Tire Problems of Nissan Quest

The tire line is a22. This option is not available on the drop-down selections. Excessive tire wear on toyo a22 tires. Purchased new Nissan Quest. At 17,000 miles tires are in need of replacing. After searching the internet for complaints/ratings on this tire I have found similar stories for this tire on the Nissan Quest.

See all problems of the 2013 Nissan Quest 🔎.

I put new goodyear assurance fuel max on my 2008 Nissan Quest on 04/27/2012. Since that time I have had numerous blow outs and slow leaks. I have replaced all four tires with the same make and model and have had numerous repairs. I just replaced all four tires with michelin brand as I could not get 10,000 miles with out a blowout on the goodyears. All tire failures were due to small splits in the tread or side wall.

See all problems of the 2008 Nissan Quest 🔎.

This is a formal complaint to the tires/wheels that Nissan has selected for placement on the 2012 Nissan Quest. The toyo a22 235/55/18 tires are completely worn at 26,000 miles. We did not discover the issue with the tires until a third party inspected the vehicle. The vehicle will not pass inspection. All service has occurred at a Nissan authorized dealer at the recommended intervals. The service groups at sheehy Nissan and grapevine Nissan did not alert us to the dangers. I have spoken with Nissan regional consumer affairs and alerted them to the concern and issues surrounding the rapid wear. It is our belief that the Nissan Quest is to heavy for the tires that were selected on the vehicle, and/or the tire is defective. Nissan regional consumer affairs has decided not to intervene, or assist on our behalf. According to Nissan employee [xxx],Nissan does not have information on the toyo a22 tire,or knowledge of weight characteristics&what constitutes abnormal wear. According to toyo the a22 235/55/18 tire is a custom part manufactured to Nissan specs. After conducting an internet search there are many mentions of Nissan Quest tires wearing early. My belief is that the toyo tire does not match the vehicle weight, or the tire is defective. The rapid wear experienced with these tires tires can jeopardize the safety of the passengers&motorists. An additional complaint to Nissan is being filed stating that the tire is not robust enough for the vehicle weight it is handling. My wife has experienced difficulty in wet conditions when handling the vehicle, I believe this is due to the abnormal tread wear. Toyo has offered a 35% wear warranty on the tires. Nissan has denied any warranty claim or assistance for the installation of the tires. This situation reminds be of the tire recalls surrounding the Ford explorer in 2000. It is my (speculative) belief that toyo or Nissan have not notified the NHTSA of these consumer complaints. The tires must be replaced. Information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u. S. C. 552(b)(6).

See all problems of the 2012 Nissan Quest 🔎.

This is a formal complaint to the tires/wheels that Nissan has selected for placement on the 2012 Nissan Quest. The toyo a22 235/55/18 tires are completely worn at 26,000 miles. We did not discover the issue with the tires until a third party inspected the vehicle. The vehicle will not pass inspection. All service has occurred at a Nissan authorized dealer at the recommended intervals. The service groups at sheehy Nissan and grapevine Nissan did not alert us to the dangers. I have spoken with Nissan regional consumer affairs and alerted them to the concern and issues surrounding the rapid wear. It is our belief that the Nissan Quest is to heavy for the tires that were selected on the vehicle, and/or the tire is defective. Nissan regional consumer affairs has decided not to intervene, or assist on our behalf. According to Nissan employee [xxx],Nissan does not have information on the toyo a22 tire,or knowledge of weight characteristics&what constitutes abnormal wear. When explaining I was recording the call she abruptly hung up. She did state that the tire was soft&did not have a warranty. In addition, she stated that Nissan does not have any responsibility to the consumer regarding the tires,& that the entire matter is toyo's responsibility. I requested to speak with a supervisor & was denied. I asked if the complaint could be reported. She said there was no other mechanism to report this within Nissan. According to toyo the a22 235/55/18 tire is a custom part manufactured to Nissan specs. After conducting an internet search there are many mentions of Nissan Quest tires wearing early. My belief is that Nissan has not accurately calculated the vehicle weight correctly,&has chosen tires that can jeopardize the safety of the passengers&motorists. An additional complaint for toyo is being filed stating that the tire is not robust enough for the vehicle weight it is handling. Information redacted pursuant to the freedom of information act (foia), 5 u. S. C. 552(b)(6).

I have 20,000 miles on my car and my tires need replacing! I purchased it new in April 2012. I have had it for a year and a half. I drive it carefully and have the tires rotated when needed. I had a flat on Monday on my way to work. That evening I had it looked at for repair. It cannot be repaired. The tire tread is very low. They are bridgestone turanza. I bought a van because I'm driving children around frequently. Why couldn't Nissan put better tires on this vehicle? when you buy a new car, you assume that you won't have to repair anything for several years. Now I have to buy a new set of tires at christmas time! I am really unhappy! I checked this site to see if there is a recall on tires. I certainly hope so!.

I bought a 2012 Nissan Quest almost 2 years ago. I have 20,000 miles on the vehicle and the tires are horrible! they are bridgestone turanza el 400. They are feathering and balding. It is very difficult to drive in the rain or other weather conditions. These tires have been rotated every 5,000 miles. . . It is extremely frustrating that you buy a 30,000 vehicle and have tires that aren't worth anything on it!.

2005 Nissan Quest had less than a 1/4 tank of gas and light was on. Was at dealership getting brakes replaced for the 4th time. Took van to gas station next door and put 16 gallons ($62) of gas in. Restarted car and gas tank still read less than 1/4 and empty light/warnings still flashing. Drove back to dealership, they tried to reset and ended up disconnecting the battery. Once the battery was reconnected the fuel gauge showed full. This was oct 2011 with 46,000mi. It is now April and car has 55,000mi. I was unable to disconnect battery so had to continue driving with warning light. After about 20mi, gauge now reads less than 1/2 tank but tank should be reading full. There was already a recall for a number of Nissan vehicles for gas gauge issues. Clearly a Nissan issue that needs to be recalled and fixed across the board. Having to disconnect the battery to get the fuel gauge to read is not a good long term solution. Also this van goes through brakes at an astounding rate. We have had to replace the brake pads front and back 4 times in the last 30,000 mi and now need new rotors. Also have replaced tires 3 times. Most recent mechanic said van was poorly designed with brakes and tires meant for a much lighter vehicle.

See all problems of the 2005 Nissan Quest 🔎.

The contact owns a 2004 Nissan Quest. The contact was driving 45 mph when the entire front end of the vehicle began shaking violently. The tires were changed and new tires were installed but the shaking persisted. The tire sensor and air bag warning light continued to illuminate continuously. The vehicle was taken to the dealer who stated that there were no recalls on the vehicle and did not attempt to repair or inspect the failure. The manufacturer was not contacted. The failure mileage was 84,000.

See all problems of the 2004 Nissan Quest 🔎.

2006 Nissan Quest, lost it's front left tire while traveling westbound. The tire was never found. (ohio crash report # 10-0286-91) updated 08/05/10.

See all problems of the 2006 Nissan Quest 🔎.

Michelin pax system tires on a 2006 Nissan Quest se. We have the michelin pax tires on our minivan and they are constantly losing air, are very loud and stiff, and worst of all are very poor and dangerous in snow. We have not had good luck this past week maneuvering our minivan in any type of snow or on any slippery road surface. Our vehicle can not have any other type of tire because of the system that is installed from factory and we only have 21,000 miles on the van and need new tires which cost on unbelievable amount of money (over $1200) for replacement tires when they are still very new!!! no deaths or injuries yet and we hope there never are. However, we are not able to replace our tires every year for that cost and from some other people we have talked to at the tire stores and at the dealership, it sounds like we will have to get new tires about every 20-30k and that the tires do not handle well in snow or rain. Well, sounds unsafe to me! nor do they hold air very well so my little kids and I are always trying to get air in the tires at the local gas stations. Absurd! please help.

I own a Nissan Quest with the michelin pax run-flat tire system. The pax run-flat tire system is a defective product. I purchased the car in November 2007. By 13 months, at 18,000 miles, 2 of the tires had worn to the point where the dealer said they needed to be replaced. At 20,600 miles we had all 4 tires replaced. In 32nds of an inch, sears measured the tread at : left front - 1,0,0, right front - 2,2,1, right rear - 3,3,4, left rear was similar to right rear but had already been replaced due to a nail in it. Michelin had to courier a complete tire and wheel assembly to my home on the nailed tire because there is no tire dealer within 20 miles of us in downtown chicago that can work on the pax tires other than perhaps a Honda dealer who told us they would not work on a Nissan. Our Nissan dealer is not equipped to work on this tire. Our situation is not unique. A web search turns up many people who have written about premature wear and blowouts with the pax tire system. There are 2 class-action lawsuits related to the pax system, one against Honda and michelin and one against Nissan and michelin. With the wheels on our new car we can only have pax tires so either we need to spend thousands of dollars to replace the wheels, potentially voiding our warranty, or continue to replace our tires every 20,000 miles, assuming we can get them. It took a week to have replacement tires shipped to chicago. I can only imagine that the problem will get worse the longer we own the car. Michelin has end of life the product and only manufactures new pax tires for those already on the road. This declaration was made by michelin a mere 4 months after we purchased our car new. The michelin pax tire system needs to be recalled for Honda odyssey and Nissan Quest vehicles for premature wear, danger of blowouts and lack of people that can service them. Nissan and Honda need to be forced to replace the pax wheels with wheels that can accept normal tires.

See all problems of the 2007 Nissan Quest 🔎.

The contact owns a 2007 Nissan Quest. The vehicle has michelin pax (na) tires. The contact stated that the run flat tire flattened. Run flat means that the tire can be driven flat for 125 miles; however, the contact drove 300 miles. He called the Nissan manufacturer and was informed to take the vehicle to poca, wv to a michelin repair shop. The shop has had the vehicle for more than 35 days and he does not know when it can be retrieved. The shop does not have the tires and the liner that are needed to repair the tire. The tire size and dot number were unknown; however, he provided the following numbers: 225-700r48oa, mxv4. The failure mileage was 29,400. Updated 3/5/09 the tire was loosing 3-4 pounds of a air a week. The dealer plugged the tire, however the consumer learned that the particular tire he has could not be plugged. It had to be removed from the rim and repaired from the inside, rebalanced and remounted. Updated 03/10/09.

I bought my car new in 2006. It was sold with the tubless tires or tires that can be driven over 100 miles to the nearest place that can help you. The first set of tires were exactly like the second set of tires. They were rotated and balanced and inflated to manufacturer recommendations. The tires did not last even a year. I had to replace each set due to poor wearing. They became treadless and the cords were actually wearing through the tires. I still have my last set for someone to look at. One of the tires were actually flat but due to the faulty make of the tire my cares sensors did not detect that the tire was actually running flat. The tire is very unsafe and is a hazard . The rotors and brakes also shake when you mash on the brake pedal. I have since put new tires on that are regular tires and not tubless tires. I have also take my vehicle to the dealer who has turned the rotors and put on new brake pads. I also have taken it to another mechanic who has on the first visit turned the rotors and adjusted the brake pads and on the next visit had to replace the rotors and brakepads both. I am still having trouble with my rotors and brakes. The rotors shake when you put on the brakes still. My tires have been fine since I changed tires.

Premature tire wear on Nissan quest 2007 van equipped with michelin pax run flat tires at 18,500 miles.

Vehicle will bottom out because of poor design utilizing the michelin pax tire causing scraping of the exhaust system. Increasing the level of the exhaust system burns a hole in the exhsust pipe that then has to be replaced which again causes a bottoming out and scraping of the exhaust system. .

2004 Nissan Quest with faulty goodyear tires. Consumer stated that she had to replace all four of her tires due to them slipping. The consumer was informed the tires on her vehicle were sport tires which were made for sport cars and there was no guaranteed mileage.

I have a 2005 Nissan Quest that I been taking to the dealer every 3 months for steering wheel vibration. They insist that is the tires, I finally found that is really the tires. Went to the tire shop and they do not want to warranty the tires. I just find out that most of the Quest owners are complaining about this tires. I hope you guys help us and other customers about this goodyear Nissan mafia. This are the goodyear ls2 tires originally installed by Nissan. Thanks !!.

Nissan & goodyear monopoly on 2004 Quest tires. It appears that Nissan contracted with goodyear to produce an oem proprietary 225/65/16 tire that only goodyear carries and only in one style. When replacing the tires consumers have little choice but to go with that tire or go with a non manufacturer recommended size like 235/60/16 which could cause issues such as speedometer readings off. . . As far as I can determine only Nissan Quests use this 225/65/16 tire. Tread wear on the goodyear oem tire is very poor causing an earlier than expected replacement of the tires.

Nissan & goodyear monopoly on 2004 Quest tires. It appears that Nissan contracted with goodyear to produce an oem proprietary 225/65/16 tire that only goodyear carries and only in one style. When replacing the tires consumers have little choice but to go with that tire or go with a non manufacturer recommended size like 235/60/16 which could cause issues such as speedometer readings off. . . As far as I can determine only Nissan Quests use this 225/65/16 tire. Tread wear on the goodyear oem tire is very poor causing an earlier than expected replacement of the tires. I have found nokian a finish tire that is sold in the USA also produces this size tire. The price is the same but the tire is a much better quality. I'll never purchase another Nissan or goodyear product.

This may not be a Nissan exclusive strategy. Consider this to be a wake up call and a potential for other "Ford-tire supplier" potential upcoming scenario. The goodyear's eagle ls2 225/60/17 ultra high performance are oem and even after following Nissan's computerized reminding schedules for tire rotation every 7500 miles, these tires (I have not met an exception yet, go to tirerack. Com to mention one source for instance and read these tires' reviews. . . . Not coincidentally, most of the complaints you'll read are Quest minivan owners) are wearing fast and not at same rate (when compared fr to rr. . Like I said even after proper p. M and too fast for average drivers like moms) the laughable matter on all this is that : a) these minivans are driven by moms. B) these minivans per design have ultra high performance tires (like moms are a bunch of street teens or drag racers). C) oem recommended size are extremely hard to find (almost like a well planned monopoly by auto manufacturer and tire supplier) if you go to the optional oem size 225/65/16 you will worsen the already Questionable fuel efficiency of this Quest vehicle line. D) goodyear laughs at customers like me when bringing my "sooner than expected" tire wear out conditions and they openly admit that they have no idea why Nissan required these eagle ls2 to be oem equipment. There are goodyear retailers that don't even adventure on selling them. E) addressing tire warranty issues is a problem that has to be re-invented. Vehicle manufacturers will not do anything for you as they recommend you to bring it up to certified tire manufacturer retailers. . . Another huge headache for average joe (and a subject for other investigation). I am a ee for one automobile manufacturer, if NHTSA is really interested on protecting the american consumer by enforcing the treat act, please listen to early symptoms like what I am presenting to you here.

Nissan Quest with numerous rattles which have not been located and goodyear eagle ls2 are worn out at 28,000. Extreme vibration at 50 mph or above from the tires. Dealership attempted to correct rattles by adjustments however, this was unsuccessful. Dealership denied any problems with oem tires but willing to install my own choice in tires.

10/04 purchased a Nissan Quest sl minivan. Tires on it are goodyear eagle ls2 size 225/65-hr16. Late 12/04 or early 1/05 not able to navigate a 15 degree grade in 3 inches snow. Contacted dealer to no avail. Contacted Nissan. Told to contact goodyear. Goodyear said they would replace the tires with a better tire, but in a different size, as only tire made in the original size was and is a goodyear eagle ls2. This action however had to have blessing of Nissan. Nissan balked stating if I changed tire size and anything happened that they determined was caused by tire size change, the "warranty" would be void on the vehicle. I was naive and bought this. But all the while, the dealer, Nissan and goodyear said they had no such problems with this tire. Now two years down the road I find hundreds of complaints regards this issue and more, one of which the tires wear out prematurely, and and "h" rated tire on a minivan is redundant. First time this happened my wife was in heavy traffic. She could have been injured or killed. Yet Nissan and/or goodyear are not being held accountable for an engineering/design flaw, that needs to be corrected. Goodyear should have to manufacturer other tires in this size and in an "h" rating so buyers/owners present and past have a choice when replacing. We can go to a 235/60-16 in a "t" rated tire that has much better ratings than the originals and/or other "h" rated tires in the new size. But dealers and tire manufacturers through collusion are trying to discourage replacing these with "t" rated tires. Instead insisting they be replaced with "h" rated tires, that are much more expensive, and have only similar traction ratings with regard to hydroplaning, wet, light and heavy snow that do the originals. The NHTSA should have already been on this like stink on crap, but I fail to see any mention of any such investigation on your web site. Come on, doesn't our tax dollars pay for this?.

Nissan Quest 2004 has been in for service 5 times. Tire problems, console lights (possible short) and rear interior lights. The air conditioner failed, the door handle fell off, the front driver side tire was continuously losing air.

Purchased new 2002 Nissan Quest on 12/201. Current millage is 26,000. All 4 tires have had tire separation. We replaced the first one on 7/03 with only 17,800 miles on it, the second one on 12/03, the third one on 7/12/04, and the forth on 8/22/04. After contacting the manufacturer (continental tires) they have made me pay for all 4 replacement tires. I have told them that I belive that those tires must have been defective. They said that they would prorate the tires, but why should I have to pay for their defective tires? if those tires wouold have been good they should have lasted at least 40-50 thousand miles. I have also had to pay to re-align the van. This is a second vehicle that, as you can see by the millage, is not used alot. All tires were replaced at tire kingdom in apopka, so I don't have the tire numbers you might need. They said they had to return them to continental for the warranty. The consequences could have been fatal on all four occasions. Twice we were driving long distance and could have had a serious accident on the interstate. Tire size p215/65r16 the replacement tires are the same as the ones before, but I don't want them! I don't trust them! what I would like is a new set of tires from a different manufacturer or at least repayment of the prorated money I had to invest plus the alignment which amounts to $224. 19.

See all problems of the 2002 Nissan Quest 🔎.

A newly purchased 2004 Nissan Quest with current mileage of around 4,800 miles when incident happened. While driving on highway, the driver side rear tire suddenly bent and smoke came out. Van was then towed back to dealership and found that the cross member was broken off. Dealership denied warranty coverage because service manager thought that such damage may have been caused by a collision, because he saw a few light scratches and a smaller than 2cm mark on the rim. I am sure that the van was not hit by anything when the tire was bent. The scratches and little mark could be caused by pulling over to shoulder with a bent tire. I pointed to the service manager that the joint of the broken cross member was full of rust, a sign of incomplete sealed over a period of time, obviously not a new damage caused by an accident. Even tried contacting manufacturer many times, but no solution was made because manufacturer makes decision based on dealership statement. Also, squeaking noise has been coming out from rear sliding doors, dealerships stated that they removed doors but no finding and problems still exist.

The consumer noticed when the doors were shut, the lights illuminated as if the door were open. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, and they reported it was fixed. The problem returned when consumer drove the vehicle home that day. There was a problem with the hatchback door lock. When closing the door, the consumer had to bang it hard to get it closed. The sliding door was having problems as well, it must be slammed in order to close it. The dealership has attempted to fix the problems with the doors. The tire problems began about 2 weeks after the purchase of the vehicle. Tire lights are coming on, indicating that the tires are loosing air. Owner advises that one time the tire light would come on about every block. The vehicle was taken to the dealership after this. The tire had a nail in it. There is also problems with the transmission. When shifting from park to drive, it is very difficult to shift. Owner received a recall letter about this last year and in January of 2005. The recall number is not available. The dealership states that this recall is closed. The dealership won't look any further into the transmission. There is a problem with the front passenger seat, you could see the metal in the seat. The radio has been replaced three times. It is now needing to be replaced again. The car has a bad smell, like rotten eggs. The smell is coming from engine. Dealership reports it is coming from a computer chip and it still smelled after replacement. The same smell returned and then the owner returned the car to the dealership, they kept it for two months. The dealership replaced the catalytic converter. The owner advises that there is still a bad smell. The dealership reported the smell must be sulfuric acid. The owner went to the doctor in regards to the bad chemical smell that burns. The vehicle had problems with the battery. Owner paid for car rental. The drivers seat moved when the consumer applied the brakes.

Tread separated inflicting damage to rear quarter panel. Separation cause lost of control of car. Luckily I was able to regaing control. Dt.

See all problems of the 1997 Nissan Quest 🔎.

Vehicle tire deflated causing vehicle to run off the road. Nar 07/02/2003 the vehicle ran off the road to the right and struck a mile marker then ran into a ditch. The consumer was not hurt during this accident (ohio traffic crash report).

See all problems of the 1996 Nissan Quest 🔎.

Both rear tires failed the first was the r rear and 3 hours later the left rear the hwy patrol was on the scene but said since there was no accident he could not file a report on property damage. (tiresize: p215/70r15).

See all problems of the 1999 Nissan Quest 🔎.

Consumer has experienced two flat tires on two separate occasions, while driving in hot weather, the dealership and the tire manufacturer are not willing to take any responsibility for the tires. ( general tires p215/70 r15).

See all problems of the 2000 Nissan Quest 🔎.

Shortly after purchasing the Quest, I noticed a vibration in the vehicle steering wheel and encountered a rough ride when the vehicle went over 30 miles an hour. I took the car to the dealer the first time and they balanced and rotated the tires. Shortly after, I experienced the same problem and returned to the dealer. This time the dealer told me that the tires were out of "true" and that I needed to go to goodyear to have the tires replaced. Goodyear replaced two of the tires. A few months later, I returned to goodyear because the problem returned. Goodyear then replaced one additional tire. Within a few months, I returned to goodyear again with the same problem and they agreed to change all four tires. Within a few months I returned to goodyear with the same problem and they suggested that the vehicle weight may of been too much for the tires so he requested that I replace the performance tires on the vehicle with other tires. I agreed and goodyear again replaced all four tires. In December 2001, I once again returned to the goodyear because the problem was once again present. They agreed to replace the tires, but felt that the problem was with the suspension on the Quest rather than a defect on the tire. The second problem I've encounter with the Quest since about 15,000 miles is the accelerator pedal sticks. This is a more serious problem because on several occasions the problem almost caused an accident. It occurs when the vehicle is stopped at a light, and I then try to accelerate. The pedal is so stuck, that when it finally gives way the vehicle takes off quickly. This also happens if I take my foot off the accelerator to slow down, then if I try to accelerate again I can't. I took it in for service, but the dealer said it was an intermitten problem and could not replicate the difficulty. The problem is still intermitten, but I noticed that when I drove it in florida on vacation this past month, it occured regularly.

Vehicle electrical system burned up causing the vehicle to.

After vehicle reaches 17,00 miles steering wheel and front began to shake giving the vehicle a rough ride. The vehicle was taken to the dealer and was diagnosed as having bent rear axle. The vehicle was never been in accident so the bent axle should be manufacturer defect. The tires are worn prematurely, but the dealer refused to pay for the replacements claiming at 17000 miles it is a normal wear.

While driving 60mph steering wheel would shake. It would be hard to control vehicle. Had taken to dealership, and was informed by mechanic that it was a tire problem. Had tires rotated and balanced.