Hankook to supply OEM Tires to Benz S-class

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I'm sure Mercedes Benz has a reason for choosing the tires they do. And they have every right to choose whatever tire they put on their cars as much as every person who has money chooses what to buy with it. If ya don't like 'em, don't buy 'em.
grin.gif
....

Well said and I completely agree, it should be just that simple.

Either way, having never owned or purchased either a Benz or a Hankook tire it's really not applicable to me.

As for the first world/third world blather, again it's immaterial to me what one wants to consider Hankook. But it could be a good thing if like Hankook seems here, only the headquarters and not the the production and manufacturing facilities are considered. If US based/owned Harbor Freight, Craftsman and Walmart were considered similarly perhaps some of the repetitive hand wringing thread/posts could be eliminated.

In any case I do find it somewhat comical that one could get apoplectic over MB's decision. It's not like they're going to change it because of what's written here anyway.
 
Originally Posted By: stephen9666
I've never heard that definition.

My understanding was always that it originated during the Cold War era:
-1st world, nations allied with the U.S.
-2nd world, nations allied with the Soviets
-3rd world, everything else

But now, First Word commonly refers to the developed countries, which most people would say includes South Korea.

Here's what Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
Quote:
The concept of the First World first originated during the Cold War, involving countries that were aligned with the United States. These countries were largely capitalistic and self-proclaimed democracies. After the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the meaning "First World" took on a new meaning applicable to the times, coming to be largely synonymous with developed countries or highly developed countries (depending on which definition is intended). The concept has a strong evolutionist bias, envisioning "development" as a linear path with Western civilization's industrial and economic advancements as the ultimate goal.


Very interesting. There seems to be some inconsistency - both between the ideas of "New vs Old", and even the definition of "3rd World" in Wikipedia doesn't seem to match its general usage.

If political discussions were allowed, this would make for a good one.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
They're better than Continental!


Actually no, they are not.



Agree. Every tire company makes [censored] tires, mediocre tires, and great tires.


Some companies only make mediocre and [censored] tires. Cooper, Pirelli, and Continental, for example.

Conti's tires are almost never round, lack of quality control.

Cooper tires aren't that spectacular either, even by cheap tire standards. Kumho, Hankook, and Falken do this segment better.

Unfortunately Pirelli trickles F1 down to their street tires.

That said, practically ALL OEM tires aren't really the greatest.

Yay for getting this thread on topic again.
 
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Some companies only make mediocre and [censored] tires. Cooper, Pirelli, and Continental, for example.

Personally, I thought the set of Conti CSC2 were great. YMMV.
 
I had no problems with Continental TS810.
Conti Pro Contact seems decent OE tire on my Focus.

Krzys
 
Originally Posted By: tommygunn


Some companies only make mediocre and [censored] tires. Cooper, Pirelli, and Continental, for example.

Conti's tires are almost never round, lack of quality control.

Cooper tires aren't that spectacular either, even by cheap tire standards. Kumho, Hankook, and Falken do this segment better.



overgeneralized and incorrect IMO.
 
Dailmer Benz can buy whatever tires it thinks it needs regardless of the politics involved. Just like a person here can "reluctantly" buy HF Battery Tester :)
 
Only one experience with Continentals and it was terrible. Car behaved like it was on skis when going through (over) a puddle. Current Michelins on the Charger are about the same if not worse. sets of Hankooks on the G6 (2 summer & 1 winter) and 2 on the G5 (1 each) my son put them on his Mazda 3 as well. I haven't had any issues. All have performed to or past my expectations and requirements.

This doesn't lead me to conclude that Continental and Michelin make garbage and Hankook is awesome. Many OE tires are not great, they are built to a spec and cost for the manufacturer. I personally think Michelin makes excellent tires for the most part, I'm just not willing to pay X% more for tires that may or may not give me Z% more performance that I may or may not use.

As far as DB using Hankooks, I really couldn't care as I will likely never be in the market for that car. If Hankook can supply the tire DB wants at the price they are willing to pay then good for them.
 
I do remember back when Korean quality was often thought to be questionable, and the Koreans were putting on the 1988 Olympics in Seoul. For the tennis competition, they wanted badly to use Korean manufactured tennis balls, and a leading manufacturer sold the "Nassau" brand. The only hitch was that the rules for the Olympics were that the model of tennis ball had to be one used at one of the previous four Grand Slam tennis tournaments. So this company paid a boatload of money to the organizers of the Australian Open to get them to use it in their tournament. Complaints were through the roof that they were horrible. At the Olympics there were lots of complaints too that they were wobbly and not flying true.

However, today Korean manufacturers are considered leaders in their field. I'm in the electronics industry myself. The two largest electronic memory companies in the world are Samsung and SK Hynix. Nobody in the industry would think of either as an off brand or a bargain brand.
 
I am certain that Benz specified exactly what they want and Hankook could deliver it for the lowest price. That's called business.

Pretty simple concept.

I've had a set of Hankook Ventus V12's on my car, ran them very hard. Short tread life was completely expected, pretty decent performance capabilities, never made a peep. Definitely a good tire if you could not afford the others available in the segment.
 
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
What about MB? What's in it for them?

If they are going to break into the Asian market in a big way, they almost have to have a manufacturing facility in the region - and wouldn't it be a good idea to have a good supplier that not only can MB learn how to deal with the differences in culture (yes, it is a problem), but one where others in the region can emulate.

I see this as a "dipping the toe in the water" sort of thing.


Agree with the rest of your post, but VW and MBZ have very different marketing that while VW can do well "supporting" the local suppliers, MBZ would be seen as cheapened to the snobs that don't know much about cars to begin with.

Anyways, I think Hankook tires will not be the problem of this car. MBZ's reliability and German engineering's weakness (in assuming all working condition to be perfect so they design with less safety margin and more aggressive engineering approach) would be the most frequent complains.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top