Actually... quite noteworthy.... after the Explorer roll-over debacle, it
might finally come to peoples attention that it is drivers that are
inherently unstable - vehicles have their own dynamics... A Ford Super Duty
and a Ferrari might not come out very equal on the G pad....
All the same.... Ford seems to be the one most love to hate... and Toyota
has been cast as "pristine"....
An article such as this can be vindication.
When it was all said and done, the courts and the NHTSA concluded rollovers
of Explorers was caused by defective Firestone tires, not the design of the
There are still hundreds of thousands of Explorers still on the road and not
rolling over that had "General" tires as well as those that no longer have
defective Firestone tires.
I don't recall saying ANYTHING about Explorer rollovers... and I didn't need
a history lesson, thanks...
Toyota has always been portrayed as some sort of golden boy... whenever it
can be shown that their feet are made of clay, it is noteworthy... even if
someone thinks it is the "wrong group".
That may be your opinion but the is not what the courts and the NHTSA
concluded. They determined the problem was caused by defective tires,
period. Search the Congressional Record for the facts, WBMS
Some years ago there were Toyota's whose electric locks were shorting
out and locking people in their cars and then catching fire. It was
hardly mentioned in any papers. If a $1 part breaks on a Ford the
owner has a fit. If a $1000 part breaks on a Toyota the owners just
shrug it off.
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 23:48:53 GMT, "Jim Warman"
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 13:25:09 -0400, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
BS. I never ran mine at anything lower then 30 psi and they were
absolute crap the whole time they were on the truck. They were
unbalanceable and rode like they were square. Not to mention how they
pulled badly to the side. We've had many Firestones at work, some
models are ok and others are nothing but repeated failures. I've had
more problems with firestone tires over the years then with any other
brand. It has nothing to do with pressure and everything to do with
crappy design and construction.
It would be 1976.... I had a 1973 F100... nice little truck in spite of the
Firestone tires installed on it... The only thing they ever did well or
predictably was separate... not me... never again... I feel safer running on
Anecdotal evidence is not worth a tinkers damn, Ed.....I sold many sets of
Bridgestone tires, primarily Dueler APTs to my customers and have had three
sets on two trucks and one van. Not one complaint about tires wearing out
prematurely, not performing up to expectations. For example, my 82 F250 has
those tires on it for 85,000 miles and are still about 3/32 over worn-out
measurement. So one man's poison is another man's gravy, I guess....Also,
one other tidbit regarding the Firestone tires on Explorers - in Alaska,
Firestones were the OEM tires on explorers in that time frame and guess
what - not one failure reported....I do remember that Firestone
(Bridgestone) admitted to one bad batch (total number I can't recall) of
tires from one plant. For whatever that is worth...
The problem was not with Bridgestone tires, it was the Firestone brand tires
made by Bridgestone
No need to guess, one can search the Congressional Record for the NHTSA and
the Senate investigations that resulted from the Firestone tire problem.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.