I have bought
BF Goodrich Touring T/As [snip] made by Michelin and I called them to ask why I should buy Michelin over the BFG TAs, they said no reason to unless I wanted the M name on the tire.
I don't really mean to be
that guy but I'm always leery when people equate brands because the same company owns both brands. It's like saying there's no reason to buy an Audi A4 over a Passat unless you want three more circles on the grille and steering wheel. There may be many parts in common between the cars but the Audi is different enough to command a higher price.
I'm not knocking the BFG; it may be a fine tire with which I have no experience. I'm just saying that, over many years, I've seen manufacturers rebrand products and, 98% of the time,
something is different: quality of the components, features, warranty, service,... If the difference(s) are unimportant to pay for then by all means save some dough. But don't let someone else assume equivalency based on just parent-company ownership.
More on-topic, I've been running Bridgestone Ecopias (their discontinued summer-only pattern) for 4-5 years now. My wife has run General's Altimax RT for a couple of years on her Kia; they've been fine and were fairly inexpensive. Both of us run winter tires, so no data points there.