Michelin eneragy saver A/S vs Michelin MXV4 ?

I cannot speak for the ES A/S versus MXV4 but I can speak for the Yokohoma vs MXV4. The ES A/S were not available when I needed new tires so I went with the MXV4. Great improvement on road handling, ride comfort and road noise over the Yoko S33D's. Great handling at highway speeds.

The only downside is that they are not LRR but not far off according to Michelin. I took about a 4-5 mpg hit with the MXV4's over the Yoko's. I keep my tires at 40/38. Now that I have about 30k miles on the tires the mpg loss is down to about 1-2 mph.

If the ES A/S are available when I need to replace the MXV4 I plan to go with the ES A/S to gain the mpg back. I will be interested in the ES vs MXV4 comparison also.

 

When my OEM Yoko's wore out at 33,000 miles, I switched to the Michelin Energy Savers. I keep the fronts at 42 and the rear at 40. In 12,000 miles of use, I have gained 1.9 MPG.

I noticed a little unstability with both the Yoko's and the Michelin Energy Savers. The two things that helped me was:

1. Replaced factory mid chassis brace for aftermarket one
2. Stay out of tractor trailer rutted lanes

Both of these things have great increased my sense of security while driving.

I would also check to see if any of your shocks are leaking, check to see if the sway bar connector is broken or a bushing is cracked.

 

I've had both. The Primacy MXV4 feels much stickier and confident in wet weather. In dry conditions, the straightline stability is a bit better on the highway, but not significant. Most drivers would notice a significant difference in wet weather performance, but not in dry conditions. Fuel economy with the Primacy MXV4 is about 5% less than the Yokohama tires.

 

And 10% worse than the Energy Saver A/S?