Anyone know any more? There's no mention in there about those who use their vehicles off-road, so I hope that we and the agricultural and building trades haven't been forgotten.
- posted
15 years ago
Anyone know any more? There's no mention in there about those who use their vehicles off-road, so I hope that we and the agricultural and building trades haven't been forgotten.
Le 11/03/2009 13:10, Ian Rawlings a écrit :
"but environmentalists argue they should be brought in sooner. "
They've always got to winge about something.
Mine seem ok, I just stood beside the hybrid and its tyres don't make any sound :-)
Mike
In message , Ian Rawlings writes
Would it be better to be not forgotten as in positively excluded or not forgotten as in included and subject to the same regulations?
What an interesting question.
"Research done in London found a real link between traffic noise and the risk of a heart attack"
Oh FFS what an absolute load of bollox. Let me guess, they compared the percentage of heart attacks per head of population for people living in the city compared to people living in the country. Or some other such completley stupid load of nonsense.
Hey doncha now, older fathers have kids who are at risk of being less brainy than kids who have younger dads! I read it in the paper!
No figures of course, no idea on how much of a risk, and how less brainy, but that would be boring, just slap the sensationalist bit in and leave it at that. I wouldn't mind so much but this was the beeb website with the dopey kids story, not the Sun or whatnot. Gawd knows what they did with it.
They were tested on TV made no difference at all to mpg and cost a packet, insert suitable phrase including the words "band jumping green on wagon" makes almost as much sense as the current hybrid cars that in real terms cause more CO2 emissions than a 5 litre Range Rover but are trotted out by the lame to seem enviromentally friendly (puts soapbox away) DerekW (saving up for another Range Rover)
Oooh tested on TV ;-)
This is a whole different kettle of fish, there's legislation coming in 2012 or so regarding a number of factors, the report I posted concentrated mostly on noise, which is why I was worried as a set of muds ain't too quiet!
Yeah, saw that too - in fact, didn't they remove all sorts of things from the car too like the spare wheel to reduce weight as well, and in the experimental tests after the 'improvements' the car actually performed worse!
What I don't get is the title of the article - I didn't see anything within the actual article that suggested the legislation had anything to do with tyres being 'safer'. All I see is yet another piece of pointless euro legislation that is likely going to make them more expensive.
Matt
Don't diss the stats - I've just popped down to the local hospital and discovered they've had a 50% increase in heart attacks in my local village since I bought the P38 - must be the increased noise in the village from those AT's it has on.
All you see is a crap article and a thin excuse for a euro-whinge. One of the things mentioned in the article suggests that we'll get some kind of metric to help us judge which tyres grip best, which would be good, after all just because a manufacturer claims that a tyre is great doesn't mean it is. It'd be nice if there was some kind of independent rating system as right now, you can't walk into a tyre shop and walk out with the best wet-weather tyre. I'm sure some claim they can but unless you've compared them all under the same conditions, how can you?
So if they actually give us a means of judging tyres based more on measured performance rather than belief that would certainly not be a waste of money.
I originally posted the link asking if anyone knew any more details about the noise aspects as I was concerned there might be noise limits, making mud-patterns an iffy prospect. If anyone knows then do please speak up.
What, last year it was 2, this year it was 3, panic! 50% increase, must be something in the water!
There's one of those rare good articles on the beeb right now, let's just dig it out;
and 90% of people will still walk into the tyre fitters and ask for the cheapest ones they've got! lol
Matt
Maybe not, I do know that some people who don't really know much about cars, i.e. people who aren't really interested in them other than as transport and style things, do pay heed to crash ratings, it may well end up that way with tyres, to a lesser extent I'd imagine.
Still, none of us even know what's going to happen about it all anyway, we've only got that crap news article at the moment, so not much point getting to finnicky about it.
Grrr, *too* finnicky, I hate that...
Also if people did just go on price, remoulds would be much more popular than they are.
Some UK testing has been done...
and these tests were frightening especially as Conti tyres are not the best anyway.
True. If there are certain standards set for tyres maybe it will be a good thing, but my point was more that the article went on to mention nothing to do with actually increasing tyre safety when that was the main headline, which kind of suggested that wasn't actually the point of the legislation - but as you said, probably just a result of a crap news article!
It'd be nice if all tyres were tested and results available widely,
*maybe* that's one of the things that's proposed but I'm wary of reading too much into a crap news article.On or around Wed, 11 Mar 2009 22:39:50 +0000, Ian Rawlings enlightened us thusly:
they used to be, but they started only lasting 5 minutes, I reckon the new-tyre makers have sabotaged it so that they're not worth it any more.
As for tyre noise, it's a lot more about the road surface than the tyre, as anyone who actually drives knows. Change of surface, more or less noise, from the same tyres!
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.