Tire life

I don't see any other useful purpose.

It doesn't stop anyone, but it certainly increases the cost.

True, but there are some generally accepted requirements if you want to get certified.

Yes, different constraints, but the same net result ... inhibition of technological progress.

As an aside, do you have any evidence that ISO 9000 has increased the quality of products produced in Europe?

Matt

Reply to
Matt Whiting
Loading thread data ...

I agree with Dori. It's not what I would consider a trade barrier. If you want an example of a trade barrier, try the "CE Mark".

Ken

Reply to
KWS

Well James, Bill Putney was right. This is working itself into a long thread. I asked the same sort of question at the beginning and, unfortunately, got a lot of opinions and little substance. There seemed to be some general agreement that there isn't much objectivity to be had when it comes to tires.

If you really want to assess the quality of any tire, you are pretty much in the dark.

My original premise was that you will do well to buy on price and buy from someone who has an interest in your repeat business. Keep them aligned, balanced and properly inflated and they will likely do the 40K miles or so that they advertised. There will be some variance and you may find yourself not liking this or that about the tires. But if you went cheap, you will feel better about it than if you paid through the nose for "quality" tires that weren't.

Ken

Reply to
KWS

Good question.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

IMO it is and it is not. What about US requirements like UL? Same thing, no?

In fact, CE marking has resulted in substantial simplification of the safety standards in the EU. Even now I get statements in potential clients' machine specifications requiring compliance with (taking the latest example) with certain Belgian standards. When I replied, saying that our machines (supplied from Canada) are CE-marked but we would be happy to comply with additional requirements if we were sent the documentation, I was told to forget about it; CE would be sufficient.

Otherwise we would have a plethora across the EU. The mind boggles in today's context.

So, is it a trade barrier per se, or only because it is not a copy of US regs????

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

I'm not terribly familiar with the CE process, but I thought it was supposed to be somewhat akin to our UL program. If this is the case, then at least it has some functional value, safety, whereas the ISO 9000 process lacks any functional value. It is all about cosmetics. Now, if the CE mark doesn't give some assurance of safety or other functional attribute, then I agree with you. :-)

Matt

Reply to
Matt Whiting

Just buy Michelins and you'll be happy.

Reply to
Spam Hater

I did and I am not. I bought a set of Cross Terrains for an Expedition and I am not all that happy with them, mostly because they have become very noisy. The original Continentals on the vehicle were replaced at 50,000 miles because they were hard to keep balanced (but they still had plenty of tread left). Initially the Michelins were quieter, but now, after 25,000 miles, they are much nosier than the original Continentals were after 50,000 miles.They look good - in fact it is hard to tell they have worn at all. I also have a set of Michelins on my Thunderbird and they are horrid. They won't stay balanced and they don't have good traction.

However, I just bought a set of Michelins for another vehicle, so I guess I am still a Michelin man. But if these don't work out, I think I'll try something else on the Thunderbird.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

IMO, Michelin are the most over rated tire on the market. In 40 years of driving, the only tire that has ever blown out on me was a Michelin, and the rest of the same set were less than satisfactory.... performance and short life. Many years ago when I worked on a highway maintenance crew we picked up more tire debris from blown out Michelins than all other brands combined, and they were not all that common at the time, so the failure rate was many times worse than other brands. When you look at the tire brands used by transportation companies, who would expect to do careful research before committing to a brand, you will note that very few of them use Michelin.

Reply to
Dave Smith

I'd like to see how you collected those statistics. Ironically, I just had a Michelin blow-out on my pick-up. Of course it was 7 years old and had a big nail in the side of the tread. I suspect I had been driving around with low pressure for more than a few miles and when I went over a horrid bump in the road (thank you State Government of NC) it deflated more or less instantly. But, I didn't leave any debris behind to be picked up (although there was something runmbling around inside the tire).

Actually I would expect them to buy the cheapest tire they could (with some adjustment passed on the UTG wear index). I have a friend who operates a small fleet of tractor-trailers. He swears Michelins are the best, but then his extensive research consists of driving a truck.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Dave Smith proclaimed:

Could you describe the type of debris from Michelins that you picked up?

Purely an unscientific survey consisting of checking the brands on the commercial big rigs I drive next to, the appearance of any brand *other* than Michelin is pretty darned rare. This is as much due to their wear patterns and re-treading capabilities as to any inherent superiority I suspect. That unscientific survey does include having the top truck lines as customers....which gives pretty good opportunity to check tires.

Reply to
Lon

ANd checking big rig brands is useless, as they are more then likely recaps! And the reacps are not made by the original manufacturer.

This is as much due to

Reply to
David

Tire carcasses.

Your unscientific survey shows much different results from mine. I spent the last 16 years as a truck and bus inspector and I find it hard to believe that unless you did your survey within a block of a Michelin dealer that you would find anything like that. I spent a lot of time every day crawling in, around and under trucks and buses. We always paid close attention to tires, and I didn't see many Michelins.

Reply to
Dave Smith

Perhaps you would like some hard scientific reportage now?

[from a tire industry report out of U Chicago]

Seventy five percent of the companies in the industry (accounting for

90% of the value) experienced a takeover bid or were forced to restructure during the period 1982-1989 (Mitchell and Mulherin, 1996). As aresult of this activity, control changed hands in over half the companies in this industry. Even more remarkable, in the majority of cases, control was transferred to foreign owners. By the end of the decade, traditional American firms like Firestone, Uniroyal, Goodrich, Armstrong, and General Tire belonged to foreign companies. As a consequence, large U.S. owned tiremanufacturers, who in 1971 represented 59% of the world production and included four out of the top five producers, in 1991 represented only 17% of world production with only one of thetop five producers

[from an EPA report] The mid- to late 1980s were difficult times for the world tire industry. Tire manufacturers faced declining demand for new cars, declining tire prices, a record high U.S. currency, and record high tire imports. As a response to this market distress, the industry went through a period of significant restructuring and consolidation. Foreign firms bought out several American firms, leaving the world tire industry with nine ultimate parent companies that have annual sales in excess of $1 billion each. These nine companies account for 80 percent of world tire sales (Ita and Gross, 1995). Four of the nine companies have their headquarters in Japan (Bridgestone Corporation, Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd., Yokohama Rubber Co. Ltd., and Toyo Tire and Rubber Co. Ltd.), three are based in Europe Groupe Michelin, Continental A.G., and Pirelli), and two are headquartered in the United States (Goodyear and Cooper).

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

Reply to
Brian Whatcott

Truck tires I cannot comment on - but when it comes to passenger tires I am certainly no fan of Michelin. If the choice was a Michelin or a Firestone 721, the Michelin would win (but 721s have not been made for over 30 years). I find they go hard, giving poor traction, harsh ride, and tire noise, early in their life - then go on to live, as cripples, for next to eternity. They.ve come a long way from the early X, but not far enough, given the advancements other companies have made.

Reply to
nospam.clare.nce

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.