Makes sense to me. I once made the mistake of buying a set of Falcon tires made by Cooper on my truck. Several times I thought maybe those tires were going to last me the rest of my life. They were just what I later learned Cooper is know for, last forever, but ride and stick very poorly. I was much happier with the Strattons made by BFG on my car. Unfortunately, since the Japs bought them, BFg dropped out of the off brand tire business and Cooper has largely taken it over. I have Uniroyals on my truck now. They are much better tires than the OEM Uniroyals on my 68 Chevelle. Maybe in another 30 years, I will give Cooper another chance.
tire wear numbers
- Thread starter ryansride2017
- Start date
- Status
I hate that. I want STICK in the rain... my Taco hates the rain very much.
Try to SIPE them, works at least the first 1/3-1/2 the tire life... I suppose it can be done when worn out, I donno, but would be nice if it went through the tire to the tread warning bumps
IIRC, Uniroyal was bought by BFG a number of years ago, and that company is now owned by Michelin. I used to be a cheeleader for BFG but the last two sets I've had were not all that impressive. I'm convinced Michelin is using BFG as a cash cow and they don't want their tires to be "too good" lest they take sales away from higher margin Michelin products.
Tires made my Bridgstone/Firestone look better to me every day...
BFG used to make one of the best competition tires, the R1. But they retired [ha] that tire in the late 90s and their replacement, the G-Force, really sucked. The best comp tires are now coming from Hoosier and Kumho.
I got turned off to Bridgestones based on the ultra-crappy Bridgestones than came as OEM tires on my Lexus GS430. I replaced them with Continentals which were much better tires. They gripped just as well, had 3 times the treadwear, were much quieter, and cost less.
I'm running Kumho Ecsta Supra 712s with a 280 rating at the moment. Even though the BFGs I had before had a 400 rating, they last the same amount of time.
That shows you how much nonsense the treadwear rating is.
Even within the same brand, a harder tire with a higher number will probably be abused more than a softer tire with a lower number, when looking at the same driver and car. So a standardised test that only measures ideal life, will come nowhere near real life. As mentioned above, it's similar to fuel economy ratings. My 4200Lb V8 powered Impala might have the same ideal ratings as a 3000Lb V6 car, but the smaller, lighter car will probably get better real world mileage.
Traction ratings rate Straight Ahead Wet Braking Traction. Thus, the Goodyear Aquatreads on my Olds, and the Kumho 712s on my Impala both carry an "AA" rating, but the Aquatread is a pretty poor dry cornerer, due to its specialization on one aspect. I'll take that trade though, since grandma needs the wet handling and braking(where even she will be closer to her limits) more than the dry handling. Traction grades do not indicate cornering ability. Ratings are AA, A, B, and C. I don't think that "C" has a minimum allowed, so I would NEVER buy one with that rating. Never seen one though...
The "AA" rating is an official one and was introduced in '97.
For Heat ratings, "C" is the minimum allowable heat shedding ability, with B and A being better. Here in the south, B is the lowest I am willing to go and only for a vehicle that is not driven agressively(Only "A" for my personal vehicles...)
That shows you how much nonsense the treadwear rating is.
Even within the same brand, a harder tire with a higher number will probably be abused more than a softer tire with a lower number, when looking at the same driver and car. So a standardised test that only measures ideal life, will come nowhere near real life. As mentioned above, it's similar to fuel economy ratings. My 4200Lb V8 powered Impala might have the same ideal ratings as a 3000Lb V6 car, but the smaller, lighter car will probably get better real world mileage.
Traction ratings rate Straight Ahead Wet Braking Traction. Thus, the Goodyear Aquatreads on my Olds, and the Kumho 712s on my Impala both carry an "AA" rating, but the Aquatread is a pretty poor dry cornerer, due to its specialization on one aspect. I'll take that trade though, since grandma needs the wet handling and braking(where even she will be closer to her limits) more than the dry handling. Traction grades do not indicate cornering ability. Ratings are AA, A, B, and C. I don't think that "C" has a minimum allowed, so I would NEVER buy one with that rating. Never seen one though...
The "AA" rating is an official one and was introduced in '97.
For Heat ratings, "C" is the minimum allowable heat shedding ability, with B and A being better. Here in the south, B is the lowest I am willing to go and only for a vehicle that is not driven agressively(Only "A" for my personal vehicles...)
Yep. I've had a couple of sets of BFG R1's as autocross tires for my Mustang over the years, along with a couple sets of AT's on my Pathfinder. That's what prompted me to buy the last set of AT's I had for the Pathfinder and a set of the Comp T/A VR4's for street tires for my Mustang.
The last set of AT's were medicore and the VR4's were really poor IMO vs. their cost. They got replaced with Firestone SZ50-EP's and the AT's got replaced with some cheapies my son found since it's his truck now. The Bridgestone Revos are a superior AT tire and the SZ50's are better in every way than the Comp T/A VR4's.
Funny how these things change. In 1993 you couldn't sell me anything but a BFG. By 2003 you couldn't get me to buy a set unless the pricing was *very* attractive.
Agree on the Hoosier and Kumho's too. If I decide to start autocrossing again I'll probably buy the Kumhos. I've never had a set of Conti car tires but their motorcycle tires were very popular a few years back as a good sport tire with decent wear...
Besides treadwear ratings not meaning much between different mfrs,I always thought it was funny that sizes are different.Next time you're at a tire store place 2 different mfrs tires of the same size next to each other,they are different,same with motorcycle tires-weird-
What's funny is that the sizes referenced in the size spec (example 255-50-17) are Width255-heigth(as a percentage of width)255*50%-rim size17.
While rim size is, of course, spot on, the width is usually all over the place, while the height, which is supposed to be a pecentage of the WIDTH, is usually spot on the required value.
This makes perfect sense from a standpoint that rim size HAS to be correct, and tire height BETTER be correct so the speedo reads right, while width is cosmetic(when looking at the variations between two tires of the same size) for the most part. Still, it seems that they would just give the right bloody numbers, vs pulling numbers out of their... for the width.
I know that, in theory, a wider tire will handle better, but, when looking a two tires of the same size, other factors have more importance, like compound and sidewall stiffness. Example of this is my Kumho 712, which is roughly an inch narrower than the "same size" stock BFGs, but they blow the BFGs out of the water in all respects.
While rim size is, of course, spot on, the width is usually all over the place, while the height, which is supposed to be a pecentage of the WIDTH, is usually spot on the required value.
This makes perfect sense from a standpoint that rim size HAS to be correct, and tire height BETTER be correct so the speedo reads right, while width is cosmetic(when looking at the variations between two tires of the same size) for the most part. Still, it seems that they would just give the right bloody numbers, vs pulling numbers out of their... for the width.
I know that, in theory, a wider tire will handle better, but, when looking a two tires of the same size, other factors have more importance, like compound and sidewall stiffness. Example of this is my Kumho 712, which is roughly an inch narrower than the "same size" stock BFGs, but they blow the BFGs out of the water in all respects.
Patman
Staff member
That's because the width is measured from sidewall to sidewall, but the actual width of the tread can vary quite a bit from one brand to another. I've seen tread widths that vary by more than an inch and a half in two different tires of the same size for my car. For instance, the Firestone SZ50 EP is a much skinnier looking tire than the Goodyear GSC, and that's because if you compare their tread widths in the 245-50-16 size, the Firestone is only 7.4" wide but the GSC is 9" wide!
- Status
