ATs and I've been looking for an excuse to replace them. As someone that has grown up through Bay Area car culture (pre Fast & Furious crap) Michelin's were usually my go to in all the car's I've gone through and hasn't let me down. The Rivian is the first SUV where I cared so much about tire selection that I've spent hours going through posts to read up on people's opinion on tires.

Thanks for making this post and getting everyone to chime in. IMO, it looks like you can't go wrong with either choice.

Thanks everyone for all of the great data and perspectives on this! Really appreciate it.

Based on the feedback, I have narrowed it down to the following options in the 275/60/R20 size (the consensus seems to be that sticking with the original size of 275/65/R20 is not the best for efficiency):

• Goodyear Wrangler Territory AT (Rivian OEM)
• Michelin Defender LTX MS/2

Goodyear Wrangler Territory AT (Rivian OEM)
Pros: Rivian OEM, 3-peak snow rating, bit cheaper
Cons: shorter lifespan, no warranty (I heard this is true about the warranty but I find that surprising)

Michelin Defender LTX MS/2
Pros: great warranty, long lifespan
Cons: not 3-peak rated for snow, not Rivian OEM, bit more expensive

However, here is the side-by-side comparison of those two in TireRack.com (see image). And yes, the Goodyear listed is the Rivian OEM variant. What stands out is that the Michelin is slightly better in all categories.

My guess is that the Michelin is used across many different vehicles so these ratings are a composite across owners of lots of different vehicles. Also a potential factor is that the data in TireRack.com doesn't separate out the feedback from the Goodyear "standard" Wrangler Territory AT and the Goodyear "Rivian" Wrangler Territory AT variant (that's just speculation on my part, though).

However, it is interesting that in every category, the Michelin is a bit better. I was leaning towards the Rivian variant Goodyear but now I am rethinking that based on this data.

It would be awesome to have this side-by-side comparison but have the data for both tires to be filtered to include only Rivian owners. Alas, I don't think that is possible.

In the end, I don't think I can go wrong with either tire since both are better for my use case compared to the stock Pirelli Scorpion ATs I currently have. Just looking for some datapoint that will tip the scale to one or the other of these options.


Thanks,

Jeff

Sponsored

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

After years of lurking on tire threads here, I've also narrowed it down to those two. I have less than 15k on my 20ATs and I've been looking for an excuse to replace them. As someone that has grown up through Bay Area car culture (pre Fast & Furious crap) Michelin's were usually my go to in all the car's I've gone through and hasn't let me down. The Rivian is the first SUV where I cared so much about tire selection that I've spent hours going through posts to read up on people's opinion on tires.

Thanks for making this post and getting everyone to chime in. IMO, it looks like you can't go wrong with either choice.

Can't remember if it's already mentioned. Worth pointing out UTQG of each tire. The factory Pirelli ATs are 640 (13/32" tread depth). Goodyears are 580 (12/32"). The Michelin M/S2 are 820 (11/32"). The rating system is relative, not absolute gospel. But it attempts to provide a frame of reference on longevity, without actually testing each tire on the market, side-by-side and under same controlled conditions. Some users on this forum and elsewhere have anecdotally* shared that their Goodyears are due for replacement soon after 20k miles. While some users of the Michelin report lower efficiency than they had hoped, compared to their factory tires. We know engineering is a game of trade-offs. Speculatively, maybe the Michelins are much harder, longer lasting tires that they are not as grippy as other tires (and therefore wasting some electrons to slippage).

*"Anecdotally" because everyone has different driving habits, drive on different roads and live at different elevations.

 

[ebarke]

HTS60 (34#) is most efficient, may be others that are very close. LL75 reported they are 2-3% more efficient than the 21 OEM.
“I'm currently running the HTS60 grabber in substitute for my 21". Efficiency is almost the same or a little bit better than the 21". No recalibration needed.”

I've got a little over 24k on my stock 21's and I'm at about 3-4/32 left. I have a set of super light atomic wheels, and looking at the hts60 275/60r20's as my next set of tires for it. I'm wondering if you can share an update as to how the hts60's are doing for you now. Are you still seeing better efficiency? How's the wear been so far? Noise levels? TIA

 

[ksurfier]

I've got a little over 24k on my stock 21's and I'm at about 3-4/32 left. I have a set of super light atomic wheels, and looking at the hts60 275/60r20's as my next set of tires for it. I'm wondering if you can share an update as to how the hts60's are doing for you now. Are you still seeing better efficiency? How's the wear been so far? Noise levels? TIA

@LL75 can tell you his experience, if you are ok with trade off of shorter tread life for better efficiency then they are a great choice. They pair very well with the super light AW rims.

 

[LL75]

I've got a little over 24k on my stock 21's and I'm at about 3-4/32 left. I have a set of super light atomic wheels, and looking at the hts60 275/60r20's as my next set of tires for it. I'm wondering if you can share an update as to how the hts60's are doing for you now. Are you still seeing better efficiency? How's the wear been so far? Noise levels? TIA

I went with HTS60 for my first set of 275/60/20 with atomic wheels AW09. My efficiency is slightly better than the stock 21". Ride and quality is essentially the same as the 21" However, it only last about 18K miles (same as my 21").
Currently using Michelin LTX M/2 to see if it last longer and so far it is. Had about 15K miles on it with more than half of thread life left. However, the efficiency is not as good.

HTS efficiency at 18K miles. 3.32
Michelin LTX at 15K miles is at 3.22
OEM 21 at 18K miles is 3.30

I might go back to the HTS for the next one since it cost the least

 

[ebarke]

I went with HTS60 for my first set of 275/60/20 with atomic wheels AW09. My efficiency is slightly better than the stock 21". Ride and quality is essentially the same as the 21" However, it only last about 18K miles (same as my 21").
Currently using Michelin LTX M/2 to see if it last longer and so far it is. Had about 15K miles on it with more than half of thread life left. However, the efficiency is not as good.

HTS efficiency at 18K miles. 3.32
Michelin LTX at 15K miles is at 3.22
OEM 21 at 18K miles is 3.30

I might go back to the HTS for the next one since it cost the least

Were you able to get a percentage of money back on the HTS tires if you only got 18k miles out of them? they have a 65k Warranty, I would expect to get a prorated $ credit on a new set of tires.

 

[LL75]

Were you able to get a percentage of money back on the HTS tires if you only got 18k miles out of them? they have a 65k Warranty, I would expect to get a prorated $ credit on a new set of tires.

Yes, I did. I put that toward the Michelin. Make sure you rotated properly by discount tires. I higly doubt that the Michelin will last 70K miles either.

 

[mrpoo]

When it comes to tire noise comparison, I understand that AT tires tend to get louder and have a whine as it gets closer to end of treadwear life. For those saying the Goodyear AT’s are far quieter, is that a comparison against the worn-and-ready-to-be-replaced Pirelli AT, or a comparison against how the Pirelli AT sounded when new?

I am currently on the stock Pirelli AT 20, gen1 quad R1S, conservative driving in all-purpose standard height and getting around 2.35 efficiency over the 3500 miles we have driven (vehicle was pre-owned). Total vehicle mileage around 23k and likely will be looking at tire replacement sometime this year.

 

[iansriv]

When it comes to tire noise comparison, I understand that AT tires tend to get louder and have a whine as it gets closer to end of treadwear life. For those saying the Goodyear AT’s are far quieter, is that a comparison against the worn-and-ready-to-be-replaced Pirelli AT, or a comparison against how the Pirelli AT sounded when new?

I am currently on the stock Pirelli AT 20, gen1 quad R1S, conservative driving in all-purpose standard height and getting around 2.35 efficiency over the 3500 miles we have driven (vehicle was pre-owned). Total vehicle mileage around 23k and likely will be looking at tire replacement sometime this year.

My experience between the OEM Pirelli 20s vs the GY AT, is that they are much quieter when new. My Pirellis were never that loud (or I was going deaf). I switched at around 20k miles. The GY is definitely more quiet.

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

My experience between the OEM Pirelli 20s vs the GY AT, is that they are much quieter when new. My Pirellis were never that loud (or I was going deaf). I switched at around 20k miles. The GY is definitely more quiet.

Which isn't all that surprising. The Pirelli, while not a hardcore AT, it is more AT than the Goodyear is. The Goodyear is a AS with slightly AT-esque tread. Plus, the Pirelli is a relatively old product with alterations to make it a Pirelli "Elect" product (whatever it is they actually did). Early on, folks who read too much into things thought they see RJ's initials in the tread pattern. But it was quickly pointed out the tread design pre-date Rivian by a large margin.

Sponsored