Speed Rating debate..and Tire Rack

[Carbuff]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer


I'm going to guess your daughter had problems with road hazards and the speed rating and the brand weren't really factors.


Wrong guess. This was her first New Car Purchase and she was very fussy about taking care of it.

She ran that car for 150,000 miles (including 10 winters with "unrated" snows) and did not suffer any vibration or failures with the other brands. (Same speed rating as OE except for the snows)


And, in the spirit of Full Disclosure, we realized after a few years (third set of tires) that the all the wheels were porous and the inflation had to be checked more often than was typical.




Not badgering you, just clarifying the anecdote.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Carbuff
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer


I'm going to guess your daughter had problems with road hazards and the speed rating and the brand weren't really factors.


Wrong guess. This was her first New Car Purchase and she was very fussy about taking care of it.

She ran that car for 150,000 miles (including 10 winters with "unrated" snows) and did not suffer any vibration or failures with the other brands. (Same speed rating as OE except for the snows)


And, in the spirit of Full Disclosure, we realized after a few years (third set of tires) that the all the wheels were porous and the inflation had to be checked more often than was typical.




Not badgering you, just clarifying the anecdote.

But how can you be absolutely sure she didn't run over something that punctured the tires and lead to an under-inflation which in turn overheated the tires and subsequently lead to failure?

Or the fact that the wheels were porous... isn't it possible she forgot to check the pressure on time just once which caused the tires to overheat at some point in their past, thus accelerating their demise?

 

[Carbuff]

Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

But how can you be absolutely sure she didn't run over something that punctured the tires and lead to an under-inflation which in turn overheated the tires and subsequently lead to failure?

Or the fact that the wheels were porous... isn't it possible she forgot to check the pressure on time just once which caused the tires to overheat at some point in their past, thus accelerating their demise?


It's all a MAYBE. Yeah, she was pretty good about noticing inflation but let them get low a few times (on both the first & second set of tires)

Her work commute wasn't that far at the time either...no long periods of heat build up...so who knows.



The hard fact was, there were no further problems with subsequent sets of tires (even tho' it was mid-way through the second set that we suspected there was an issue with the wheels).



HeeHee, I "slapped her hand" about checking pressure all the time, and truly, she was pretty good about remembering. She is still very good about mentioning automotive behavior to Dad. She doesn't ignore problems.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Carbuff
It's all a MAYBE.

And that's exactly Capri's point. It's hard to tell these things apart with any certainty.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
I explain the process used to qualify tires for new vehicles here:
http://www.barrystiretech.com/oetires.html
Short version: The vehicle manufacturer decides the speed rating.


Short version, cheap is good, cheaper is better....


Sorry, but, No. The vehicle engineers set the specs first (and that would include the speed rating) and the purchasing agents negotiate the price later. Needless to say, with millions of dollars on the line, the purchasing agents at the vehicle manufacturers are really good at getting the rock-bottom price. But all the tire manufacturers are working off the same specs. In other words, the speed rating is NOT part of the price negotiation!

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
......As a consultant to major automobile manufacturers in the US over three decades I can assure folks that a 2006 Elantra did not require H-rated tires, and that when Hyundai made the decision to use them cost was the single largest criterion in their decision. The second biggest criterion was ride.......


I appreciate that 30 years of consulting may give one a level of expertise, but I have more years in and they were all involved with tires - and I spent 5 years in Detroit, directly involved in the whole tire qualification process.

Now let me parse this out:

"Requires" That might mean many things.

There's a law? No

There's an engineering standard that has to be met? Maybe!

If the top speed of the vehicle is close to 118 mph, then it might sense to go up a step. Is that a "requirement"?

From the point of view of supplying the tire to the assembly plant - Yes!

But what about buying replacement tires?

Again, there is no law. As a matter of fact, there is very little regulation in the US concerning replacement tires what can be applied to vehicles. You can put on any size/speed rating/brand you like. If you've seen some of these "LowRiders", you'll know what I mean.
But I don’t think anyone is arguing that it is REQUIRED. I think we are arguing about what is advisable.
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
…..It is the same reason tire inflation pressures recommended are usually too low. The automobile manufacturer wants to make money selling cars, and it accomplishes that by reducing costs in manufacturing and by providing something people would like to buy. Most people want a nice ride…..

To some extent I agree, but the issue of low inflation pressure goes to load carrying capacity – and there are other ways of skinning this cat. Larger tire size for example.

Cars produced since about the 1980’s have been pretty good when it comes to the tire load thing. SUV and pickup trucks – not so much.

But that has been fixed. Not only have cars increased their size, they’ve also increased the speed ratings. This results in a safer vehicle.

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
This leads me to the opinion that H speed rated tires should be the minimum.

That seems to indicate some confusion as to what a speed rating actually is.
Are you suggesting that an S or T rated tire could be driven at a high enough speed long enough to fail in a normally loaded Hyundai Elantra assuming proper tire inflation?.........[/quote]
No, I am not confused. Earlier I referred to failures in S and T rated tires- and that is what is driving that statement.

I am NOT saying the failures are the result of the speed. I am saying that what is needed to make a tire pass an H speed rating results in a tire much, much more durable – that is more resistant to failure.
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
…..
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
Sorry, but speed ratings are pretty much tied to the use of fabric overlays (of the belt) commonly known as cap plies.


The primary cause of failure..……


I ‘ve been at this for over an hour and a half. I’ve deleted the next part as it is full of mis-information and there is no point in repeating it. The original post for this thread isn’t being addressed any more – and we should return to it.

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
……The speed rating has nothing to do with durability. It has to do with the ability of the tire to operate at a given speed using a standard methodology…..


Perhaps the problem is one of terminology. I use the term “durability” in the classical sense of performing without failure. Needless to say, I am excluding failures caused by external sources, such as punctures, cut, and impacts – what is typically called “Road Hazards”.

Clearly, any speed rating test IS a measure of a tire’s resistance to the affects of speed – and that’s durability.
********************************************
I am now going to try to wrap up this conversation with a few remarks.

The original posting in this thread was about what Tire Rack said about other tire shops and how those shops approach the speed rating issue.

Summary:

There isn’t any law or other such requirement that tires have to have the speed rating that came originally on the car. However, there are some legal liabilities that would surface if a tire shop would do so – so it is understandable if a tire shop was reluctant to.
There is also some technical and safety reasons why putting on a lower speed rating might not be advisable.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Short version, cheap is good, cheaper is better....


Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
Sorry, but, No.


Sorry but yes. There’s an old question in the automotive business: “Why does a $30,000 car come with a $5 jack?” and the answer is: “Because they couldn’t find one for a dollar”.

There is an envelope of performance that is intended by the manufacturer of the automobile and among the tires within that envelope there may be a half dozen tires that would prove acceptable. The accountants, not the engineers, make that decision.

Let’s take a moment and consider the three forces within the automobile manufacturer and follow it up with a real world situation: marketing, engineers, and accountants.

Consider the former Ford Explorer. The marketing folks wanted a soft ride. The accountants wanted the cheapest tire. The engineers wanted it to be safe.

Marketing overrode the engineers on tire pressure, demanding 32 psi although the engineers pointed out that at that tire pressure the tires were at their limit, and if they lost 4 psi they were dangerous. The bean counters overrode the engineers on tire size, demanding that the Explorer come shod with tires barely big enough to support the weight of the vehicle with a full load.

The result was zero margin of error on both tire pressure and tire condition. And the result was both blowouts and lawsuits.

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
I appreciate that 30 years of consulting may give one a level of expertise, but I have more years in and they were all involved with tires - and I spent 5 years in Detroit, directly involved in the whole tire qualification process.


Hopefully not on the Ford Explorer.

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
If the top speed of the vehicle is close to 118 mph, then it might sense to go up a step. Is that a "requirement"?


Let us remember we are talking about a Hyundai Elantra, which with a five mile long gradual hill, a backwind, and some luck might crack 100 mph.

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
I ‘ve been at this for over an hour and a half. I’ve deleted the next part as it is full of mis-information and there is no point in repeating it.


When you find yourself calling the other guy’s facts “mis-information”, you’re admitting you are in over your head.

Now that we’re done with that, here’s some stuff I pulled together for folks to get some real information:

FMVSS 139 - NHTSA’s Standards Explained

How 11 Real World Tires Differ in Characteristics

How M+S Tires Differ from Winter Tires

How Track Tires Differ from Street Tires

How Nine Reasonably Priced 225/45R-17 Tires Compare

Anyone looking for replacement tires can get some idea of what those little numbers and letters on the sidewall mean and how tire manufacturers choose among the various characteristics of cost, wear, traction, and so on so that the aftermarket buyer can choose tires that meet his needs, not the needs of the bean counters and the marketing division of the automobile manufacturer.

This post took about 10 minutes, and I don't really have anything further to add to the discussion.

 

[flinter]

I appreciate everyone's thoughts here! It was a respectful, thoughtful
debate, without any name calling like in other childish forums
I used to participate in.

I know I will be installing either the Continental ProConact EcoPlus
T Rated or the Michelin MXV4 H Rated on my 2006 Elantra this Friday. My Elantra is garage kept with just 47000 miles and it looks like it just came out of the showroom. May very well be one of the nicest looking 2006 Elantras on the road.

Since I am a very conservative driver and NEVER drive over 75-80mph,I am leaning towards the Continental at this point.

I am very religious about 5000 mile rotations, and checking and
maintaining 32PSI bi monthly, so I am confident I will get long
life from the Continentals. Just by looking at the tread on the Continental you can tell if will be a better tire for wet conditions than the Michelin.

 

[stephen9666]

I just did some research on my 2007 Hyundai Sonata. The car comes with V speed rated tires (149 mph) from the factory. That seems way overkill, IMO.

The placard only specifies a size and pressure, it doesn't say anything about a required speed rating. I don't know if any placards say anything about speed ratings, BTW.

I checked the owner's manual, and nowhere does it say that the car requires "V" speed-rated tires. It only mentions that the car has v rated tires on one page, page 8-6.

It doesn't say anywhere that V rated tires are required when the tires are replaced.

This is what it says about the OE tires on page 8-2:
Quote:

TIRE INFORMATION
The tires supplied on your new Hyundai
are chosen to provide the best performance
for normal driving.


Here's a link to a PDF of the owner's manual. You can use the search function and find that two pages contain the phrase "speed rating."

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer

Summary:

There isn’t any law or other such requirement that tires have to have the speed rating that came originally on the car. However, there are some legal liabilities that would surface if a tire shop would do so – so it is understandable if a tire shop was reluctant to.


I find it hard to believe there would be a legal liability if a shop installed lower speed rated tires on my Hyundai, because Hyundai doesn't say V speed rated tires are required.

I wonder how much tire companies have to do with the speed rating of factory tires? I assume they would encourage car companies to use higher-than-necessary speed rated tires, because that could mean selling more expensive replacement tires when the OE tires wear out.

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: stephen9666
I just did some research on my 2007 Hyundai Sonata. The car comes with V speed rated tires (149 mph) from the factory. That seems way overkill, IMO.


Obviously you never heard about the Sonata that got tagged by photo radar in Phoenix a few years ago - I think it was doing something in the ballpark of 150. If I remember right, the Arizona State Police actually called Hyundai to make sure their equipment wasn't grossly malfunctioning.

 

[flinter]

Thanks Stephen9666, for posting the placecard photo!
Thanks EXACTLY the same style placecard in my 2006 Elantra.

Absolutely NO mention of speed rating, or NO mention that the
identical speed rating is required, or even suggested!

Not on the placecard, or ANYWHERE in Hyundai documentation
will you find this, so this is NO way anyone is liable if
you chose to drop a speed rating.

 

[CapriRacer]

Wow!! You guys are so mssing the point. Perhaps a story will help illustrate the problem.

I was involved with a lawsuit where a company pickup lost traction in a snowstorm. The truck crossed the median and was hit by a tractor/trailer. The driver was severely injured and could not work at that job again.

The tires were nearly worn out, but still legal to use.

The basis of the lawsuit was that the leasing company - who leased the truck to the company - and the company did not have standards for when tires should be removed due to tread wear - and especially for winter driving - and that is what lead to the accident.

I see a similar thing with regard to speed rating. A good lawyer could take a tire shop to task for installing a lower speed rating.

Again, don't take this the wrong way. I am not saying that this is a hard and fast rule thoroughly documented with numerous studies and papers published in peer reviewed journals - but I am saying that it is not unreasonable for a tire shop to decide that they do not want to accept the risk.

 

[weebl]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
I see a similar thing with regard to speed rating. A good lawyer could take a tire shop to task for installing a lower speed rating.


Hence, with the Elantra, a tire shop's legal advisor likely told them do not install tires with a lower speed rating than it was equipped with from the factory. In the case of the Elantra, Hyundai put an H rated tire on, even though their own specifications did not require it. But following the legal advisors, that is what it came with so sorry, the tire shop isn't going to put on anything less.


Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Short version, cheap is good, cheaper is better....

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
Sorry, but, No. The vehicle engineers set the specs first (and that would include the speed rating) and the purchasing agents negotiate the price later. Needless to say, with millions of dollars on the line, the purchasing agents at the vehicle manufacturers are really good at getting the rock-bottom price. But all the tire manufacturers are working off the same specs. In other words, the speed rating is NOT part of the price negotiation!


You've both sat on differing sides of the OEM tire supply chain, and I suspect that you are both correct. I see CapriRacer's point that the tire manufacturers need to meet specs provided by the automaker. And I can certainly see that automakers have marketers and accountants overriding the engineers. What I am going to suggest happened here (and probably many other cases) is that Hyundai set out the specs, and in this case, maybe the H speed rating was not part of the criteria. Several companies bid with tires they tuned/re-engineered or even engineered from the ground up to meet those specs. It just happened the winning bid, which was maybe the cheapest, also just happened to be H rated for whatever reason the tire manufacturer deemed for meeting Hyundai's specs.

 

[flinter]

I understand what you are saying, CapriRacer, you make some good
points.

However, the doom and doom serarios about how unsafe my ELantra will be with quality T Rated tires is just silly, in my opinion.
Especially for a conservative style driver, like myself.

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer

Wow!! You guys are so mssing the point.

I was involved with a lawsuit where a company pickup lost traction in a snowstorm. The truck crossed the median and was hit by a tractor/trailer. The driver was severely injured and could not work at that job again.

The tires were nearly worn out, but still legal to use.

The basis of the lawsuit was that the leasing company - who leased the truck to the company - and the company did not have standards for when tires should be removed due to tread wear - and especially for winter driving - and that is what lead to the accident.

I see a similar thing with regard to speed rating. A good lawyer could take a tire shop to task for installing a lower speed rating.

Again, don't take this the wrong way. I am not saying that this is a hard and fast rule thoroughly documented with numerous studies and papers published in peer reviewed journals - but I am saying that it is not unreasonable for a tire shop to decide that they do not want to accept the risk.


NOTE- This post is not meant to be critical, but to point out how I don't think this example applies to the speed rating discussion.



I don't think I'm missing the point at all.

Your anecdote relates to specifications, or a lack of, related to the tires wearing. It does not relate to the performance specifications of replacement tires.

In theory, a shop could be sued for anything. Could they be sued for installing a different brand or model of tire than the original, even if the replacement tire had the same speed rating as the original? A different brand or model of tire would change the handling dynamics of the car.

Could a shop be sued for installing tires with a higher speed rating than the original? That would also change the handling of the car.

So basically, after an accident a lawyer could sue a shop for installing any tire that isn't the exact same tire that was installed from the factory. If shops were that worried about liability, then they would only install tires identical to the OE tire.

 

[Carbon]

Originally Posted By: stephen9666

So basically, after an accident a lawyer could sue a shop for installing any tire that isn't the exact same tire that was installed from the factory. If shops were that worried about liability, then they would only install tires identical to the OE tire.


Around here, tire shops will not install a T-rated all-season tire if the OEM tires are H-rated, but they will install a higher temperature rating. By your logic ....

Related to the original post, many tire places will patch a hole in a T-rated tire that they will not patch in an H-rated tire. They define a significantly narrower part of the H-rated tire they consider patchable than for T-rated tires. That's the way it is. With that in mind, I would count that as a plus for the T-rated tires if you want to have a local shop patch your punctured tires.

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: Carbon


Around here, tire shops will not install a T-rated all-season tire if the OEM tires are H-rated, but they will install a higher temperature rating. By your logic ....



Yes, I'm aware some shops won't install a different speed rating than the OE tire, even when there is no requirement for a speed rating. I think it's as much about selling a more expensive tire as liability.