I use to have a pick up truck with a set of middle of the road brand tires. I put 45K miles on those tires, and had them on there for about 5 years. About a month before I traded it in, I noticed that the tires appeared to have about 10-15K worth of tread left on them, but they had a lot of little hair line cracks like you are describing. Well, I decided to try to make them last until I traded it. One day, when I pulled into the parking lot at work (there is a bit of a bump entering the lot), one of the rear tires started going down. I took the tire off, and there was no niticible damage to it (screws, glass, etc...). I assumed air was coming out through those little cracks??? I didn't bother doing a water/soap test to find out for sure.
Will19 --I believe the answer is that Consumer Report was only testing standard or "passenger" all-season tires, not "high performance all-seasons" (BF Goodrich Traction T&A V-rated or H-rated; Yokohama Avid H4) nor "touring all-seasons" (BF Goodrich T&A T-rated). In other words, none of the above-mentioned tires fell into the category CR was testing.
capriracer said on Oct 05, 2005 (9:54 pm): I know where to find the formula, but it's so complex you can't even write it correctly using normal script like we have on this web site. That's why they have books of these tables. But these books are expensive (over $50) so it just doesn't make sense to have one unless you are in the business.
Could you list the pertinent info on some of these books (title/author/publisher), so that I could find them at the library? Too expensive for me to buy for a quick look up, but that's why I have a library card. ;-)
It's not really complicated if you have the tools.
So allow me to help see if the 28 psi makes sense. What I'll need is the year, make and, model of your car (so I can look up the original tire size and inflation pressure, which will also be on the vehicle placard) and the tire size you are using now.
"Could you list the pertinent info on some of these books (title/author/publisher), so that I could find them at the library?"
There are several, but the real sources are: The Tire and Rim Association (TRA) Yearbook, and The European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO) Yearbook. These are the yearly publication by the standards organizations (so the organization is the author and the publisher)
BUT!!!!
I doubt if ANY library has these, except maybe for some automotive technical library. Every so often you'll find some of the load tables publisher on some web sites - usually tire manufacturers.
However, if you need assistance, I'm more than happy to help.
What is written on the vehicle placard (by the vehicle manufacturer) DOES relate to the load curves - and, of course they determine what gets printed there by referring to these books we've been discussing.
But what is on the sidewall of a tire is dictated by law. It's been a while since I actually read the pertinent passage, but at the time I was trying to understand why there was a difference in what was printed by different tire manufacturers. If I remember correctly the passage was something like:
must have the maximum load and inflation pressure.
Most tire manufacturers interpret this to mean the absolute max pressure, but some interpret this to mean the pressure the corresponds to the maximum load.
Anyway, my point is that for a given tire size - which has the same load curve regardless of tire manufacturer - the max pressure printed on the sidewall may be different. While the max pressure is great information, it is not pertinent to what the proper inflation pressure is for a given vehicle. That info is on the vehicle placard - which makes it pretty easy for everyone, provided they are using the original tire size - and that's printed there as well.
"Thoughts on replaceing tires after so many years instead of going by remaining tread depth?"
Actually you need to consider both!
Tread depth affects wet and snow traction, so this is obviously a safety consideration.
But the age of a tire should be considered in terns of durability. Obviously the older the tire gets, the more deterioration due to the elements. But there also is an effect due to the gradual breakdown of rubber and organic material.
This kind of brings me to the cracking issue.
Cracks in rubber are part of the normal aging process and to be expected. So small, superficial cracks in the tread grooves or on the sidewall should not be cause for alarm.
HOWEVER, if the cracks are deep enough to reveal reinforcing materials such as the steel belts or the polyester plies should prompt an IMMEDIATE trip to the tire store!
If you happen to see cracks on the face of the tread - the part that touches the road surface - this indicates the tire's durability is near the end and should be replaced.
Most tire shops and car dealerships I have dealt with just set everything at 35 psi. If there's a default rule, that seems to be it (35 is the max on many sidewalls, which may explain its origin).
I have come to accept that 35lb pressure as a very good choice for all my vehicles (except motorcycles). It is like a universal default, you might say.
I've always thought that run flat tires seemed like a major extravagance, and maybe they are, but an accident in my home town (Louisville, KY) a few days ago made me rethink that. Basically three teenagers were driving in a Subaru Legacy (apparently not speeding and no drugs or alcohol involved) when one of their tires blew out completely. The driver lost control of the car and went into the oncoming traffic. All three teenagers were killed, even though they were wearing seatbelts, as was the occupant of the car coming the other way that hit them. Of course there are horrific accidents every day, but this seems like one that would have been prevented with run flat tires. Or, am I wrong about that? Can run flat tires still catastrophically blow?
Also, how common is it for regular tires to blow out like that? Although no speeding or alcohol appear to have been involved, it's possible the tires were past their useful life and/or not properly inflated.
Still, even if run flat tires cost--well, what do they cost?--$150 each?--that might be an investment that could save your life (and someone else's) in a worst case scenario. Is that true, or am I overreacting? I always buy good quality (50k-60k) radial tires from manufacturers like Goodyear, and don't mind at all spending up to $300 for a set of 4, but perhaps I should up my tire budget.
If you take care of your tires, it's very unlikely that one will blow out. In the event of a blowout, a car with stability control will be much easier to retain control of than one without it. I couldn't care less about whether a car has or doesn't have run-flats, but I do want a car with stability control.
Thanks for the pointers on the TRA and ETRTO Yearbooks. I'll have to check out the local (state) college library - they have a decent auto repair/collision training track, so they'll probably have it. (Then again, I won't hold my breath, as I don't see it listed in a quick search of their online card catalog...)
"The car is a '93 Tercel and the current tire size is 185/70/13. Thanks."
My book only goes back to 1995, but for that year (and probably yours, too) the original tire size was 155/80R13 with an inflation of 34 psi front and 32 psi rear. Please check this against your placard as this info is critical to the rest of the calculation.
That means the front tires can carry a maximum load of 948# and the rears 926#.
To carry the same load a 185/70R13 needs 24psi front and 23 psi. So 28 is a good value - +4 and +5.
BTW I don't recommend lower than 26 psi for passenger car tires. I think that you can generate sufficient side forces in emergency maneuvers to unseat the beads - and bad things can happen after that!
In a regular tire (non-RunFlat), if the tire loses inflation pressure the beads can become unseated and when that happens, the rim can dig into the pavement and over you go!
In a RunFlat, the sidewalls are so stiff that even without inflation pressure it is difficult to unseat the beads. That's one of the reasons why it takes upgraded mounting equipment to mount and dismount these things!
So IMHO, there is a MAJOR safety reason to use them. However, it does come at a price.
How often does a blow out happen in a regular tire? Not often, and you have to be careful because the term is used much more widely than is appropriate.
Technically a "blow out" is a nearly instantaneous loss of inflation pressure - which means that impacting an object is the most likely cause. This means that punctures usually don't count. It also means that tread detachments also don't count.
RunFlat tires can fail due to an impact, but the stiff sidewalls mean the tire doesn't deteriorate nearly as fast, even if the sidewall is split (which is also less likely to happen with RinFlats)
From a technical perspective, I like them, but the TMPS's (required) react too slowly IMO. Since RunFlats need to be replaced when they are run flat, and I expect people to ignore this requirement due to the replacement cost, unless the warning light is there from the moment of deflation as a reminder of how long the tire was flat.
BTW I don't recommend lower than 26 psi for passenger car tires.
I wouldn't, either. When determining a number to use, it's important to leave a margin of error. When the outside temperature gets colder, the pressure in the tires will drop, and they will probably need to have air added--a little extra inflation pressure is a good thing. Not to mention, there is always the potential for a tire gauge to be off so that the tires actually have less pressure than indicated.
28 psi is also pretty close to the 85% figure as well. The 185's have a max inflation pressure of 35, so 85% ends up being 29.75. So I guees I'll keep the pressure at 28 or 29.
Yours is a good example. The original tires on your vehicle, which were supposed to be inflated to 34/32, could say either 35 psi or 44 psi on the sidewall depending on who manufactured the tire. 85% would be 30 or 37 (???) But the size you are using now - which has a larger load capacity - can also say 35 or 44 psi depending on who manufactured the tire and as I calculated 23 and 24 psi for the same load capacity - 30 or 37 doesn't make sense!
85% is merely the math conversion of the answer you gave.!? Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load. I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again.
Just a thought, I have known about the tire publications of which you cited and speak, available to the trade, for a very long time. As an observation, of ALL the tire shops I have ever been to over 44 years, while a shop or owner, manager, etc. might have it or use it or even have access to it, for some reason the knowledge does not hit the actual person/s who "turns the wrenches" so to speak. So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication.
I mean I consider it a good shop when the staff uses the actual lifting adapters for the correct cars, doesnt use an impact gun (with 200-100#s of torque) to bolt up the lug nuts, but a torque wrench. It would also seem that since it is a business, the air/ nitrogen systems psi measuring gauges should be calibrated like weights and measures. But because they are not, I personally have had tire gauges for a long long time and take measures (cold) the day after going to a shop. Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)
I was more impressed with Costco, for they used the correct lifting adapters, used an impact gun to REMOVE lug nuts. A TORQUE wrench to FASTEN lug nuts. They even checked a computer and insisted on the correct PSI !!!! The guys that jocky your cars around dont even peel rubber in the parking lot before and after servicing your car!!?? Life is good. However, sometimes it is a trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig.
I've gotten similar service at Wal-Mart Tire & Lube Express. The wait is usually bad, but when you come in for the free rotation and balance, they check and set the air pressure and measure the tread depth of the tires, and give you that information on the printout. (They did put the "default" 35 psi in my Altima's tires, instead of the manufacturer recommended 29, but I was also using a plus zero size tire.)
"85% is merely the math conversion of the answer you gave.!? "
No, it is not the mathematical equivalent: A) The 85% rule's starting point can be either 35 pis or 44 psi (for P metric standard load tires) and that's determined by the way the law is read, not the way the tire is designed. Different vehicle manufacturers have different philosphies regarding what gets put on the placard.
So what gets put on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer. He considers many things and load on the tire is the primary thing. He could go with the "large tire with low inflation" or "small tire / high inflation" and still get the same load capacity.
Using Bottger's car as an example, Toyota could have used either of the 2 sizes (this has happened before), and chosen to use the inflation pressures as I calculated. I'm going to have to assume that Toyota knows what it is doing and what is specified on the placard doesn't follow the 85% rule for either of the 2 possible pressures to be written on the sidewall.
"Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load."
Since this is the original tire size, no research is needed. Follow the placard.
I will rarely over-rule a vehicle manufacturer as they've spent a lot of the time thinking and testing what they put there and if it's wrong there will be a bunch of lawsuits!
"I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again."
I'm curious why you would reverse the front/ rear pressure split. That would cause the vehicle to have less understeer, but at the adhesion limit might result in the rear breaking loose first - and I would think that never is a good thing to happen.
"Just a thought..........So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication."
Ah, but they do benefit!
First there are standards for a great many things - bolts, for example. And the guy on the shop floor doesn't have to know what kind he has so long as he is just taking them on and off.
However, if he breaks one, then he needs to be able to interpret the markings on the head of the bolt, so he gets the right one. But he doesn't need to know WHY and even WHAT the standard is - just be able to read the markings.
The same is true for tires. If the guy on the shop floor can read the placard and he puts the same size tire on, he doesn't need to know why and what the standard is. What could be simpler? Follow the placard!
However, if he wants to change tire sizes - well, that's re-engineering the vehicle, and this is a bit too complex for the inexperienced wrench turner - he should leave that to other, more knowledgeable folks.
"I mean I consider it a good shop.........Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)"
Unfortunately, many folks on the tire shop floor level are new to the working environment and / or just have never been properly trained. This is somewhat aggravated by the constant pressure to reduce costs. Sometimes this cost pressure results in "shortcuts" - Impact wrenches and calibrations being among them.
"I was more impressed with Costco........trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig "
I should mention that what they look up in the computer is the information that on the placard. Why they don't just look at the placard - I don't know. Perhaps there are updates or warnings that are specific to certain vehicle models.
But one of the things that comes along with the way that Costco does things is that they will not install a tire with a lower speed rating than came originally. Some folks find this more than just annoying! Personally, I think they are right - and that's a whole 'nother discussion!
""85% is merely the math conversion of the answer you gave.!? "
No, it is not the mathematical equivalent: A) The 85% rule's starting point can be either 35 pis or 44 psi (for P metric standard load tires) and that's determined by the way the law is read, not the way the tire is designed. Different vehicle manufacturers have different philosphies regarding what gets put on the placard. "
It is either the mathematic equivalent OR even you don't believe what you have said.?? Or your calculation is incorrect (which I personally do not think is) A .yes, I have been saying all along the 85% rules starting points ARE 35/44/51. So I am glad you agree with what I am saying!? I do understand you disagree with the 85% concept. B. For example one oem tire that comes with a max tire wall pressure is Michelin at 51 PSI. So while I put 38 /36 psi in on 44 psi max sidewalls, if I had the Michelin's on the same car I would put 44 f / 42 r psi. In fact the Michelins come oem on a slightly upscale model the GLS (I know that you know this has more to do with stuff like sunroof, leather seats cup holders etc ) vs the GL, it DOES gives a higher psi on the placard!??
"So what gets put on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer. He considers many things and load on the tire is the primary thing. He could go with the "large tire with low inflation" or "small tire / high inflation" and still get the same load capacity.
Using Bottger's car as an example, Toyota could have used either of the 2 sizes (this has happened before), and chosen to use the inflation pressures as I calculated. I'm going to have to assume that Toyota knows what it is doing and what is specified on the placard doesn't follow the 85% rule for either of the 2 possible pressures to be written on the sidewall. "
I usually assume the oem either knows what it is doing and/or stands behind its technical data. That is another reason why I was a bit vexed by one/some of your earlier comments i.e, that load has "absolutely" nothing to do with the PSI ratings", especially when the placard was EXTREMELY clear between half load and full load (difference that is)
"Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load."
Since this is the original tire size, no research is needed. Follow the placard.
I will rarely over-rule a vehicle manufacturer as they've spent a lot of the time thinking and testing what they put there and if it's wrong there will be a bunch of lawsuits!
"I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again."
I'm curious why you would reverse the front/ rear pressure split. That would cause the vehicle to have less understeer, but at the adhesion limit might result in the rear breaking loose first - and I would think that never is a good thing to happen.
Yes to have the vehicle have less than the massive understeer that is designed into the car. It hangs very well at the limits of adhesion. Will 26 in the /fronts and rears prevent the rear end breaking loose over 38F 36 R? Absolutely not!! Actually for this particular car the 38/36 seems to be the sweet spot in terms of performance and handling for this car. Also I tend to run at closer to autobahn speeds and a tad more pressure seems to flex and heat less. Another spin off is the tread life seems to be a lot longer than what other folks with the same car and tire combo seem to get.
"Just a thought..........So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication."
Ah, but they do benefit!
First there are standards for a great many things - bolts, for example. And the guy on the shop floor doesn't have to know what kind he has so long as he is just taking them on and off.
However, if he breaks one, then he needs to be able to interpret the markings on the head of the bolt, so he gets the right one. But he doesn't need to know WHY and even WHAT the standard is - just be able to read the markings.
The same is true for tires. If the guy on the shop floor can read the placard and he puts the same size tire on, he doesn't need to know why and what the standard is. What could be simpler? Follow the placard!
In fact I didn't anticipate your advice to be any different in this case. However
Having come out of nuclear weapons design and maintainance, I find that attitude or reasoning a tad scary. But I would agree with you that tires, etc are WAY much less technically exacting. In fact when you compare it with the art and science of motorcycle tires and suspension, WE are in the stone age.
However, if he wants to change tire sizes - well, that's re-engineering the vehicle, and this is a bit too complex for the inexperienced wrench turner - he should leave that to other, more knowledgeable folks. I would agree, one needs to have reasonable faith the calculations are correct and also the RIGHT calculations.
"I mean I consider it a good shop.........Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)"
Unfortunately, many folks on the tire shop floor level are new to the working environment and / or just have never been properly trained. This is somewhat aggravated by the constant pressure to reduce costs. Sometimes this cost pressure results in "shortcuts" - Impact wrenches and calibrations being among them.
Actually your experience and take and my observations cut to the point I have been making. It is harder for consumers to benefit with so many obstacles which you are acquainted with at a professional level and me as a consumer OBSERVE . So if anything if the guy does put 35/42 psi in the tire "HE'S HELPING!!!!!???"" And is a minor miracle indeed that the consumer even gets THAT!!!
"I was more impressed with Costco........trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig "
I should mention that what they look up in the computer is the information that on the placard. Why they don't just look at the placard - I don't know. Perhaps there are updates or warnings that are specific to certain vehicle models.
Well for sure it is their data stream, but gleaned from oem sources. I think they follow their data stream so in a court of law they can show a logical basis for their actions.
But one of the things that comes along with the way that Costco does things is that they will not install a tire with a lower speed rating than came originally. Some folks find this more than just annoying! Personally, I think they are right - and that's a whole 'nother discussion!
Hope this helps.
Like I have said I was impressed with a lot of the principles/STANDARDS, I see them operating in accordance with.
One variable that I watch is tire tread wear. Which or what in your opinion will give you longer tread wear: higher vs lower? Given that: what are the degrees of separation.
In my experience, raidal tires are much less sensitive to tire pressure when it comes to tread wear. Maybe if you have it cranked up to the max. pressure on a 44 psi or 51 psi tire, the center will wear out first, but I've never seen any strange wear patterns at 30-35 psi. Also, I would guess that a radial tire would have to be dangerously underinflated before you would see increased wear on the edges.
My experience applies to the tires I have owned--other tires may be more or less sensitive to pressure.
My personal opinion is that the radials on FWD cars are sensitive to low pressure, e.g. my car recommends 30. If I used 30 and was slow to rotate tires, the edges wear more rapidly than 32/33 or 35 I sometimes used.
Well that has been my experience also. You and I also have experience with so called "bias" belt tires, i.e., pre radials. So using those experiences as a backdrop, radial tire tread wear is almost a gimme.
I also have not experienced strange wear patterns at 30/35 psi. Although the min for me for a lot of miles has been 35 psi (275 70-16's). I normally get app 90-110k miles from sets of Michelin LTX's. 400 UTOQ.I have one with Bridgestone Dueler AT REVO's. the verdict is still out as they are very new.
I got 56k from a set of GY Eagle F1 Supercars on 5/32in or 11,200 per 1/32. I changed them out early (still had a projected 11k miles on them) because of too much fun with a neg camber setting, which if you are not consistently on them wear out the inner edges a tad faster. I also run 36/38 fronts and 36/34 rears. 220 UTOQ. On realigned front wheels, the wear on the new tires seems to be app 12-13k per 1/32 in.
Am also running 38/36 on a Jetta TDI and project 100-120k for app 16-16.5k oer 1/32 in of wear. 360 UTOQ.
Oddly, a set of Dunlop SP 20 FEs, oem on a Honda Civic 360 UTOQ seem on track to only go app 36-40k. This is on the lightest vehicle we have and it also happens to be a 51 psi tire run at 35 psi (100 mph Honda recommended pressure) It is a daily commuter which up until a year ago the very same commute was done by the Jetta TDI.
"Which or what in your opinion will give you longer tread wear: higher vs lower?"
Higher inflation pressure.
Higher inflation pressure stiffens the tire causing less movement as the tread goes through the footprint.
I haven't actually done the experiments, but my gut tells me that even if higher inflation causes the center to wear out first, the overall effect is still longer wear life.
"Given that: what are the degrees of separation."
If you mean degrees of freedom - meaning what factors also contribute to the tire wear equation, here's my list (in order) of the most influential factors when it comes to tire wear:
1) Turns per mile (call this city vs country driving) 2) Alignment 3) Driving style (agressive vs gentle) 4) UTQG Treadwear Rating 5) Inflation pressure 6) Road Surface
If you'll notice - the first 3 items are things that when an individual driver does a comparison, he makes no effort to control. As a result, the general public thinks that the rating somehow equates to a given mileage - and when a guy who fits the Pareto Principle (80% of the problem is caused by 20%), he wonders why he isn't getting the same mileage as his neighbor (or as predicted). That's why I go back to the first three items when I talk to these folks (after I discuss inflation which IMHO is the most important and least appreciated aspect of tires.).
Turns per mile and Driving style tie together in my mind.
I see lots of drivers who turn square corners in this area rapidly which really scrubs the tires on FWD and wears the sides rapidly. Many also accelerate during the turn or after the half point.
Other drivers turn more gently but still at a speed and accelerate after the tires are nearly centered again and won't scrub the edges with more force.
I actually agree and have read about, experienced and observed what you have posted to be true.
In regards to the TP, that is partially the reason why I use higher rather than lower TP.s (not to draw fingernails across a chalkboard for you ) but a good reason for the use of 85% of max tire wall pressure as a point of departure. So in effect, you might agree that is why I am seeing longer treadwear . Also I am aware of those factors you list and probably a lot of what I do is consistent with some ,if not all of the factors you cite (to varying degrees of course.)
I still am vexed by the much faster wear of the Honda Civic VP's Dunlop's tires.
1. Can it be Dunlop makes "faster wearing tires"? "Crappy "if you want to cut to the chase.
2. Honda Civic's tend to eat tires?
3.Or could it be : I am not running 85% of 51 psi or 43/44 psi?
Here are my top choices for replacement when needed, Which one would you recommend? If several, in order of choice. Or others that are not on this list?
GY Triple Tread T GY Comfort Tread T Toyo 800 Ultra T BFG Traction T/A-T Bridgestone Turanza LS-T Kumho Touring A/S 795 (S) Yokohama AVID H4S (H)
FWD dynamics are of interest to me, since 2/5 cars I have are front wheel drive, I am going to guess that the majority of compact/small cars are front wheel drive, front engine, so this might be of potential interest to the high % of owners of these cars.
The static weight distribution of the VW Jetta is app 60/40. of a 2950# car. This translates to 1770#s front/2=885# per side. Rear would tend to be 1180#'s/2=590#'s per side. My guess also is during normal operations the weight transfered to the front can be a more normal 80/20 to as high as 90/10. So it is not a stretch to say the fronts bear the brunt of the steering, handling, stopping, weight transfer, loads during normal operation. It is also obvious the front tires would tend to wear more. So things like alignment, rotation and drivers style become important factors in tread life.
Did a little research on the gooyear tripletred tire. what a unique and awesome tire.Are they really all they are cracked up to be? Are they worth the steep price?would they work well with my buick regal with performance package?any suggestions,comments. thx.
My point was with RWD the corning wear of front wheels smooths off much better on the rears with driving force and a little weight. On FWD the extra cornering wear for speedsters (?) doesn't get smoothed out of rears due to less weight, no sanding effect from drive forces, and the extra camber changes or strange wear patterns the rears can give.
I would not disagree in that it is the sound of one hand clapping! It is as much a structural problem as a consequence of structural design. So one compensation is 4/5 tire cross rotations. In one of mine, the REARS cross and the fronts go straight back . In another, the oem recommendation is front to rear and rear to front, but the technical data hints at the right front passenger side (components )wearing slightly faster (probably due to torque steer). So I also cross the REARS (fronts straight back) using 5 tires. Both oem's recommend 10k rotation intervals.
This is as much to EVEN out the wear as well as doing a weight redistribution.
So while this may be out of the topic of tires, using double weigh springs in the rear and standard oem shocks can really offer better compliance and performance at a pretty inexpensive price. It is probably one of the "sleeper mods" that can be done on the VW Jetta TDI. On the Honda side most of the aftermarket goes with BONE and BRAIN stem jarring, horridly stiff suspension "upgrades". EXPENSIVE usually to boot! I think part of it is to make you FEEL as if you are going faster.
thanks, that helps. the superficial cracks are on the face of the tread that touches the road..not in the tread grooves. When bought last year the car had Firestones on the front ...and Goodyears on the back. Looked to have about the same mileage...but the Goodyears don't have the superfical cracks. It seemed odd at the time of purchase brcause the car only had 54k miles. So, the current set of tires would have replaced the originals.When I asked the salesmen he said the original owner probably just got the other set on sale or similar nonsense. I suspected the dealership may have swapped the better set out for another.Don't know the quality of these tires. But, the Goodyear tire was the Integrity and the Firestone was the FR680.
Just went outside with flashlight imidaz...I didn't see anything with DOT...but did see an oval with these numbers 02 74 85. Hopefully that would mean a manufacture date of 2002 and not 1985 :confuse:
I had to get to a scout meeting earlier so I didn't go look at the format. On my Michelins there is a DOT then block of 4 letters and numbers, another block of 4 letters and numbers, and then 4 numbers. E.G., 4102 means 41st week of 2002. On my other tires it's 1300 meaning 13th week 2000; no wonder they're showing slight cracking between the treads.
The new Michelins are on backwards (does that make a difference? Capriracer?) and don't have the DOT on the outside and I didn't crawl under to see if it's on the inside.
Tires are the single most important thing that effects the ride, handling, and braking of a car. This is an area I do not recommend compromising too much. $300 for a set of 4 tires is a very minimal tire budget. I generally spend from $125 to $225 per tire, depending on the vehicle and the tire options out there. I always research the purchase throughally, read reviews, etc.
I don't know how this helps you, but I've never had a set of Goodyear tires I've liked. Goodyear may be famous for their racing tires, but it seems to me they devote all of their focus on racing tires, and not so much on passenger car tires. My guess is with a little research, you'll be able to find a better set of tires for less money, but I could be wrong.
"The new Michelins are on backwards (does that make a difference? Capriracer?) and don't have the DOT on the outside and I didn't crawl under to see if it's on the inside."
It doesn't make a difference unless one side is a white wall or there is a note on the sidewall that says "This Side Out" (or words to that effect).
I just purchased a new 2005 Focus Wagon SES. Now that winter is coming, I'd like to put snow tires on the car, but never having had a FWD car before, I'm not sure if I need them just on the front, or all around. Comments?
The consensus is to put snow tires on all four wheels, not just two. As I recall from past posts, if you put traction tires on the front of a FWD car, you may be passed by the rear end in hard braking. If you put them on the rear, you're probably safer, but you may sit and spin on the black ice at an intersection.
The pros in here will have some better reasons to offer as well.
I checked CR's tire review. I noticed the Sears version of the Harmony with less tread depth and shorter mileage got rated higher than the Harmony. I believe it had better traction, they said, on wet pavement. I'm skeptical of that outcome. But it looks like they're trying to be somewhat impartial.
It's down to two tires for my wife's 2000 Honda Acoord EX 4door 4-cyl. (195/65/55R, H rated):
Bridgestone Potenza G009 or Cooper Lifeliner Touring SLE (H rated)
We live in Connecticut, so weather (rain, snow, sleet, slush) is always an issue in winter. Wife does 45 minutes to an hour each day of mostly highway driving to her job in NY.
I am kinda at a loss cause there aren't many reviews online for the Cooper (TireRack doesn't sell them). At TireRack, the Bridgestone seems to get good reviews...
They are both about the same price at the various dealers around here....so not sure which way to go.
I posted a few days ago about superficial cracks in my front Firestone tires. It was suggested I check DOT to find when the tire was manufactured. The left front tire did not have any DOT ...it is a Firestone FR 680 (treadwear 400, traction B, Temp C) I checked the right front tire today. It is a Firestone FR 440 with no tread or traction rating that I could see. But, it's DOT was HYM3 4FA 439(the 439 number was stamped into the tire)
So, can anyone out there decipher what the DOT number means? And if these 2 tires are compatiable...with the cracking on the tread and an indentation running down the right front tire, I'm thinking of getting rid of these suckers. Even though they have about 30k left of tread.
The last group of 4 digits is what you need. There should be 4 digits and the first two are the week and the last two are the year. So yours is 199X and 43rd week means October approx. If it was 1999 then your tires are almost 6 years old. DOT code on the other tire is probably inside.
Comments
I know where to find the formula, but it's so complex you can't even write it correctly using normal script like we have on this web site. That's why they have books of these tables. But these books are expensive (over $50) so it just doesn't make sense to have one unless you are in the business.
Could you list the pertinent info on some of these books (title/author/publisher), so that I could find them at the library? Too expensive for me to buy for a quick look up, but that's why I have a library card. ;-)
It's not really complicated if you have the tools.
So allow me to help see if the 28 psi makes sense. What I'll need is the year, make and, model of your car (so I can look up the original tire size and inflation pressure, which will also be on the vehicle placard) and the tire size you are using now.
There are several, but the real sources are: The Tire and Rim Association (TRA) Yearbook, and The European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO) Yearbook. These are the yearly publication by the standards organizations (so the organization is the author and the publisher)
BUT!!!!
I doubt if ANY library has these, except maybe for some automotive technical library. Every so often you'll find some of the load tables publisher on some web sites - usually tire manufacturers.
However, if you need assistance, I'm more than happy to help.
What is written on the vehicle placard (by the vehicle manufacturer) DOES relate to the load curves - and, of course they determine what gets printed there by referring to these books we've been discussing.
But what is on the sidewall of a tire is dictated by law. It's been a while since I actually read the pertinent passage, but at the time I was trying to understand why there was a difference in what was printed by different tire manufacturers. If I remember correctly the passage was something like:
must have the maximum load and inflation pressure.
Most tire manufacturers interpret this to mean the absolute max pressure, but some interpret this to mean the pressure the corresponds to the maximum load.
Anyway, my point is that for a given tire size - which has the same load curve regardless of tire manufacturer - the max pressure printed on the sidewall may be different. While the max pressure is great information, it is not pertinent to what the proper inflation pressure is for a given vehicle. That info is on the vehicle placard - which makes it pretty easy for everyone, provided they are using the original tire size - and that's printed there as well.
Hope this helps.
Actually you need to consider both!
Tread depth affects wet and snow traction, so this is obviously a safety consideration.
But the age of a tire should be considered in terns of durability. Obviously the older the tire gets, the more deterioration due to the elements. But there also is an effect due to the gradual breakdown of rubber and organic material.
This kind of brings me to the cracking issue.
Cracks in rubber are part of the normal aging process and to be expected. So small, superficial cracks in the tread grooves or on the sidewall should not be cause for alarm.
HOWEVER, if the cracks are deep enough to reveal reinforcing materials such as the steel belts or the polyester plies should prompt an IMMEDIATE trip to the tire store!
If you happen to see cracks on the face of the tread - the part that touches the road surface - this indicates the tire's durability is near the end and should be replaced.
Hope this helps.
Also, how common is it for regular tires to blow out like that? Although no speeding or alcohol appear to have been involved, it's possible the tires were past their useful life and/or not properly inflated.
Still, even if run flat tires cost--well, what do they cost?--$150 each?--that might be an investment that could save your life (and someone else's) in a worst case scenario. Is that true, or am I overreacting? I always buy good quality (50k-60k) radial tires from manufacturers like Goodyear, and don't mind at all spending up to $300 for a set of 4, but perhaps I should up my tire budget.
Any thoughts?
Thanks, Ben
My book only goes back to 1995, but for that year (and probably yours, too) the original tire size was 155/80R13 with an inflation of 34 psi front and 32 psi rear. Please check this against your placard as this info is critical to the rest of the calculation.
That means the front tires can carry a maximum load of 948# and the rears 926#.
To carry the same load a 185/70R13 needs 24psi front and 23 psi. So 28 is a good value - +4 and +5.
BTW I don't recommend lower than 26 psi for passenger car tires. I think that you can generate sufficient side forces in emergency maneuvers to unseat the beads - and bad things can happen after that!
Hope this helps.
In a RunFlat, the sidewalls are so stiff that even without inflation pressure it is difficult to unseat the beads. That's one of the reasons why it takes upgraded mounting equipment to mount and dismount these things!
So IMHO, there is a MAJOR safety reason to use them. However, it does come at a price.
How often does a blow out happen in a regular tire? Not often, and you have to be careful because the term is used much more widely than is appropriate.
Technically a "blow out" is a nearly instantaneous loss of inflation pressure - which means that impacting an object is the most likely cause. This means that punctures usually don't count. It also means that tread detachments also don't count.
RunFlat tires can fail due to an impact, but the stiff sidewalls mean the tire doesn't deteriorate nearly as fast, even if the sidewall is split (which is also less likely to happen with RinFlats)
From a technical perspective, I like them, but the TMPS's (required) react too slowly IMO. Since RunFlats need to be replaced when they are run flat, and I expect people to ignore this requirement due to the replacement cost, unless the warning light is there from the moment of deflation as a reminder of how long the tire was flat.
Hope this helps.
I wouldn't, either. When determining a number to use, it's important to leave a margin of error. When the outside temperature gets colder, the pressure in the tires will drop, and they will probably need to have air added--a little extra inflation pressure is a good thing. Not to mention, there is always the potential for a tire gauge to be off so that the tires actually have less pressure than indicated.
Yours is a good example. The original tires on your vehicle, which were supposed to be inflated to 34/32, could say either 35 psi or 44 psi on the sidewall depending on who manufactured the tire. 85% would be 30 or 37 (???) But the size you are using now - which has a larger load capacity - can also say 35 or 44 psi depending on who manufactured the tire and as I calculated 23 and 24 psi for the same load capacity - 30 or 37 doesn't make sense!
Hope this helps.
Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load. I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again.
Just a thought, I have known about the tire publications of which you cited and speak, available to the trade, for a very long time. As an observation, of ALL the tire shops I have ever been to over 44 years, while a shop or owner, manager, etc. might have it or use it or even have access to it, for some reason the knowledge does not hit the actual person/s who "turns the wrenches" so to speak. So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication.
I mean I consider it a good shop when the staff uses the actual lifting adapters for the correct cars, doesnt use an impact gun (with 200-100#s of torque) to bolt up the lug nuts, but a torque wrench. It would also seem that since it is a business, the air/ nitrogen systems psi measuring gauges should be calibrated like weights and measures. But because they are not, I personally have had tire gauges for a long long time and take measures (cold) the day after going to a shop. Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)
I was more impressed with Costco, for they used the correct lifting adapters, used an impact gun to REMOVE lug nuts. A TORQUE wrench to FASTEN lug nuts. They even checked a computer and insisted on the correct PSI !!!! The guys that jocky your cars around dont even peel rubber in the parking lot before and after servicing your car!!?? Life is good. However, sometimes it is a trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig.
"85% is merely the math conversion of the answer you gave.!? "
No, it is not the mathematical equivalent: A) The 85% rule's starting point can be either 35 pis or 44 psi (for P metric standard load tires) and that's determined by the way the law is read, not the way the tire is designed.
So what gets put on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer. He considers many things and load on the tire is the primary thing. He could go with the "large tire with low inflation" or "small tire / high inflation" and still get the same load capacity.
Using Bottger's car as an example, Toyota could have used either of the 2 sizes (this has happened before), and chosen to use the inflation pressures as I calculated. I'm going to have to assume that Toyota knows what it is doing and what is specified on the placard doesn't follow the 85% rule for either of the 2 possible pressures to be written on the sidewall.
"Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load."
Since this is the original tire size, no research is needed. Follow the placard.
I will rarely over-rule a vehicle manufacturer as they've spent a lot of the time thinking and testing what they put there and if it's wrong there will be a bunch of lawsuits!
"I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again."
I'm curious why you would reverse the front/ rear pressure split. That would cause the vehicle to have less understeer, but at the adhesion limit might result in the rear breaking loose first - and I would think that never is a good thing to happen.
"Just a thought..........So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication."
Ah, but they do benefit!
First there are standards for a great many things - bolts, for example. And the guy on the shop floor doesn't have to know what kind he has so long as he is just taking them on and off.
However, if he breaks one, then he needs to be able to interpret the markings on the head of the bolt, so he gets the right one. But he doesn't need to know WHY and even WHAT the standard is - just be able to read the markings.
The same is true for tires. If the guy on the shop floor can read the placard and he puts the same size tire on, he doesn't need to know why and what the standard is. What could be simpler? Follow the placard!
However, if he wants to change tire sizes - well, that's re-engineering the vehicle, and this is a bit too complex for the inexperienced wrench turner - he should leave that to other, more knowledgeable folks.
"I mean I consider it a good shop.........Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)"
Unfortunately, many folks on the tire shop floor level are new to the working environment and / or just have never been properly trained. This is somewhat aggravated by the constant pressure to reduce costs. Sometimes this cost pressure results in "shortcuts" - Impact wrenches and calibrations being among them.
"I was more impressed with Costco........trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig "
I should mention that what they look up in the computer is the information that on the placard. Why they don't just look at the placard - I don't know. Perhaps there are updates or warnings that are specific to certain vehicle models.
But one of the things that comes along with the way that Costco does things is that they will not install a tire with a lower speed rating than came originally. Some folks find this more than just annoying! Personally, I think they are right - and that's a whole 'nother discussion!
Hope this helps.
No, it is not the mathematical equivalent: A) The 85% rule's starting point can be either 35 pis or 44 psi (for P metric standard load tires) and that's determined by the way the law is read, not the way the tire is designed.
It is either the mathematic equivalent OR even you don't believe what you have said.?? Or your calculation is incorrect (which I personally do not think is) A .yes, I have been saying all along the 85% rules starting points ARE 35/44/51. So I am glad you agree with what I am saying!? I do understand you disagree with the 85% concept. B. For example one oem tire that comes with a max tire wall pressure is Michelin at 51 PSI. So while I put 38 /36 psi in on 44 psi max sidewalls, if I had the Michelin's on the same car I would put 44 f / 42 r psi. In fact the Michelins come oem on a slightly upscale model the GLS (I know that you know this has more to do with stuff like sunroof, leather seats cup holders etc ) vs the GL, it DOES gives a higher psi on the placard!??
"So what gets put on the placard is set by the vehicle manufacturer. He considers many things and load on the tire is the primary thing. He could go with the "large tire with low inflation" or "small tire / high inflation" and still get the same load capacity.
Using Bottger's car as an example, Toyota could have used either of the 2 sizes (this has happened before), and chosen to use the inflation pressures as I calculated. I'm going to have to assume that Toyota knows what it is doing and what is specified on the placard doesn't follow the 85% rule for either of the 2 possible pressures to be written on the sidewall. "
I usually assume the oem either knows what it is doing and/or stands behind its technical data. That is another reason why I was a bit vexed by one/some of your earlier comments i.e, that load has "absolutely" nothing to do with the PSI ratings", especially when the placard was EXTREMELY clear between half load and full load (difference that is)
"Also if you have time, I asked in a prior post if you would research a 2003 TDI Jetta, 195 65 15 H. Current placard indicates 26 F/R half load and 30 F 41 R full load."
Since this is the original tire size, no research is needed. Follow the placard.
I will rarely over-rule a vehicle manufacturer as they've spent a lot of the time thinking and testing what they put there and if it's wrong there will be a bunch of lawsuits!
"I have been running 38-36 f and 36-34 r for 67k miles. Thanks again."
I'm curious why you would reverse the front/ rear pressure split. That would cause the vehicle to have less understeer, but at the adhesion limit might result in the rear breaking loose first - and I would think that never is a good thing to happen.
Yes to have the vehicle have less than the massive understeer that is designed into the car. It hangs very well at the limits of adhesion. Will 26 in the /fronts and rears prevent the rear end breaking loose over 38F 36 R? Absolutely not!! Actually for this particular car the 38/36 seems to be the sweet spot in terms of performance and handling for this car. Also I tend to run at closer to autobahn speeds and a tad more pressure seems to flex and heat less. Another spin off is the tread life seems to be a lot longer than what other folks with the same car and tire combo seem to get.
"Just a thought..........So in effect the overwhelming majority of consumers really do not benefit from the information, if my experiences are any indication."
Ah, but they do benefit!
First there are standards for a great many things - bolts, for example. And the guy on the shop floor doesn't have to know what kind he has so long as he is just taking them on and off.
However, if he breaks one, then he needs to be able to interpret the markings on the head of the bolt, so he gets the right one. But he doesn't need to know WHY and even WHAT the standard is - just be able to read the markings.
The same is true for tires. If the guy on the shop floor can read the placard and he puts the same size tire on, he doesn't need to know why and what the standard is. What could be simpler? Follow the placard!
In fact I didn't anticipate your advice to be any different in this case. However
Having come out of nuclear weapons design and maintainance, I find that attitude or reasoning a tad scary. But I would agree with you that tires, etc are WAY much less technically exacting.
However, if he wants to change tire sizes - well, that's re-engineering the vehicle, and this is a bit too complex for the inexperienced wrench turner - he should leave that to other, more knowledgeable folks. I would agree, one needs to have reasonable faith the calculations are correct and also the RIGHT calculations.
"I mean I consider it a good shop.........Almost 9 of 10 times, the pressures vary and/or different from what they said it should be. (usually 35 psi or 42 psi)"
Unfortunately, many folks on the tire shop floor level are new to the working environment and / or just have never been properly trained. This is somewhat aggravated by the constant pressure to reduce costs. Sometimes this cost pressure results in "shortcuts" - Impact wrenches and calibrations being among them.
Actually your experience and take and my observations cut to the point I have been making. It is harder for consumers to benefit with so many obstacles which you are acquainted with at a professional level and me as a consumer OBSERVE . So if anything if the guy does put 35/42 psi in the tire "HE'S HELPING!!!!!???"" And is a minor miracle indeed that the consumer even gets THAT!!!
"I was more impressed with Costco........trick to get in the cue for the Costco gig "
I should mention that what they look up in the computer is the information that on the placard. Why they don't just look at the placard - I don't know. Perhaps there are updates or warnings that are specific to certain vehicle models.
Well for sure it is their data stream, but gleaned from oem sources. I think they follow their data stream so in a court of law they can show a logical basis for their actions.
But one of the things that comes along with the way that Costco does things is that they will not install a tire with a lower speed rating than came originally. Some folks find this more than just annoying! Personally, I think they are right - and that's a whole 'nother discussion!
Hope this helps.
Like I have said I was impressed with a lot of the principles/STANDARDS, I see them operating in accordance with.
My experience applies to the tires I have owned--other tires may be more or less sensitive to pressure.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I also have not experienced strange wear patterns at 30/35 psi. Although the min for me for a lot of miles has been 35 psi (275 70-16's). I normally get app 90-110k miles from sets of Michelin LTX's. 400 UTOQ.I have one with Bridgestone Dueler AT REVO's. the verdict is still out as they are very new.
I got 56k from a set of GY Eagle F1 Supercars on 5/32in or 11,200 per 1/32. I changed them out early (still had a projected 11k miles on them) because of too much fun with a neg camber setting, which if you are not consistently on them wear out the inner edges a tad faster. I also run 36/38 fronts and 36/34 rears. 220 UTOQ. On realigned front wheels, the wear on the new tires seems to be app 12-13k per 1/32 in.
Am also running 38/36 on a Jetta TDI and project 100-120k for app 16-16.5k oer 1/32 in of wear. 360 UTOQ.
Oddly, a set of Dunlop SP 20 FEs, oem on a Honda Civic 360 UTOQ seem on track to only go app 36-40k. This is on the lightest vehicle we have and it also happens to be a 51 psi tire run at 35 psi (100 mph Honda recommended pressure) It is a daily commuter which up until a year ago the very same commute was done by the Jetta TDI.
Higher inflation pressure.
Higher inflation pressure stiffens the tire causing less movement as the tread goes through the footprint.
I haven't actually done the experiments, but my gut tells me that even if higher inflation causes the center to wear out first, the overall effect is still longer wear life.
"Given that: what are the degrees of separation."
If you mean degrees of freedom - meaning what factors also contribute to the tire wear equation, here's my list (in order) of the most influential factors when it comes to tire wear:
1) Turns per mile (call this city vs country driving)
2) Alignment
3) Driving style (agressive vs gentle)
4) UTQG Treadwear Rating
5) Inflation pressure
6) Road Surface
If you'll notice - the first 3 items are things that when an individual driver does a comparison, he makes no effort to control. As a result, the general public thinks that the rating somehow equates to a given mileage - and when a guy who fits the Pareto Principle (80% of the problem is caused by 20%), he wonders why he isn't getting the same mileage as his neighbor (or as predicted). That's why I go back to the first three items when I talk to these folks (after I discuss inflation which IMHO is the most important and least appreciated aspect of tires.).
Hope this helps.
I see lots of drivers who turn square corners in this area rapidly which really scrubs the tires on FWD and wears the sides rapidly. Many also accelerate during the turn or after the half point.
Other drivers turn more gently but still at a speed and accelerate after the tires are nearly centered again and won't scrub the edges with more force.
I'm visualizing with FWD cars that I've watched.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In regards to the TP, that is partially the reason why I use higher rather than lower TP.s (not to draw fingernails across a chalkboard for you ) but a good reason for the use of 85% of max tire wall pressure as a point of departure. So in effect, you might agree that is why I am seeing longer treadwear . Also I am aware of those factors you list and probably a lot of what I do is consistent with some ,if not all of the factors you cite (to varying degrees of course.)
I still am vexed by the much faster wear of the Honda Civic VP's Dunlop's tires.
1. Can it be Dunlop makes "faster wearing tires"? "Crappy "if you want to cut to the chase.
2. Honda Civic's tend to eat tires?
3.Or could it be : I am not running 85% of 51 psi or 43/44 psi?
Here are my top choices for replacement when needed, Which one would you recommend? If several, in order of choice. Or others that are not on this list?
GY Triple Tread T
GY Comfort Tread T
Toyo 800 Ultra T
BFG Traction T/A-T
Bridgestone Turanza LS-T
Kumho Touring A/S 795 (S)
Yokohama AVID H4S (H)
The static weight distribution of the VW Jetta is app 60/40. of a 2950# car. This translates to 1770#s front/2=885# per side. Rear would tend to be 1180#'s/2=590#'s per side. My guess also is during normal operations the weight transfered to the front can be a more normal 80/20 to as high as 90/10.
So it is not a stretch to say the fronts bear the brunt of the steering, handling, stopping, weight transfer, loads during normal operation. It is also obvious the front tires would tend to wear more. So things like alignment, rotation and drivers style become important factors in tread life.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
This is as much to EVEN out the wear as well as doing a weight redistribution.
So while this may be out of the topic of tires, using double weigh springs in the rear and standard oem shocks can really offer better compliance and performance at a pretty inexpensive price. It is probably one of the "sleeper mods" that can be done on the VW Jetta TDI. On the Honda side most of the aftermarket goes with BONE and BRAIN stem jarring, horridly stiff suspension "upgrades". EXPENSIVE usually to boot! I think part of it is to make you FEEL as if you are going faster.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The new Michelins are on backwards (does that make a difference? Capriracer?) and don't have the DOT on the outside and I didn't crawl under to see if it's on the inside.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It doesn't make a difference unless one side is a white wall or there is a note on the sidewall that says "This Side Out" (or words to that effect).
Also, what brand of snow tires do you suggest?
TIA
Ken
The pros in here will have some better reasons to offer as well.
Check out Snow/Ice winter tires too.
Steve, Host
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
It's down to two tires for my wife's 2000 Honda Acoord EX 4door 4-cyl. (195/65/55R, H rated):
Bridgestone Potenza G009
or
Cooper Lifeliner Touring SLE (H rated)
We live in Connecticut, so weather (rain, snow, sleet, slush) is always an issue in winter. Wife does 45 minutes to an hour each day of mostly highway driving to her job in NY.
I am kinda at a loss cause there aren't many reviews online for the Cooper (TireRack doesn't sell them). At TireRack, the Bridgestone seems to get good reviews...
They are both about the same price at the various dealers around here....so not sure which way to go.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Mike
I checked the right front tire today. It is a Firestone FR 440 with no tread or traction rating that I could see. But, it's DOT was HYM3 4FA 439(the 439 number was stamped into the tire)
So, can anyone out there decipher what the DOT number means? And if these 2 tires are compatiable...with the cracking on the tread and an indentation running down the right front tire, I'm thinking of getting rid of these suckers. Even though they have about 30k left of tread.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,