Paying for optional tire packages makes no sense

I was reading an article about the new Nismo Sentra on a website who’s initials match those of Mud Tires this morning. The article in question mentioned how Nissan offers optional Bridgestone performance tires for extra money to replace the factory garbage tires. I remembered how this is common practice for performance cars all over. I also realized how these make no sense whatsoever.

Now hear me out. Equipping your car with better tires ALWAYS makes more sense. What DOESN’T make sense is paying full price (I did some quick research by looking at the price of these optional tire packages on online configurators) for a new set of tires to replace a set of included tires that already come on the car.


As an example, the focus RS comes with Michelin pilot super sports from the factory. If you pay 1900$ (USD!) you can get Michelin Sport Cup 2s to replace the PSS. Which means you pay full price (if not more) for the SC2s and lose out a free set of PSS which, let’s face it, are good tires. If the price difference for the package was just the price difference between the two sets of tires it wouldn’t be so bad but in every case I’ve seen, you’re paying full price for new tires and lose the factory tires.

So this brings me to my point: It makes more money sense to stick to the factory tire and pay out of pocket for the optional rubber SEPERATELY. And paying the pocket change it costs to get the good rubber mounted on the wheels. The overall cost comes to the same (and maybe even less if you can bargain hunt or find a discount) except you now have a “free”(that you already technically pay for in the MSRP of the car you buy, all the more reason to keep the tires) set of extra tires for the inevitable time when your optional rubber wears out. I mean, if I’m going to be paying 1900$ extra on the price of the focus RS I’d at least like to keep the tires it came with too since I already “paid” for them.

Share This Story