Consumer Complaints
| Fail date | miles | occurences | Purchase date |
|---|---|---|---|
| TIRES | |||
| 11/25/2011 | 143000 | ||
| Purchased falken tires 11/15/2010.fk ze912b at sears . all four tires were high speed balanced. car also had wheel alignment , as of 11/25/2011 with 15,000 miles the tires are almost balded in the front and not much tread life in the rear , as per the lincoln penny test.these tires were installed on a 2000 camery, have replaced these tires with bf goodrich advantage t/a , feel much safer. . | |||
| 07/19/2009 | 38000 | 1 | |
| My husband and i bought grand touring tires #p2056515 in june of 2005...we have experience two blow out with these tire...plus air leakage in one tire especially, l-f...r-fblew out on i-65 going south in 08...and going down to visit daughter b-r blew out on i-65...there was no construction traffic was moving normally. just wanted you to know that i do not trust these tires...do not feel safe, something wrong. my husband call the hp but they did not respond...aaa came an changed the tire.*tr | |||
| 06/29/2008 | 105089 | 1 | |
| My wife was driving back home on the turnpike. the front left tires tread separated from the core and almost caused a serious 2-car accident. the tread damaged our car. no one was hurt and the only damage was to our car. the bad tire did not go flat; it just lost all of its tread. i contacted bridgestone and used their procedure to claim damages. i got all the estimates and shipped the tire to them for examination. they sent me a form letter stating there was evidence of over deflection and denied any compensation. over deflection is an under inflated tire. my tire was not under inflated. i kept detail records of the entire set of tires. i check inflation regularly and i never let a car leave town without checking the inflation. all 4 tires were properly inflated. i have replaced all the tires (even though almost half the tread was still left on the other 3 tires). i requested that they send me the offending tire back to me--which they did. on the internet there are other stories of tread separating from bridgestone/firestone tires. people contact them for damage reimbursements and they received the same form letter about over deflection. what course do we have? when i got the car back to town i checked all 4 tires and they were still properly inflated. the tire is a b 420, p195/70r14 dot 0brwp 213801. *tr | |||
| 03/15/2004 | 1 | 06/30/2000 | |
| A road hazard destroyed a front tire at approx 20, 000 miles. i replaced it and had new spare placed on other front wheel. rear tires needed replacing at 47,000 miles and i requested costco tire center, sunnyvale, ca, to place new tires on front and rotate present fronts to rear wheels. clerk refused stating that costco policy is to refuse to install new tires and mount on front wheels only. reason was based on a study from michelin tire company. i requested and was shown costco employee manual with that direction. study was not available. costco employee directions are that if customer insists on newer tires on front wheels, the employee is not to sell the tires to the customer. i was replacing michelin tires with michelin tires. costco sell other brands, but this was apparently a rule for all. i contacted michelin on their website requesting availability of reading the subject study. no response in 8 days. i have always heard and followed the rule that best tires belong on front wheels for safety reasons. i have used michelin tires for years but have never heard of this condition of sale. has michelin placed me and family in an unsafe position with this unavailable study? would appreciate nhtsa assistence in resolving this matter. *ak | |||
| 1 | |||
| The tires (general) on the vehicle were dry rotted. the vehicle was taken to the dealer who stated the tires must be replaced. *jb | |||
| 06/20/2002 | 2 | 07/01/2000 | |
| My front tires wore out completely, down to the bare metal, at 11,000 miles. this was determined by the dealer during an oil change. the tires were replaced at my expense and i asked that the manufacturer be contacted so that i could get an explanation. subsequent communication with a dealer representative indicated that the manufacturer was contacted but did not respond. the service manager indicated that they have had similar issues with other customers and he believes that the tires wear out quickly because they are made to provide a smooth ride. as a consumer i am appalled that tires costing over $100 each wore out so quickly and i believe that there may be an issue related to this particular batch. i am also concerned about the fact that i have not yet received a response from the manufacturer (toyota). ts | |||
| 01/01/2000 | |||
| The groves in these tire is so narrow that they allow the snow to fill them up. it creates a smooth surface causing an extremely slippery condition. only experience this proble in the winter. | |||
| 08/31/2000 | 10 | 04/01/2000 | |
| I have had to replace 2 tires at only 22,000 miles and have brought in my vehicle for the same problem multiple times. i have had repeated alignments, balancing and rotation of tires with no results. *ak | |||
| 08/22/2001 | 3 | 08/01/2000 | |
| Front tires have no tread after 20,000 miles, tread separated and one tire blewout on highway, firestone says it is the wrong tire on the car and toyota says it is firestone's responsibility to supply new tires. *ak (tiresize: p205/65r15) | |||
| 1 | 01/01/2000 | ||
| While driving consumer had difficulty controlling the steering of the vehicle it would drift across the road and consumer had to forcefully clutch the steering wheel to control the vehicle, consumer took vehicle in to be inspected, and it was determined that the two rear tires were out of round the tread on tires were fine, but mechanic felt that tires were of poor quality. (tire make/model not provided) *jb | |||
| 05/01/2000 | 1 | 03/01/2000 | |
| When i bought the car texas was in a drought so until it started raining here in dallas i did not know the car hydroplaned. i checked the air in the tires i did all i could do to have it checked out and their was nothing wrong with the car other than the tires. i reported this to toyota site, i told the guy who sold me my car, i sent an email to general tires, toyota nor general tires emailed me back. i have about 22,000 miles on the car now the tires are wore in the front so before i go on vacation in june i will have to purchase new tires. so far i have kept control of the tire one time i did slide into the curb and thought we were going to flip, but thank god not toyota or general we did not. i don't have any claims against anyone, but this car or these tires are not safe and something does need to be done about it. thanks for whatever you can do.*ak (dot number: acur3hu409 tiresize: p205/65r15) | |||
| 12/06/2000 | 4 | 11/01/2000 | |
| Rough vibration/1 set replaced / 2nd set same/dealer doesn't want to replace with michelin which they should. i took the car to two separate dealers and they both suggested replacing the continental general with michelin and said i would have no problem. *ak( dot number: ) | |||
| TIRES - MARKINGS | |||
| 11/19/1999 | 1 | 11/19/1999 | |
| Re: dunlop sp sport 4000 tires, original equipment on 2000 toyota camry purchased nov 1999. he final digits of the dot number on all the tires is: 369. my understanding is that these digits are supposed to indicate the date of manufacture. but surely that date cannot be the 3rd week of 1969! so my complaint is that the tires do not accurately indicate the date of manufacture.*ak | |||
| 06/16/2001 | 1 | ||
| While driving, rain started to fall and became very intense, consumer applied brakes to slightly slow down to let a truck pass, however consumer lost control, consumer hit a total of three vehicles and hit a concrete median barrier, consumer had purchased new front goodyear eagle hp, h speed rated, all season radial tires one month prior to this incident, tires were marked incorrectly causing incorrect installation, the tread facing direction was opposite to the tire rotation, which is what caused consumer to lose control, also in accident air bags did not experience deployment, tire size p205/65h15, not dot number give, consumer was injured in accident. *slc | |||
| TIRES - SIDEWALL | |||
| 07/31/2003 | 1 | 05/20/2000 | |
| My wife was driving on the 57 south fwy about 7p.m. when her front right tire exploded into serval pieces... this was the original tire and equipment. we understand a flat could have occurred from everyday wear and tear; however, this was not the case. this could have resulted in a serious or fatal accident. if you would like to see evidence of this, we will provide photos of what is left. we believe that this should be investigated and or recalled.*ak | |||
| 1 | 12/01/2000 | ||
| The bridgestone tires that were on the vehicle when purchased, had developed an air bubble on the sidewall. other tires have worn out a lot of the tread, causing the lack of capacity of the tire and mileage. *ak re 92 p205/65r15 92h-two rear tires had a depth reading of 3-5/32nd even both tires (wear). the tires have been checked every 3000 miles at the time of oil change. the tires were rotated and balanced on may 13,2002. *scc | |||
| 04/19/2001 | 04/01/2000 | ||
| Sidewall failure; car was rear-ended; upon inspection found bulge in front tire sidewall. *ak (tiresize: 205/60r16)( dot number: tire size: 205/60r16 ) | |||
| TIRES - TEMPORARY/EMERGENCY SPARE TIRE | |||
| 03/09/2007 | 1 | 02/09/2007 | |
| Whitaker sales sent me on the road with no lights, no spare tire and no jack. they sold me a 2000 toyota camry and said no damage but i question this. i questioned the flat tire and the lights .they said things were fine . i will explain more by sending disclosures of the vehicle if you want. *jb | |||
| TIRES - TREAD/BELT | |||
| 03/11/2008 | 1 | ||
| In july 2004, i purchased a set of tires (kelly springfield explorers). one of the tires has deteriorated to the point where the steel redials are protruding from parts of the rubber. according to the manufacturer specs, the tires are rated 40,000 miles. however, this particular tire has lasted for only 16,754 miles before its deterioration. ultimately, i had to replace the whole set. my toyota car servicer called the manufacturer, who apparently said that too much time had passed to compensate me for obviously inferior workmanship. the tire code is as follows: (17681 kel exp 19570r14), which cost me $209.08+ 6% sales tax, plus service. the 4 replacement tires, labor, & disposal cost $394.25, with alignment $85.95,plus 6% taxes. *tr | |||
| 05/14/2007 | 48000 | 12 | 02/10/2007 |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2000 toyota camry. while driving 40 mph, the contact noticed a vibration coming from the front end of the vehicle. the contact inspected the dominator touring mr2 tires and noticed a bulge on the outer tread. the bulge caused the tire to be worn. the tires have not been inspected to determine the cause of failure. the current mileage is 49,000 and failure mileage was 48,000. | |||
| 06/16/2005 | 1 | 11/10/2000 | |
| On or about june 16, 2005 while driving at approximately 45 mph on the main highway, the front passengers side tire exploded immediately prior to the explosion there was a brief thump thump thump thump coming from that area. upon explosion i brought the car to a stop on the side of the road and changed the tire with a spare, and noticed a significant amount of damage to the front end of the vehicle - a 2000 toyota camry. i contacted the manufacturer (goodyear) and had them evaluate the tire ... they claimed i must have impacted a substantial object which is not the case. the insurance company covered repairs amounting to almost $2000.00 i still have the tire awaiting the outcome of this investigation, as goodyear will not take responsibility for this obviously defective tire. *jb | |||
| 03/22/2005 | 28000 | 1 | 01/11/2003 |
| Goodyear, aquatread, 205/65r15, dot# mdup3mhp4301. all four tires are wearing on the outer edges. there is only 28,000 miles of tread wear on the tires. the vehicle has been completely aligned however, the tires continue to wear excessively on the outer edges. owner contacted the manufacturer and is still waiting for a response. *ak the consumer felt the tire were unsatisfactory in rain or wet roads. the vehicle would slide and skid in wet weather. *bf *nm | |||
| 06/15/2001 | 1 | 04/01/2000 | |
| At 9,000 miles vehicle vibrated while traveling 70 mph. bridgestone/firestone realigned front end and rebalanced all the tires. at 12,846 miles front two tires were showing signs of tread separation. dealer notified. *ak tires are bridgestone potenza, p205/65r15 92h, dot number y79lefa219, two tires experienced tread separation, another tire was beginning to separate, dealer had balanced tires and re-aligned wheel at 12489 miles, however this did not help. *slc | |||
| TIRES - VALVE | |||
| 05/01/2008 | 18000 | 2 | |
| Tl*the contact owns a 2000 toyota camry. the manufacturer of the valve stem is tech international on two different occasions, both driver side tires blew out. as a consequence, the contact lost control of the vehicle, which almost resulted in a crash. the dealer stated that the valve stem on the tire cracked and was deteriorating. secondly, he stated that the valve stems on all four tires were defective; therefore, all four tires and valve stems were replaced. he called the distributor of the equipment and a representative stated that they were aware of the failure, and would replace any valve stems if the consumers were experiencing failures. the contact never received a recall notice for nhtsa campaign id number 08t018000 (tires:valve). he has a copy of the repair statement. the serial number, part number, and location in the vehicle were unknown. the failure and current mileages were 18,000. updated 09/16/08. *lj updated 09/17/08.*jb | |||