Perhaps this a dumb question - but here goes:
I have read most of threads about this, combed thru Tireracks reviews, read other tire reviews and now I either totally confused or I get it.
when comparing the Conti's; the F1's; the Michelins; the Goodrich's and some of the others - is it about the tires themselves or our tastes in tires?
By the time I get all 4 put on the dollar diff. isn't enough to sway me 1 way or another, I don't drive hard , and I certainly don't want to do this again in 15,000 miles, so is there an answer to which tire is better all around or is it up to our gut feelings?

Currently have Conti touring on my '05 - but the sidewalls are totally cracked on both rear tires (bought the car 2 weeks ago and knew this was a problem).

 

Conti touring is the cheapest and in my opinion they are a great tire, but they wear fast. Michelins are very expensive, I just bought two 285/35/19's for the back of my car mainly to try to get some better traction. I'd suggest buying a pair of Michelin PS2's for the front and save yourself some $$ and buy my like new PS2's for the rear for about half the price of new.

 

I'm about to order a set of these. They look pretty good, and long-lasting!

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....ng=Y&minLoad=S

 

Well I went and got the Goodyear F-1's! Drove home thru the Shenandoah Mtns, and a quick trip on Skyline Dr. - Car was rock steady, quite, and the car stuck to curves like a slot car. Granted the Conti's that I took off were totally shot - so far the Goodyears seem to work fine.