anyone changed tires after this?
in [Technical]
|
Prev: Government Motors plans demise of SAAB brand
Next: Quality differences between motor oil. brands & bulk oil from oil-change places
From: Ashton Crusher on 24 Dec 2009 16:46 On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:23:57 -0600, Nicholas <Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:52:23 -0600, "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote: > >> >>"Ashton Crusher" <demi(a)moore.net> wrote in message >>> >>> I watched it. There was not a shred of evidence presented showing >>> "old" tires were any more likely to come apart then new ones. All it >>> shows is a lawyer who makes millions suing people making unsupported >>> statements of danger. Industry groups who will benefit by making you >>> throw away good tires and buy new ones, and of course, the news media >>> who have to show stories to scare you, whether fact based or not, to >>> get ratings. If there is research showing a statistically meaningful >>> relationship between age (unused) and use why isn't it ever cited. The >>> closest they came was showing a picture of an unidentified tire being >>> spun on a machine while they said "research shows". What research, >>> who did it, where can I get a copy, etc... I've had numerous "old" >>> tires and have NEVER had a problem with them. On the other hand, >>> we've had MANY NEW tires come flying apart, usually Firestones. >> >>I agree. To get back to the original post, months ago (or is it years now?) >>I would have to go into the archives, and I may do that if I run out of >>everything >>else to do. > >I made the post couple/few years ago when I was *active* in this n/g, >and caught a little flack for it. Posted by >Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net > >This is an OLD story, but I still don't know what to make of it. You >hear that 40,000 die on highways in the US every year. How many are >from tire failure? Nobody knows. > >Lg All 40,000 died of speed too fast. After all, Cops with a GED are experts at everything related to highways.
From: Nicholas on 24 Dec 2009 17:17 On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 14:46:45 -0700, Ashton Crusher <demi(a)moore.net> wrote: >On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:23:57 -0600, Nicholas ><Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:52:23 -0600, "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote: >> >>> >>>"Ashton Crusher" <demi(a)moore.net> wrote in message >>>> >>>> I watched it. There was not a shred of evidence presented showing >>>> "old" tires were any more likely to come apart then new ones. All it >>>> shows is a lawyer who makes millions suing people making unsupported >>>> statements of danger. Industry groups who will benefit by making you >>>> throw away good tires and buy new ones, and of course, the news media >>>> who have to show stories to scare you, whether fact based or not, to >>>> get ratings. If there is research showing a statistically meaningful >>>> relationship between age (unused) and use why isn't it ever cited. The >>>> closest they came was showing a picture of an unidentified tire being >>>> spun on a machine while they said "research shows". What research, >>>> who did it, where can I get a copy, etc... I've had numerous "old" >>>> tires and have NEVER had a problem with them. On the other hand, >>>> we've had MANY NEW tires come flying apart, usually Firestones. >>> >>>I agree. To get back to the original post, months ago (or is it years now?) >>>I would have to go into the archives, and I may do that if I run out of >>>everything >>>else to do. >> >>I made the post couple/few years ago when I was *active* in this n/g, >>and caught a little flack for it. Posted by >>Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net >> >>This is an OLD story, but I still don't know what to make of it. You >>hear that 40,000 die on highways in the US every year. How many are >>from tire failure? Nobody knows. >> >>Lg > > >All 40,000 died of speed too fast. After all, Cops with a GED are >experts at everything related to highways. Speed Kills. No doubt about it. Ever seen a car cut in two by a tree by some guy who couldn't keep it on the road? I've driven by this more than once. Anyhow, cops have Interceptor Tires, rated for much higher speeds than the stuff you and I buy. Same with their engines. Interceptor engines. Their vehicles are hunter/predator vehicles, and are designed for performance, not comfort. At least in the USA where I live. Don't know about elsewhere. But if you want to torture test a tire, put it on a New York City taxi cab ;0) Then again, they don't do highway driving at hi speeds, so maybe they're not a good overall choice. The most important things are you wheels/tires and brakes. Everything else is somewhere under those top two items of interest IMO, when it comes to safety. And ironically, they may be the two things that most people ignore the most. Lg
From: hls on 24 Dec 2009 17:51 "Nicholas" <Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > Happy holidays to you and the group, and wishing you a prosperous and > healthy 2010. > > Lg Thanks and the same to you. The manufacturer doesnt always pick the "best" tires for you. I learned that with our Avalon. It came with expensive Michelins which lasted about 30K miles. They had great adherence, and were quiet, but treadlife was not acceptable. That is why I went to Kumho. I dont mind trying something new, but I dont swallow the first hook that goes in the water.
From: Ashton Crusher on 24 Dec 2009 18:42 On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:17:53 -0600, Nicholas <Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 14:46:45 -0700, Ashton Crusher <demi(a)moore.net> >wrote: > >>On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:23:57 -0600, Nicholas >><Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:52:23 -0600, "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"Ashton Crusher" <demi(a)moore.net> wrote in message >>>>> >>>>> I watched it. There was not a shred of evidence presented showing >>>>> "old" tires were any more likely to come apart then new ones. All it >>>>> shows is a lawyer who makes millions suing people making unsupported >>>>> statements of danger. Industry groups who will benefit by making you >>>>> throw away good tires and buy new ones, and of course, the news media >>>>> who have to show stories to scare you, whether fact based or not, to >>>>> get ratings. If there is research showing a statistically meaningful >>>>> relationship between age (unused) and use why isn't it ever cited. The >>>>> closest they came was showing a picture of an unidentified tire being >>>>> spun on a machine while they said "research shows". What research, >>>>> who did it, where can I get a copy, etc... I've had numerous "old" >>>>> tires and have NEVER had a problem with them. On the other hand, >>>>> we've had MANY NEW tires come flying apart, usually Firestones. >>>> >>>>I agree. To get back to the original post, months ago (or is it years now?) >>>>I would have to go into the archives, and I may do that if I run out of >>>>everything >>>>else to do. >>> >>>I made the post couple/few years ago when I was *active* in this n/g, >>>and caught a little flack for it. Posted by >>>Lawrence_Glickman(a)comcast.net >>> >>>This is an OLD story, but I still don't know what to make of it. You >>>hear that 40,000 die on highways in the US every year. How many are >>>from tire failure? Nobody knows. >>> >>>Lg >> >> >>All 40,000 died of speed too fast. After all, Cops with a GED are >>experts at everything related to highways. > >Speed Kills. No doubt about it. Ever seen a car cut in two by a tree >by some guy who couldn't keep it on the road? I've driven by this >more than once. > >Anyhow, cops have Interceptor Tires, rated for much higher speeds than >the stuff you and I buy. Are you stuck in the 60's?? They have the same Z-rated tires that come on most anything else. Due to drive shaft issues the cop crown vics were, for several years, speed limited to less then 130 mph. I used to drive almost that fast in a 70 Plymouth with low bid gvt bias tires on it. >Same with their engines. Interceptor >engines. Are you stuck in the 60's. Due to the cost of getting an engine emission certified no one does "interceptor" engines anymore. They are the same engines anyone else can buy. The only difference, sometimes, is they may not offer that engine in the car unless it's ordered as the police vehicle because they don't want to screw up their CAFE number. >Their vehicles are hunter/predator vehicles, and are >designed for performance, not comfort. The current PI Crown Vic is essentially the same as what anyone can buy. The main difference now days between teh cop versions and non-cop are higher output electric system to handle the lights and radios and an added oil and ps cooler. > At least in the USA where I >live. The 60's??? > Don't know about elsewhere. But if you want to torture test a >tire, put it on a New York City taxi cab ;0) Then again, they don't >do highway driving at hi speeds, so maybe they're not a good overall >choice. > If you want to torture test a tire put it on something that carries a lot of weight at high speed, such as the typical fat county sheriffs car after the dumbfrick has packed in his morning dozen donuts. >The most important things are you wheels/tires and brakes. Everything >else is somewhere under those top two items of interest IMO, when it >comes to safety. And ironically, they may be the two things that most >people ignore the most. > At least your closing makes some sense.
From: Scott Dorsey on 24 Dec 2009 20:04
>>This is an OLD story, but I still don't know what to make of it. You >>hear that 40,000 die on highways in the US every year. How many are >>from tire failure? Nobody knows. > >All 40,000 died of speed too fast. After all, Cops with a GED are >experts at everything related to highways. Nahh, a lot of them die from too much beer before driving and/or too much attention paid to the cellphone and the hamburger they're eating. Driving too fast for conditions is certainly right up there, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |