BRIDGESTONE TIRES Complaints

MAJOR SAFETY PROBLEM WITH TIRE AIR PRESSURE SYSTEM. NORMAL TIRE PRESSURE IS 35 PSI. BECAUSE OF THE TIRE DESIGN, YOU CAN RUN WITH VERY LOW AIR PRESSURE AND NOT FEEL IT (ON A NORMAL CAR, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS). THAT IS WHY TOYOTA HAD TO PUT IN THE TIRE PRESSURE WARNING SYSTEM/LIGHT. TWICE THE TIRE PRESSURE WARNING SYSTEM DID NOT COME ON UNTIL A TIRE HAD ~10 PSI. THAT IS A DANGEROUS LEVEL. THE FIRST TIME I DID NOTHING AND THE TIRE WAS REPLACED BY THE TIRE MANUFACTURER (NAIL ISSUE) AND THE TIRE WAS LESS THEN 7 MONTHS OLD. THE SECOND TIME, I BROUGHT IT TO THE DEALER. THEY TESTED TWO WAYS: 1) ON THE COMPUTER AND IT PASSED; 2) TEST DRIVE WHERE ALERT LIGHT CAME ON BELOW 18 PSI. IN MY TESTING IT CAME ON BETWEEN 10-15 PSI AND IN REAL LIFE CLOSER TO 10-11 PSI (BASED ON MY 2 PROBLEMS). CHECKING TIRE PRESSURE DAILY DOES NOT HELP BECAUSE IN REAL LIFE, IF YOU TAKE A TRIP YOU CAN DRIVE FOR 3-6 HOURS WHICH IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THE TIRE DURING THE TRIP, YOU WILL NOT KNOW UNTIL IT FAILS (AGAIN THIS IS BECAUSE UNLIKE NORMAL TIRES, YOU CAN NOT TELL THE TIRE HAS LOST SIGNIFICANT AIR PRESSURE. YOU CAN READ HERE AND OTHER PLACES ABOUT THE CATASTROPHIC FAILURES OTHERS HAVE HAD IN JUST THIS SITUATION. I SPENT MANY MANY HOURS ON THE PHONE WITH TOYOTA TO GET THE SPECIFICATION ON WHEN THE SYSTEM SHOULD ALERT YOU. I WAS ONCE TOLD IT IS A DIFFERENCE OF MORE THEN 5 PSI. HOWEVER, IT SEEMS THAT TOYOTA HAS NO PUBLISHED SPEC FOR HOW THE SYSTEM SHOULD WORK IN REAL LIFE. THIS IS DEFECTIVE AND TOYOTA IS NOT TELLING US THE TRUTH. ALL SYSTEMS HAVE TO BE DESIGNED TO A SPEC. THIS SYSTEM WAS AND THERE IS SOMEWHERE AT TOYOTA A SPEC. THEY ARE NOT SHARING WITH CONSUMERS BECAUSE OF THE IMPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE (THEY WILL HAVE TO RECALL/FIX THEM). I DO HOPE SOMEONE AT THE NHTSA WILL PURSUE THIS SINCE IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE FOR FAMILIES. *NM

TIRES ARE FALLING APART. AT LESS THAN 10,000 MILES SUBARU ADVISED US TO REPLACE THEM. THEY ARE BRIDGESTONE POTENZA RE92A 225 55R 17. *JB

BRIDGESTONE DUELER A/T 110S OEM EQUIPMENT ON NISSAN TITAN TRUCK. TIRE SIZE P245 75R 17. THESE TIRES ARE DELAMINATING. TREADS COMING OUT IN CHUNKS IN BELT CENTER. LOCAL DEALERS STATE THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE WARRANTY SERVICE FOR THESE TIRES. BRIDGESTONE TELEPHONE NUMBER ATTEMPTED 2 TIMES WITH HOLD TIMES OF GREATER THAN ONE HOUR WITHOUT EVER SPEAKING TO A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE. EMAILED THE COMPANY NO RESPONSE. ANOTHER FORMER BRIDGESTONE DEALER IN KINGSTON TENNESSEE, JON LODEN AUTO CENTER STATES THE TIRES ARE CLEARLY DEFECTIVE AND DANGEROUS . HE SUGGESTED I CONTACT YOU. II NOTICED THE PROBLEM DURING ROUTINE TIRE ROTATION. THE TIRES WERE LAST ROTATED JUNE 2006 . THERE WAS NO VISIBLE PROBLEM AT THAT TIME. THERE ARE 26K MILES ON THESE TIRES AS OF THIS WRITING. *JB

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR TIRE THREAD SEPARATED WHILE DRIVING 30 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A TIRE DEALER WHERE THE TIRE WAS REPLACED. A RECALL LETTER #[XXX] WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THE TIRES. THE TIRE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED FOR REIMBURSEMENT AND DETERMINED THE TIRE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR

HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF NOISE AND VIBRATION CAUSED BY IRREGULAR (UNEVEN) TIRE WEAR (FEATHERING) ON 2006 330I BMW WITH BRIDGESTONE TURANZA EL 42 225/45/17 RUN FLAT TIRES: EUROPEAN DELIVERY 9-12-2005, ARRANGED BY DEALER. AT ABOUT 16,000 MILES, BEGAN TO NOTICE FRONT TIRE NOISE (ROAR) AND VIBRATION AT 15-30 MPH, ESPECIALLY UPON BRAKING. THE NOISE BECAME PROGRESSIVELY WORSE AND COULD FEEL VIBRATIONS IN DRIVER'S AND PASSENGER'S FLOOR PANS. THE NOISE CONTINUED TO INCREASE AND THE VIBRATION BEGAN TO SOUND LIKE WORN FRONT WHEEL BEARINGS. I TOOK TO DEALER AT 18,500 MILES AROUND 7/ 31/2006. VEHICLE TEST DRIVEN AT 18,775 MILES. SA ADVISED THAT THE FRONT TIRES HAD UNEVEN WEAR WHICH CAUSED THE NOISE AND VIBRATIONS, AND TIRES NOT COVERED BY NEITHER BMW NOR BRIDGESTONE. NO OTHER ADVICE OR REMEDY WAS GIVEN. WROTE TO PRESIDENT BMWNA, ON 8/04/2006 REQUESTING BMW PERFORM WHEEL ALIGNMENT (TO CORRECT THE FACTORY DEFECTIVE ALIGNMENT) AND TO REPLACE THE FRONT TIRES. CUSTOMER RELATIONS REP INSTRUCTED ME TO TAKE CAR TO DEALER FOR ALIGNMENT CHECK. ON 8/14/2006, ALIGNMENT CHECK PERFORMED BY DEALER, AND DETERMINED THAT THREE WHEELS ALIGNMENT WERE OUT OF FACTORY SPECIFICATION RANGE. CHARGED $225 FOR THIS ALIGNMENT. SERVICE MANAGER ADVISED THAT THEY WOULD NOT REPLACE THE UNEVENLY WORN AND NOISY TIRES. ON 8/16/2006, MESSAGE FROM CUSTOMER RELATIONS THAT BMW WOULD PAY FOR THE ALIGNMENT. HAD TIRES INSPECTED BY THE LOCAL BRIDGESTONE TIRE DEALER, AND MANAGER ADVISED THAT VEHICLE WAS MISS-ALIGNED CAUSING ALL FOUR TIRES TO EXHIBIT IRREGULAR WEAR (FEATHERING) CAUSING THE EXCESSIVE NOISE AND VIBRATION. HE SAID THE DEALER SHOULD REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES. ON 08/29/2006 WROTE 2ND REQUEST TO PRESIDENT OF BMWNA FOR REPLACEMENT OF ALL FOUR TIRES AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF $225. 09/18/2006 RECEIVED LETTER FROM CR REP PROMISING REIMBURSEMENT FOR ALIGNMENT, BUT DENYING REQUEST FOR REPLACEMENT TIRES ON THE BASIS THAT VEHICLE WAS ALIGNED TO SPECIFICATIONS AT THE FACTORY PRIOR TO DELIVERY. *NM

SQUEAK NOISE INTERMITTENT WHEN FIRST OBTAINED VEHICLE. ADJUSTMENTS MADE PERIODICALLY UNDER WARRANTY ( TO DASHBOARD ETC.) NOISE SEEMED TO GO AWAY BUT ALWAYS CAME BACK. NOISE BECAME LOUDER, AND MORE LIKE A CREAKING NOISE, WHEN AT LOW SPEEDS OR OVER BUMPS WHEN BRAKE IS NOT BEING PRESSED. TOOK VUE IN WHILE UNDER 49,700 MILES, VISUAL INSPECTION FOUND FRONT STABILIZER LINKS TO BE NOISY. I DECLINED THEM REPAIRING IT AS THEY WOULD NOT REPLACE FRO FREE OR DISCOUNT, EVEN WITH SUCH LOW MILEAGE, AND NOISE HAS BEEN PRESENT. I STOPPED TAKING IT TO THE DEALER AFTER WARRANTY WAS UP AS THEY HAVE A REPUTATION IN TOWN TO NOT WORK WITH THE CUSTOMER. LATERAL LINKS WERE ALREADY REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY, I FEEL THE STABILIZER LINKS SHOULD BE REPLACED FREE ALSO, WITH SUCH LOW MILEAGE. I WILL TAKE IT TO A MECHANIC AND HAVE IT DOWN, FOR MY OWN SAFETY, BUT I FEEL I DESERVE REIMBURSEMENT FOR THAT AS WELL AS THE FRONT AND REAR BRAKES I JUST HAD PUT ON AND FRONT WHEEL BEARING! I ALSO HAD TO REPLACE ALL 4 TIRES ON CAR DUE TO WEAR, AND CAR HAD LESS THAN 4500 MILES ON IT. *NM

I HAVE 215/45/17 TIRES FROM BRIDGESTONE. I HAD A NAIL IN A TIRE AND TOOK IT IN TO GET IT FIXED. WHEN I WAS LEAVING THE SHOP I WAS ADVISED THAT THE BEADS ON THE INSIDE OF MY TIRES ARE COMING APART. *NM

2007 ESCALADE WITH FACTORY 22'S RIMS HAS SEVERE VIBRATION ISSUES, CREATING AN UNSTABLE OPERATING CONDITION. DEALER UNABLE TO ADDRESS AFTER THREE VISITS. DRIVERS SIDE MIRRORS VIBRATE EXCESSIVE, UNABLE TO VISUALLY LOOK OUT. WEBSITES CONTAIN NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ABOUT SAME ISSUES AND INABILITY TO RESOLVE. *NM

DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE PASSENGER REAR TIRE BLEW OUT WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH. THE TIRE BLEW OUT WHICH CAUSED A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL. THE VEHICLE SWERVED IN AND OUT OF THE TWO LANES, MADE A U-TURN, AND STOPPED. THE CONTACT WAS ABLE TO PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A DEALERSHIP.

I RECENTLY OPENED A CORPORATE CASE AGAINST THE TOYOTA OF STUART DEALERSHIP. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST INCIDENT THAT I HAVE HAD WITH THEM, BUT THIS IS THE MOST RECENT. ON JULY 26, 2006, I NOTICED SOME GREASE ALL INSIDE THE RIM OF MY TIRE. I BROUGHT THE TRUCK INTO THE DEALERSHIP. I TALKED TO THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT TO TRY AND EXPLAIN THE PROBLEM. I WAS TOLD, WE KNOW WHAT IT IS, WE WILL ORDER THE REAR SEALS AND CALL YOU WHEN THEY COME IN. NO ONE LOOKED AT MY VEHICLE!!! I WAS TOLD TO LEAVE AND I WOULD GET A PHONE CALL. ON JULY 27, 2006 AT 10:30 AM WHILE IN A LEFT HAND TURN, I APPLIED THE BRAKE LIGHTLY AT A SPEED OF APPROXIMATELY 30 MPH. THE TRUCK VERY QUICKLY SPUN AROUND AND BACKWARDS INTO A GUARD RAIL. I CALLED THE DEALERSHIP AND WAS TOLD TO BRING THE TRUCK BACK TO THEM. THEY ASSURED ME THAT BECAUSE OF THE GREASE ON THE WHEEL AND BEING MADE TO THINK THAT IT WAS SAFE TO DRIVE, THAT THE DEALERSHIP WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE. THIS HAPPENED, FORTUNATELY ON A ROAD WITH MINIMAL TRAFFIC, NOT ON I-95. I OFTEN THINK ABOUT WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED IF I WAS DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY. I COULD HAVE SERIOUSLY INJURED MYSELF, OR SOMEONE ELSE. I COULD HAVE HAD MY 5 YEAR OLD IN MY VEHICLE GOING TO CAMP. ANYTHING SERIOUS COULD HAVE HAPPENED. FORTUNATELY, IT DID NOT. AFTER BRINGING THE TRUCK IN AND MANY PHONE CALLS AND TRIPS TO THE DEALERSHIP, I WAS TOLD AFTER TWO WEEKS, BY THE MANAGER OF THE DEALERSHIP THAT I NEEDED TO CALL MY INSURANCE COMPANY. THIS WAS SO MY INSURANCE WOULD PAY FOR THE DAMAGES. THIS IS TOTALLY WRONG. I COULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR EVEN WORSE! IF THEY WOULD HAVE CHECKED MY VEHICLE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DEEMED UNFIT TO DRIVE. I AM NOT A MECHANIC. NOW THE DEALERSHIP WANTS MY $500.00 DEDUCTIBLE PAYMENT. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! I MUST SAY, I AM VERY SORRY THAT I BOUGHT A TOYOTA VEHICLE. IF I HAD TO DO OVER AGAIN, I WOULD NOT DO SO. THIS IS A TERRIBLE WAY TO TREAT A CUSTOMER. *JB