Best Make Of Tyres For Wear

[sepulchrave]

Surely we pay more for premium brand tyres because of the time and money they spend on R&D and sponsorship.

 

Tiny, Pirelli are the only tyre used in WSB racing which is great for marketing but a hell of a loss leader for manufacturing, so we pay higher prices for that manufacturing and R&D loss which your company supports.

 

Tread patterns are largely meaningless gibberish since as long as the water is cleared then you could get a tatoo 'artist' to design them (within stability constraints).

 

Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago, the technology has migrated and they often use tried and trusted tread patterns.

 

High performance cars and motorcycles need high peformance tyres, the suspension setup of some vehicles is so finely tuned that a slight change in tyre pressure has a pronounced effect on performance. The Shalaxy is NOT one of these vehicles.

 

High performance tyres have a short shelf life after manufacture and 'go off' as they sit on a rack in a warehouse. Never buy old stock at discounted prices no matter what name is embossed on the tyrewall.

 

There is a lot of rubbish talked about tyres, please feel free to come clean and tell us the truth about mainstream applications like our vehicles. After all you are anonymous and amongst friends. :D

 

I stand by my assertion that decent premium brands are plenty good enough for ordinary cars like ours as long as the size/load/speed index is correct. My experience with budget car tyres has been good although I wouldn't fit them to my Trumpet (Bridgestones, or are they a budget tyre as well?).

 

After all my wifes Swift has Ceat tyres and they grip like buggery!

 

Please tell me my dream of a soft grippy tyre which lasts for ages isn't a fantasy. :wacko:

[Bigjeeze]

My apologies, I am a foetus with only 25 years experience driving cars, vans, motorcycles every day for a living.

 

 

Only 25 years? I have 36 years experience driving all types of vehicles - but I am not going to risk my life and those of my passengers to save

[sepulchrave]

You're hysterical, calm down, it's dangerous to get so excited at your age. :wacko:

[tiny]

""Tiny, Pirelli are the only tyre used in WSB racing which is great for marketing but a hell of a loss leader for manufacturing, so we pay higher prices for that manufacturing and R&D loss which your company supports.""

 

And Bridgestone have F1, Our WSB sponsorship is paid for by the motorcycle division, and covered entirely by them not car. If it wasn't ultimately profitable they wouldn't do it.

 

""Tread patterns are largely meaningless gibberish since as long as the water is cleared then you could get a tatoo 'artist' to design them (within stability constraints).""

 

So there is no need for directional or asymetric patterns? Or are they simply a luxury for those with money to burn? And if they were so unimportant, why do you say "Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago, the technology has migrated and they often use tried and trusted tread patterns." If tread patterns are meaningless gibberish?

 

""Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago""

 

How does a ten year old car compare with a modern one? In terms of performance and economy, cars have come a hell of a long way. Is it unreasonable to expect the same from tyres? Or do you expect your present day car to be able to perform to the limits of its abilities if the tyre technology is 10 year old?

 

""High performance cars and motorcycles need high peformance tyres, the suspension setup of some vehicles is so finely tuned that a slight change in tyre pressure has a pronounced effect on performance. The Shalaxy is NOT one of these vehicles""

 

No, I agree, but was tyre pressure part of the original discussion?? No, but tyre pressure does come into play when we talk about the immense changes in pressure that occur during such manouvers as swerving to avoid that small child thats just ran out in front of you. What I asked was, do you think a budget tyre will perform the same as a premium tyre that has had infinitely more capital pumped into the research and development of it? By your own admission mainstream manufacturers spend more on R&D. Undoubtably they spend much more on sponsorship, but there is a direct correlation between sponsorship/advertising revenues and profit, something you appear to miss out of your opinionated argument.

 

""High performance tyres have a short shelf life after manufacture and 'go off' as they sit on a rack in a warehouse. Never buy old stock at discounted prices no matter what name is embossed on the tyrewall""

 

ALL TYRES have a limited shelf life, NOT JUST high performance tyres. The lifespan is comparable no matter what the intended usage. Fortunately for the consumer, CE branding dictates that tyres must be date marked, this applies no matter what the tyre. Premium or Budget, High Performance or Mundane, your tyre should be date stamped, if it isnt give it a wide berth.

 

""There is a lot of rubbish talked about tyres, please feel free to come clean and tell us the truth about mainstream applications like our vehicles. After all you are anonymous and amongst friends""

 

Mainstream applications? Hmm, I dont see a "Shalaxy" as mainstream, as you say, and I quote " a two ton shalaxy " is far from mainstream. A car that can carry seven adults plus luggage at speeds way in excess of the speed limit is far from mainstream. I see them as them as specialised.

Whether I am among friends or not, I have nothing to tell apart from the truth. Please tell me, who is it thats talking rubbish about tyres?

 

""Please tell me my dream of a soft grippy tyre which lasts for ages isn't a fantasy.""

 

I aint a liar so no I cant, fantasy all the way!!

 

""After all my wifes Swift has Ceat tyres and they grip like buggery!""

 

Thanks for buying Pirelli!

 

 

I really havent got much more to say, and dont want to be seen as pedantic.

You have your views, I have mine.

Lets shake hands and simply say we will never see eye to eye on this one.

[big_kev]

A couple of points worth noting.

 

If you are using cheapo tyres you are more likely to change them when the tread drops below the performance limit of 3mm, whereas with expensive ones you may run them down to the legal limit of 1.6mm due to the cost of replacement. ( might be just me being stingy ! ).

 

I would rather use china cheapos with plenty of tread than top of the range tyres that are nearly bald as the cheap ones will still work in the wet.

Remember you can ignore all the facts and figures given for tyres in the dry as this is not when you are going to lose grip on the road, its performance in the wet that matters.

 

Also why is the legal limit for cars 1.6mm when it is only 1mm for anything above 3.5t ?

And they are allowed to have their treads recut a couple of times ( hence why most of the blowouts you see are from HGV's.

Strangely the limit for motorbikes is also 1mm less than the 1.6mm for cars ?

This knocks out any theory for the tread difference being related to the vehicles weight or speed and means that as usual the car driver is either being victimised ( as is usual ) or is being given extra safety guidlelines ( depends on your point of view).

 

And a further note !....I know waffling again...its my age :D

 

I was always led to believe that you should have good tyres with good tread on the front axle and a pair of something black on the rear.

However recently I have seen many recommendations that if you have a pair of new tyres these should be fitted on the rear and the worn ones ( assuming still ok ) on the front.

The only reason I have seen supporting this is that if you have a blowout on the front you are more able to control the car than if you have a blowout on the rear ( WTF ! ).

I have experienced both front and rear blowouts in my times and the front blowout was brown trousers time wheras the rear blowout was mildly annoying.

 

Just thought I would add my almost thirty years of driving badly into the dicussion.

When you get to forty years you go "do lally" apparently :wacko:

[gregers]

now now boys as pointed out,everyone has there own opinions on tyres and you will never change there minds no matter what,i personally will buy what i can afford at the time as long as they are the correct load rating and confirm to my insurance cover ect.each will wear out at different rates depending on the style of driving.

 

on a footnote a friend of mine has got a chrysler voueger 3lt auto and its a bloody big car(or appears to be)and that runs on normal tyres and not extra load ones,WHY does the galaxy have them when a car like the chrysler doesnt?

[Richard gal]

A couple of points worth noting.

 

If you are using cheapo tyres you are more likely to change them when the tread drops below the performance limit of 3mm, whereas with expensive ones you may run them down to the legal limit of 1.6mm due to the cost of replacement. ( might be just me being stingy ! ).

 

I would rather use china cheapos with plenty of tread than top of the range tyres that are nearly bald as the cheap ones will still work in the wet.

Remember you can ignore all the facts and figures given for tyres in the dry as this is not when you are going to lose grip on the road, its performance in the wet that matters.

 

Also why is the legal limit for cars 1.6mm when it is only 1mm for anything above 3.5t ?

And they are allowed to have their treads recut a couple of times ( hence why most of the blowouts you see are from HGV's.

Strangely the limit for motorbikes is also 1mm less than the 1.6mm for cars ?

This knocks out any theory for the tread difference being related to the vehicles weight or speed and means that as usual the car driver is either being victimised ( as is usual ) or is being given extra safety guidlelines ( depends on your point of view).

 

And a further note !....I know waffling again...its my age :P

 

I was always led to believe that you should have good tyres with good tread on the front axle and a pair of something black on the rear.

However recently I have seen many recommendations that if you have a pair of new tyres these should be fitted on the rear and the worn ones ( assuming still ok ) on the front.

The only reason I have seen supporting this is that if you have a blowout on the front you are more able to control the car than if you have a blowout on the rear ( WTF ! ).

I have experienced both front and rear blowouts in my times and the front blowout was brown trousers time wheras the rear blowout was mildly annoying.

 

Just thought I would add my almost thirty years of driving badly into the dicussion.

When you get to forty years you go "do lally" apparently ;)

 

The new tyres on the rear is because in hard cornering in the wet its the rear that will let go first, especially on front wheel drive.

 

Hgvs, are max 56mph so cannot aquaplane so easy at lower speeds?

 

Blowouts on HGV are more to do with the abuse they get off the road when scrubbing wheels sideways on rough ground.

[markie]

Again, thanks for all responses, even though some of the discussions have got a little heated !!! I think I'm probably going to try the continental, as most seem to think these are good. I'm just about to do an internet search for prices.

[big_kev]

on a footnote a friend of mine has got a chrysler voueger 3lt auto and its a bloody big car(or appears to be)and that runs on normal tyres and not extra load ones,WHY does the galaxy have them when a car like the chrysler doesnt?

 

Extra Load/Reinforced are required for the Gal because you may have 40psi in the front tyres and 45psi in the rear to cope with an extra load and hence the additional pressure on the sidewalls of the tyres.

 

Plus I think the Gal has a lower profile tyre fitted which again requires the reinforced sidewalls.

[gregers]

i can appriciate what your saying kev,but what i was angling at was the chrysler weighs more then the galaxy,my m8s car had the same size tyres then my car.

[Bigjeeze]

Fit whatever suits your budget - Chances are the insurance company will pay for the funerals anyway.

[insider]

""Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago""

 

How does a ten year old car compare with a modern one? In terms of performance and economy, cars have come a hell of a long way. Is it unreasonable to expect the same from tyres? Or do you expect your present day car to be able to perform to the limits of its abilities if the tyre technology is 10 year old?

 

The Mk2 Galaxy (and Alhambra and Sharan) is essentially a 14 year old car. Nothing has changed chassis-wise in all these years. Therefore, if budget tyres now are as good as premium tyres then, they are more than adequate for this car.

[sparky Paul]

i can appriciate what your saying kev,but what i was angling at was the chrysler weighs more then the galaxy,my m8s car had the same size tyres then my car.

What matters is the load index on the tyre - these numbers correspond to a maximum weight the tyre can carry.

 

Are you certain he has the same tyres fitted? I just checked a few Voyager models, and two tyre sizes came up - 215/65R15 and 215/65R16 on later models, neither specified RF/XL. The load index of standard tyres in these sizes is 96 and 98 respectively, both of which are above the 94 minimum required by the Galaxy - assuming the gross weight of the Voyager is not too much higher than the Galaxy, then it is possible that these standard (not-reinforced/extra load) tyres are sufficient for the Voyager. Indeed, a load index of 96 seems to be the minimum specified.

 

If the load index on the Voyager's tyres is lower than 96, I would guess that the wrong tyres are fitted.

[tiny]

""Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago""

 

How does a ten year old car compare with a modern one? In terms of performance and economy, cars have come a hell of a long way. Is it unreasonable to expect the same from tyres? Or do you expect your present day car to be able to perform to the limits of its abilities if the tyre technology is 10 year old?

 

The Mk2 Galaxy (and Alhambra and Sharan) is essentially a 14 year old car. Nothing has changed chassis-wise in all these years. Therefore, if budget tyres now are as good as premium tyres then, they are more than adequate for this car.

 

The big thing is, are they as good? Does anyone know that for fact? From a materials point of view alone I would strongly disagree with the fact that they are even comparable.

 

And if by some slim chance a bugget tyre is as good as a premium product from 10 years ago does that mean you should still knowingly settle for 2nd (or 3rd,4th etc) best.

 

And did those 10 year old tyres get as much punishment as they do today? How many speed humps were around when the Galaxy was first brought out compared with today?

[Smilge]

Some really good points there gents and thank you for the advice.

 

Markie ..... I tried Hankook Ventus Prime 105s when I had my Galaxy and was particularly impressed with the road holding in the wet. At

[Beyond Help?]

The new tyres on the rear is because in hard cornering in the wet its the rear that will let go first, especially on front wheel drive.

 

Hgvs, are max 56mph so cannot aquaplane so easy at lower speeds?

 

Blowouts on HGV are more to do with the abuse they get off the road when scrubbing wheels sideways on rough ground.

 

Your correct with the best tyres on the back. You can not steer the rear axle so you need tyres on the back that will provide the best grip.

 

HGVs don't aquaplane as they are too heavy, it is not really a speed related issue. And the maximum speed limit for HGVs in the UK is 60MPH, most now are speed limited to 56MPH, however on a down hill section of motorway you can easily exceed that.

 

Also blowouts on HGVs have more to do with re-capped tyres that are running under inflated, it is often difficult with truck tyrse to visually spot underinflation due to the stiff tyre-walls and the load being shared by other nearby wheels, often on the same hub. A local company I do some work for has over 100 trucks and trailers, they only use new Michelen tyres and have very few blow outs, less than 10 a year.

[Beyond Help?]

Also why is the legal limit for cars 1.6mm when it is only 1mm for anything above 3.5t ?

And they are allowed to have their treads recut a couple of times ( hence why most of the blowouts you see are from HGV's.

 

HGVs have their treads re-cut following the tread pattern that is already on the tyre. Only tyres that are marked as being re-grooveable my be re-cut, they are designed for this when manufactured and have the tread-blocks wider at the base to stop them from moving too much when the tyre is new. When the tyre reaches the markers for re-cutting you then use a cutting tool to remove the excess tyre compound, your only opening up the tread that is already there down to the maximum cutting depth markers.

 

Most HGV blow-outs are NOT because the tyre has been re-cut, but due to running the tyre under-inflated or side-wall damage from bad drivers 'kerbing' the tyres.

[gregers]

SPARKY,im afraid i didnt catch the load index so your probably right in what you say,i was just amazed they wernt stamped extra load but hey as they say your always learning.

[big_kev]

i can appriciate what your saying kev,but what i was angling at was the chrysler weighs more then the galaxy,my m8s car had the same size tyres then my car.

What matters is the load index on the tyre - these numbers correspond to a maximum weight the tyre can carry.

 

Are you certain he has the same tyres fitted? I just checked a few Voyager models, and two tyre sizes came up - 215/65R15 and 215/65R16 on later models, neither specified RF/XL. The load index of standard tyres in these sizes is 96 and 98 respectively, both of which are above the 94 minimum required by the Galaxy - assuming the gross weight of the Voyager is not too much higher than the Galaxy, then it is possible that these standard (not-reinforced/extra load) tyres are sufficient for the Voyager. Indeed, a load index of 96 seems to be the minimum specified.

 

If the load index on the Voyager's tyres is lower than 96, I would guess that the wrong tyres are fitted.

 

 

Guys,

 

The galaxy has lower profile tyres with 40 psi in them hence reinforced are required for both these reasons.

The voyager has a higher load index because it has more weight on each wheel but with a higher profile reinforced tyres are not required.

[AD90]

Don't know how they will wear, but I am running Avon ZV5s and they are a LOT better, grip-wise than the 'plastic' tyres (Federa S595) that were on it when I bought it. I also run Avon ST Ice Touring on the front during the winter months, and they are impressive.

 

The size is 215/55R16XL and I am paying

[mzokk]

Turned into an intersting discussion this. As I said I'd normally go for a well known make (you'd think QC and materials might be better) but never noticed any difference using a cheapy in normal driving. It would be intersting to see the results of a blind test!

[seatkid]

Turned into an intersting discussion this. As I said I'd normally go for a well known make (you'd think QC and materials might be better) but never noticed any difference using a cheapy in normal driving. It would be intersting to see the results of a blind test!

I wouldnt like to be in the same car as the blind man driving!!

[b318isp]

The point about having new tyres on the rear was based on the fact the most driver feedback regarding grip comes from the front tyres. If new tyres are on the rear, you tend to drive within the (lower) limits of the fronts.

 

However, if you put the new tyres on the front, you may drive in such a way that you end up over stretching the rears - spinning the car.

 

Personally, I'm not convinced of the arguement for strongly front weight biased or understeering cars, like the Alhambra. The front tyres take a huge amount of abuse compared to the rears - so I'm clear of where I want the best tyres.

 

Regarding cost / performance, my experience is that you pay for what you get. Best tyres I have ever run are the Goodyear Eagle F1s, Bridgestone Potenza S02 and S03s, Conti Sport Contact 2s, etc. I have thrown 3 month old Nankangs off the rear of FWD cars, they were so bad. That said - there are exceptions - e.g. Toyo Proxes T1s, Yokahams AVS, Falkens (can't remember the exact model) which are really good value at the mid price levels.

[b318isp]

Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago, the technology has migrated and they often use tried and trusted tread patterns.

 

High performance cars and motorcycles need high peformance tyres, the suspension setup of some vehicles is so finely tuned that a slight change in tyre pressure has a pronounced effect on performance. The Shalaxy is NOT one of these vehicles.

 

This is not my experience, and I believe a misleading and simplified statement. Back in 1999 I started buying premium tyres - such as the Goodyear Eagle F1s and Bridgestone Potenza S02s - subsequently replace by the S03. I was moving from mid range Goodyears, Dunlops and Avons - I have not driven better road tyres since then, despite trying different brands on different vehicles. These tyres, when worn, were also used on a number of track days and performed very well. One thing that has struck me is that the performance of top tyres stays much more consistent as they wear.

 

I agree that 2-3 psi can make a difference in the performance of tyre, and that sports cars are more sensitive to this. However, the correct tyre pressures are critical no matter what the vehicle. Often it can take a number of years to settle on the correct pressures for a particular style of driving - I run 47psi up front on the Alhambra now, as I tend to agressively turn in, causing the outer edge of the tyre to get a lot of wear. Running a higher pressure takes load off the edge of the tyres, evening out this wear.

 

On the Alhambra, having had Dunlops and Bridgestone, the current Conti Sport Contacts 2 are significantly better for grip in all conditions, but have worn faster.

 

I strongly belive that paying a little extra for tyres is a bit like insurance - you may never need its benefits, but when you do, then you do!

[Bigjeeze]

Budget tyres now are as good or better than premium tyres were ten years ago, the technology has migrated and they often use tried and trusted tread patterns.

 

High performance cars and motorcycles need high peformance tyres, the suspension setup of some vehicles is so finely tuned that a slight change in tyre pressure has a pronounced effect on performance. The Shalaxy is NOT one of these vehicles.

 

This is not my experience, and I believe a misleading and simplified statement. Back in 1999 I started buying premium tyres - such as the Goodyear Eagle F1s and Bridgestone Potenza S02s - subsequently replace by the S03. I was moving from mid range Goodyears, Dunlops and Avons - I have not driven better road tyres since then, despite trying different brands on different vehicles. These tyres, when worn, were also used on a number of track days and performed very well. One thing that has struck me is that the performance of top tyres stays much more consistent as they wear.

 

I agree that 2-3 psi can make a difference in the performance of tyre, and that sports cars are more sensitive to this. However, the correct tyre pressures are critical no matter what the vehicle. Often it can take a number of years to settle on the correct pressures for a particular style of driving - I run 47psi up front on the Alhambra now, as I tend to agressively turn in, causing the outer edge of the tyre to get a lot of wear. Running a higher pressure takes load off the edge of the tyres, evening out this wear.

 

On the Alhambra, having had Dunlops and Bridgestone, the current Conti Sport Contacts 2 are significantly better for grip in all conditions, but have worn faster.

 

I strongly belive that paying a little extra for tyres is a bit like insurance - you may never need its benefits, but when you do, then you do!

 

What a sensible well balanced post - a long way from some of the frankly silly comments seen so far. Take the emotion out of the subject - and the benefits of quality tyres are there for all to see. You can't buy back a life.