If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"RPS" > wrote in message ... >I suppose this can apply to any product but in this case I am thinking > of tires: > > (1) I can buy a pricier model which will last a long time, but then I'd > have an old tire most of that time. > Don't you suppose to change tires every 4 to 5 years even if you don't drive at all? > (2) I can buy a less expensive model but change it more frequently, so > I'd have a newer tire most of the time. > Inexpensive tires doesn't mean its cheap. My Korean tires out perform the tires I have that costs 2-4 times more. One of the company that modify Lotus cars for higher performance use some Korean tires and said it was the best kept secrete. Mine you they were looking at performance, not price. > Which is the better way? > > Would you buy a new Lexus every 10-12 years , or a new Corolla/Camry > every 4-5 years? |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
> highly advertised $125 baby saver tires that
> have 2% tread left on them because the owner is postponing for > as long as he can the $600+ bill that he will faced for a new > set of balanced/aligned baby savers tires I suspect that a lot of people driving around on tires so bald the air is showing are just ignorant of the importance of the things, regardless of whether they have baby savers or loss leaders. That having been said, I wonder how many people are shocked at how much tires can cost these days -- especially if they bought a sports car or high end luxury boat without thinking about the implications of 16-17-18" tires with a speed rating somewhere on the far end of the alphabet. Just one more example of a subject that sometimes comes up: how the quest for performance and/or long punchlists of luxury features in cars is kinda floating away from reality... I try to stick with tires that have holes no bigger than 15" diameter, at least a 60-series distance from the tread. They may not be the best way to indulge any autobahn, F1, or Baja 1000 fantasies that I haven't yet outgrown, and might limit my choice of cars to what I can afford anyway -- but decent tires are available for fifty or sixty bucks for the grocery getters, with performance types still under a hundred. And I have a fighting chance of getting at least a vaguely similar new tire out in the boondocks if I scrag one on vacation, or replacing them in this pay period if somebody fumbled a boxful of sheetrock screws at a construction site on my commute, or one of those things that seem to keep happening in the real world. Your mileage, and that of your spare tire, may vary, --Wile E. Quixote |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
C.H. wrote: > > Btw, cheaper tires don't necessarily wear faster, but they usually grip > much worse, and please don't insult our intelligence by claiming that you > don't need good grip. > I drive slow. Even with bald tires, i'd be less a risk than you speeders who spend $200 a wheel. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"ray" > wrote in message
... > Actually, higher speed rated tires are usually HARDER to withstand the > heat generated by sustained high speeds. Race tires are a totally > different breed... my drag radials aren't speed rated at all and have a > treadwear rating of ZERO and they're technially street legal... but I > don't bother because they're so "squishy" I don't feel comfortable driving > the car on the street... but they have a ton more grip once heated up > versus any regular street tire. > > Oh, but the hi-perf tires have short tread blocks for less squirm, so they > still don't last 40,000 miles ... mine only made it 20,000 miles... > > All of which means you can't answer the OP in absolutes. Tires are an > absolute bear to comparison shop... because it's all about the tradeoff... > dry traction, wet traction, tread life, even noise and ease of balancing > from brand to brand.... > > All I'll say is this: I've decided that BF Goodrich tires for me are the > way to go for my good cars. It's worth the extra $20 per tire. > > Ray I believe that it is the sidewalls and belts under the tread that are harder, not necessarily the tread itself. V and Z rated tires usually don't last as long as S or T rated tires, because it is the tread that wears. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Mark A wrote:
> "ray" > wrote in message > ... > > Actually, higher speed rated tires are usually HARDER to withstand > > the heat generated by sustained high speeds. Race tires are a > > totally different breed... my drag radials aren't speed rated at > > all and have a treadwear rating of ZERO and they're technially > > street legal... but I don't bother because they're so "squishy" I > > don't feel comfortable driving the car on the street... but they > > have a ton more grip once heated up versus any regular street tire. > > I believe that it is the sidewalls and belts under the tread that are > harder, not necessarily the tread itself. V and Z rated tires usually > don't last as long as S or T rated tires, because it is the tread that > wears. Like I said - it's counterintuitive. At speed the idea may be to get optimum grip. A compound that's too soft might get too squishy at the limits of the speed rating and overheat. A soft compound might be OK at freeway speeds. Of course there are no absolutes. What I'm trying to get across is that harder rubber doesn't always mean worse grip or longer life. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote: > C.H. wrote: > > > > Btw, cheaper tires don't necessarily wear faster, but they usually grip > > much worse, and please don't insult our intelligence by claiming that you > > don't need good grip. > > > > I drive slow. Even with bald tires, i'd be less a risk than you > speeders who spend $200 a wheel. You drive slow because you're retarded, and your tiny, drug-polluted brain is incapable of handling information faster than that of a 2 year old. If you're stupid enough to believe that you're less of a risk driving slowly on bald tires than someone who has bought some tires with grip, then you need to be taken off the road before you cause a fatal accident. URACRIMINALANDADRUGADDICT. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I' ve bought cheap and very expencive. All the cheap one's blow up
before there tread life was gone. All the Expencive one's I drove till I saw the belts, and then some. I don't like to drive 65.....ok 80ish mph and have a tire blow. For me it's spend more. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"RPS" > wrote in message ... >I suppose this can apply to any product but in this case I am thinking > of tires: > > (1) I can buy a pricier model which will last a long time, but then I'd > have an old tire most of that time. > > (2) I can buy a less expensive model but change it more frequently, so > I'd have a newer tire most of the time. > > Which is the better way? > > Would you buy a new Lexus every 10-12 years , or a new Corolla/Camry > every 4-5 years? My advice: forget about price and longevity, buy on performance. If a tire handles better and stops quicker, it may save you from having an accident (not to mention handle better and make the car more fun to drive.) Look for performance test ratings (found in a number of different magazines such as Consumer Reports) for your climate type (for example in a very rainy climate I'd look for the best wet-traction tire.) STICKY tires are made from SOFTER rubber. Softer rubber wears faster. Tires that have very high wear ratings are made from HARDER rubber, which does not stick to the road as well. Therefore you may pay top dollar for a tire with an extremely long wear rating/tread warranty, and yet you're getting a pretty crappy tire when it comes to handling, braking and performance!! |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
RPS wrote:
>I suppose this can apply to any product but in this case I am thinking > of tires: > > (1) I can buy a pricier model which will last a long time, but then > I'd have an old tire most of that time. > > (2) I can buy a less expensive model but change it more frequently, so > I'd have a newer tire most of the time. > > Which is the better way? Why not both? The tires on my Big Car are expensive, and only last about 8000 miles rear/12000 miles front. -- Bob |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Flaminio wrote:
> RPS wrote: > >>I suppose this can apply to any product but in this case I am thinking >>of tires: >> >>(1) I can buy a pricier model which will last a long time, but then >>I'd have an old tire most of that time. >> >>(2) I can buy a less expensive model but change it more frequently, so >>I'd have a newer tire most of the time. >> >>Which is the better way? > > > Why not both? The tires on my Big Car are expensive, and only last about > 8000 miles rear/12000 miles front. > So you spend a lot of money, often. That works! Reminds me of the old Yokohama A509s I had on my VW GTI... (I think at the time they were the next step down from the A008 which was the big badass performance tire back then) I wore those suckers out in about 15K miles! But they *did* stick... and did surprisingly well in the snow for a supposedly summer-only tire (yes, I had snow tires... but I didn't realize it could snow in freakin' October in Cleveland!) nate -- replace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tire question: buy pricier or more often? | RPS | Driving | 42 | June 25th 05 03:39 AM |
Calculating Tire Pressure question? | Tom Nakashima | VW air cooled | 3 | May 4th 05 02:28 PM |
Tire bubble question | Nick | Honda | 2 | May 4th 05 02:11 AM |
Interesting...Expired Tires | Patrick | Ford Mustang | 4 | November 10th 04 03:42 AM |
Attn Tire experts. Tire valve stem question | Jim Smith | Saturn | 1 | June 17th 04 07:03 AM |