Tire life

Perhaps you would like some hard scientific reportage now?

[from a tire industry report out of U Chicago]

Seventy five percent of the companies in the industry (accounting for
90% of the value) experienced a takeover bid or
were forced to restructure during the period 1982-1989 (Mitchell and
Mulherin, 1996). As aresult of this activity, control changed hands in
over half the companies in this industry. Even more remarkable, in the
majority of cases, control was transferred to foreign owners. By the
end of the decade, traditional American firms like Firestone,
Uniroyal, Goodrich, Armstrong, and General Tire belonged to foreign
companies. As a consequence, large U.S. owned tiremanufacturers, who
in 1971 represented 59% of the world production and included four out
of the top five producers, in 1991 represented only 17% of world
production with only one of thetop five producers


[from an EPA report]
The mid- to late 1980s were difficult times for the world tire
industry. Tire manufacturers faced declining demand for new cars,
declining tire prices, a record high U.S. currency, and record high
tire imports. As a response to this market distress, the industry
went through a period of significant restructuring and consolidation.
Foreign firms bought out several American firms, leaving the world
tire industry with nine ultimate parent companies that have annual
sales in excess of $1 billion each. These nine companies account
for 80 percent of world tire sales (Ita and Gross, 1995). Four of the
nine companies have their headquarters in Japan (Bridgestone
Corporation, Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd., Yokohama Rubber Co.
Ltd., and Toyo Tire and Rubber Co. Ltd.), three are based in Europe
Groupe Michelin, Continental A.G., and Pirelli), and two are
headquartered in the United States (Goodyear and Cooper).


Brian Whatcott Altus OK

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:09:40 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Lon wrote:
>
>>
>> > IMO, Michelin are the most over rated tire on the market. In 40 years of
>> > driving, the only tire that has ever blown out on me was a Michelin, and the
>> > rest of the same set were less than satisfactory.... performance and short life.
>> > Many years ago when I worked on a highway maintenance crew we picked up more
>> > tire debris from blown out Michelins than all other brands combined, and they
>> > were not all that common at the time, so the failure rate was many times worse
>> > than other brands. When you look at the tire brands used by transportation
>> > companies, who would expect to do careful research before committing to a brand,
>> > you will note that very few of them use Michelin.
>>
>> Could you describe the type of debris from Michelins that you picked
>> up?
>
> Tire carcasses.
>
>>
>> Purely an unscientific survey consisting of checking the brands on
>> the commercial big rigs I drive next to, the appearance of any brand
>> *other* than Michelin is pretty darned rare. This is as much due to
>> their wear patterns and re-treading capabilities as to any inherent
>> superiority I suspect. That unscientific survey does include having
>> the top truck lines as customers....which gives pretty good
>> opportunity to check tires.
>
>Your unscientific survey shows much different results from mine. I spent the last 16
>years as a truck and bus inspector and I find it hard to believe that unless you did
>your survey within a block of a Michelin dealer that you would find anything like
>that. I spent a lot of time every day crawling in, around and under trucks and buses.
>We always paid close attention to tires, and I didn't see many Michelins.
>

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:42:44 -0700, Lon >
wrote:

>Dave Smith proclaimed:
>
>> "C. E. White" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I did and I am not. I bought a set of Cross Terrains for an Expedition and I
>>>am not all that happy with them, mostly because they have become very noisy.
>>>The original Continentals on the vehicle were replaced at 50,000 miles
>>>because they were hard to keep balanced (but they still had plenty of tread
>>>left). Initially the Michelins were quieter, but now, after 25,000 miles,
>>>they are much nosier than the original Continentals were after 50,000
>>>miles.They look good - in fact it is hard to tell they have worn at all. I
>>>also have a set of Michelins on my Thunderbird and they are horrid. They
>>>won't stay balanced and they don't have good traction.
>>
>>
>> IMO, Michelin are the most over rated tire on the market. In 40 years of
>> driving, the only tire that has ever blown out on me was a Michelin, and the
>> rest of the same set were less than satisfactory.... performance and short life.
>> Many years ago when I worked on a highway maintenance crew we picked up more
>> tire debris from blown out Michelins than all other brands combined, and they
>> were not all that common at the time, so the failure rate was many times worse
>> than other brands. When you look at the tire brands used by transportation
>> companies, who would expect to do careful research before committing to a brand,
>> you will note that very few of them use Michelin.
>
> Could you describe the type of debris from Michelins that you picked
> up?
>
>
> Purely an unscientific survey consisting of checking the brands on
> the commercial big rigs I drive next to, the appearance of any brand
> *other* than Michelin is pretty darned rare. This is as much due to
> their wear patterns and re-treading capabilities as to any inherent
> superiority I suspect. That unscientific survey does include having
> the top truck lines as customers....which gives pretty good
> opportunity to check tires.


Truck tires I cannot comment on - but when it comes to passenger tires
I am certainly no fan of Michelin. If the choice was a Michelin or a
Firestone 721, the Michelin would win (but 721s have not been made for
over 30 years). I find they go hard, giving poor traction, harsh ride,
and tire noise, early in their life - then go on to live, as cripples,
for next to eternity. They.ve come a long way from the early X, but
not far enough, given the advancements other companies have made.