Any experience with TripleTreads and ice?

- B
- Body Roll
  
  Contact options for registered users
Vote on answer
posted
17 years ago

Thu, Dec 28, 2006 1:09 AM

I find little correlation with the speed rating and performance of a tire. Without turbo anything above H seems fine. Even Q is fine as long as there is an understanding that there should be no triple digit driving on those dedicated Q-rated winter tires. It looks like TripleTreds are a fine example of a manufacturer trying to kick below its weight and get people to buy a high performance tire as a "passenger" tire. Probably a lot of people are in denial about what tire they really have a use for and intentional misplacement is served to get people what they need vs. what they want. I could not otherwise explain why would people like TripleTred better than RE92. RE92 is sold as a high perf all season tire. If TripleTred was a "passenger" tire it would've sucked compared to 92s. But according to the responses TripleTred offers better traction. Therefore either RE92 is a passenger or highway tire or TripleTred is a high performance tire.

Having said that I should say that wet and snow grip on RE92s is appropriate for the HP A/S category. I just have no explanation for the combination of low dry grip, low tread life and high price. I guess from the Subaru perspective its a safety equipment compared to the tires in the passenger category that they otherwise would've put on their low and mid end cars.

Yep. I've heard the all season rating for PZero nero is a joke. How was the dry/wet grip compared to 960s?

I had a set of RE 950s which I think were a precursor of 960s and they absolutely rocked in dry and wet. First set of decent tires in my life. On tirerack some reviewers claim that 960s are a step up from 950, so it would be nice to know if they are usable on snow. (I don't like my Outback zerospot enough to buy dedicated winter and summer sets. I guess that's how urban legends are born that people buy Subarus to be able to use sucky tires). Please keep us posted. Thanks.

Loading thread data ...

- J
- j
  
  Contact options for registered users
Vote on answer
posted
17 years ago

Sat, Dec 30, 2006 12:58 AM

There's only so much to be gleaned from ratings and technical specs. Without having tried each tire it's hard to say what they are truly capable of, or not.

I would say that the RE92's were a good tire, BUT only when it was dry. They weren't bad when it was wet. They were garbage in snow/ice. I certainly would NOT want to rely on another set of RE92's throughout the year as my one set of tires.

I would literally lose traction completely with the RE92's, in the most minute amount of slush, to the point where the engine would rev as a result of my wheels spinning. WTF? I'm sorry, but to me that's unacceptable.

I don't race, but I do drive a little fast, and I do like to have a little fun with my non-turbo Baja when I hit the curves at the bottom of Parley's Canyon (outside SLC). What *I* was looking for is a tire that could be something for every condition, which is exactly what *I* feel *I* got with the TT's. They handle AT LEAST as well as the RE92's did in the dry and wet, and then take it a step further by nicely complimenting the Subaru AWD in the snow/slush/ice/crud.

That is why *I* like the TripleTred better than the RE92. Bridgestone can call the RE92 whatever the hell they want, but it wouldn't necessarily make it so.