Yokohama Geolandar G91A 

These are the OEM tires on my CX-5 AWD Touring. They are good tires and I would buy another set if they weren't over $200. They have better traction in dirt and light mud than Michelin Premier LTX and the Tokyo A23s on my CX-5 GT. Traction and control in 1 to 2 inches of snow is excellent, almost like it wasn't there. Fuel mileage is excellent, this car easily exceeds its ratings, the other one couldn't. I rarely drive under 80 on the highway, unless my V1 says slow down. There are plenty of crooked roads in SE TN and I try to drive it like a Mustang on them (lacks enough power). Its turn-in and dry traction are very good. Its response to steering input is good and more or less linear, certainly predictable. It is not a Pilot Super Sport, but it is not supposed to be. I have just over 30k miles on them and they are not yet to the wear bars. I do keep them well inflated. I just don't understand the negative comments about this tire. It is not a Michelin, but it is an excellent tire, the 2nd best OEM tire I've had. It is well suited to its task of being a do it all SUV tire.

ALL GRIP OPINIONS ARE WITH AN AWD VEHICLE (I am unable to tell how much the AWD system might be compensating for poor tire traction so please keep that in mind)

Wet:
Tire grip upon normal and hard acceleration is completely adequate. Cornering on highway and slight curves in city conditions is adequate with no sudden loss of grip and tire felt planted.
Normal and hard braking grip was adequate with no loss of grip or sudden sliding.
I have not experienced deep enough water at speeds capable of hydroplaning (nor do I wish to) to give this a rating.

Dry:
Same as wet ratings above. Did not notice any significant change.

Ride (< 50 MPH):
Small and large bumps are felt however they are not harsh. Overall ride is acceptable at lower speed.

Ride (> 50 MPH):
Tire becomes rather stiff causing not only small bumps to be felt more but large bumps also start to intrude. At highway speeds greater than 70 MPH this becomes very noticeable and can start to be uncomfortable at times.

Noise (< 50 MPH):
Noise is kept to a background hum and is not intrusive. Majority of road surfaces are quiet with rougher roads just starting to intrude into the cabin at ~45 MPH.

Noise (>50 MPH):
Noise goes from a quiet background hum to a louder rumbling as speed increases. At 60+ MPH noise is very much present and is intrusive. On some road surfaces noise can become so loud that it completely overwhelms the cabin.

Winter:
Unable test as I do not live in such a climate.

Overall would not recommend these tires. They are expensive for poor highway ride and noise even though grip seems to be better than expected with a B traction grade (probably AWD compensating).

Theses were standard equipment on my 2015 Mazda Cx-5 Sport (AWD). Tire makers have to find a lot of compromises when they design tires for OEM fitment and Yokohama did a decent job but I don't think I'll buy these again. The CX-5 rides very comfortably while still being very responsive and balanced and these tires are part of the reason why. I suspect that poorer-quality tires would be really noticeable on this vehicle. They have gotten great traction in the wet and dry for me on many surfaces although I haven't put them through a lot of mud or sand. The steering feel is good for a vehicle of this nature and road feel is great without being harsh.

The CX-5 also seems like it skimps on sound-deadening insulation and the aggressive tread creates noticeable road noise on surfaces like concrete that the vehicle doesn't muffle. I can accept this trade-off but like others here I have been disappointed by their traction in very cold snow even when they were new, in comparison to other AWD vehicles I've driven that didn't have dedicated snow tires.

My main reason for wanting something different is that they are significantly worn with 25,000 miles on a fairly light vehicle that isn't powerful and isn't driven aggressively. They must have pretty soft rubber, considering their 280 treadwear rating. I suppose this is another trade-off required for all of their good ride and handling qualities but I would probably go for something longer-wearing next time. Maybe I would live to regret that though if the car doesn't drive as nicely.

Great tire if you’re a boat. Brand new tires on a highway during rai storm and car started to hydroplane

Came on our Mazda. Driven in Utah for nearly 11 months. Had a couple times of hydroplaning at highway speeds, no accidents though.

Switching tires for the upcoming winter, otherwise a fine tire.

Tred wore already. Slip on the paved uphill with light snow and on gravel roads. Scared me hydroplaning in heavy rain at low speed.

OEM on my 2017 Subaru Forester. At 38,000 I still have a at least 15k-20k of tread left. Despite this I plan to get rid of these tires this year and switch to crossclimate+. The geolanders are dangerous to drive in the winter in MN. I had no confidence with even a hint of ice/snow. It was a skating rink. These would be fine for a warm climate but stay far away if living in a Northern State.

OEM tires on my Mazda CX-5. As many others have noted, these tires were a horrible decision on Mazdas part. The tires are OKAY, at best, in dry conditions and wet conditions for the first 10,000 miles. After that, traction fades, extremely fast for a tire. I have tried these tires in the light snow and on ice and they are like having summer tires on�

I wouldn�t recommend these tires, unless you live in a desert. At 14,000 miles, I will be replacing these tires as I no longer feel safe in snowy conditions. I feel like my AWD system is working way harder than it needs to for the cost of these tires. I�ll be going back to Continentals, as always. Only $20 more per tire and I�ve always been extremely pleased with their handling in all conditions.

These tires are absolutely horrible. I've owned 2 Mazda CX-5 Tourning's and have been unhappy with the performance of these tires. These are the original OEM tires that Mazda installs on this vehicle. My 2016 Mazda CX-5 was ok for the first 10-15,000 miles or so but after that, they were terrible in anything but dry conditions. I replaced these tires with Michelin Defender tires at only 30,000 miles on the original tires. The difference was night and day. Traded this car in for a 2019 Mazda CX-5 Touring and I am having the same exact issue. Do yourself a favor, ask the dealer if there are is other brand of tire that they can install on this car before you buy. I am going back to the dealer and asking if they can change out these tires.

These are the most over priced soft rubber tires you will ever own. They came on a 2016 Mazda CX-5 and at 25K they were ready to be replaced. I made complaints to Yokohama and Mazda as its just irresponsible these tires exist. I will most likely steer clear of Yoko's going forward, not sure how they got away with charging a premium for a soft rubber compound tire that lasts half as long as a tire that costs 1/2 as much. I would NOT recommend these tires EVER unless they were 1/4 the price.

Compared to much cheaper tires, these are not worth the money. They are a standard tire offered on new vehicles, and don't deserve to be cast in a premium category. They Perform well on dry paved roads, but even then they don't last as long as they should. After 35,000 miles these tires were completely worn and cracked in 2 1/2 years.