Consumer Reports Jan '06 Issue Proves My Point on Tire Profiles.
What point... did they liken them to the one on top'a your haid?
> Amazingly ...
yawn... snip!
> A neat side effect is instead of $35 tires, your replacement is going
> to cost about $150 or more.
Who buys $35 tires? And where can you GET $35 LT's?
I dont, I wont and the only time I ever DID was when I was a kid without a job.
> How does C.R. prove my point? Easy. Every one of these cars rode
> "noisy". That's because the stiff sidewalls of low profile tires
> telegraph all the noise into the cabin. Also, because there's little
> air cushion, the rides are harsh.
>
> Not to mention its impossible to wear a wide imprint tire evenly. Its
> also impossible to maintain alignment and avoid cupping, that's why
> cars which are perfectly aligned start pulling hard to the right after
> the tires wear into a pattern, then bounce like crazy. This NEVER
> happened when tires were -90, -80 or -75.
Yeah! Back to them 6.50 - 16's!!!
And Doughnut white sidewalls
But, say... back then, didnt they all wear out the tread at 25,000 anyway?
When tires were -70 or
> less, that's when all Hell broke loose and cars no longer where the
> comfortable conveyences we had grown to love. They're all bastards
> now, one and all and its due 100% to low profile tires.
>
> Here's another proof and its an unrefutable foolproof proof.
Say again? You mean like .. it's bogus?
... They don't, so that proves it, once and for
> all.
uh.. you forgot NASCAR tires
> Do not throw your money away by buying cars with those stupid tires.
> Boycott all makers until they get the point and start putting real
> rubber back on our cars.
>
>
Or not... just let me have the last word on "dizum.com", here!
Then we can boycott him.