Police tweet aftermath of accident, blame dodgy tyres

[guindilias]

guindilias said:

It does seem to make sense, though - no additional R&D needed, no need to buy new plant to make each model/size of tyre, etc... do you know something we don't?

[Trabi601]

guindilias said:

guindilias said:

It does seem to make sense, though - no additional R&D needed, no need to buy new plant to make each model/size of tyre, etc... do you know something we don't?

Obviously you have access to this secret tyre fitter database of which Ting Tong Iddle Ey Po tyre is really a rebadged Pirelli from the 2000s.

I bow to your superior knowledge.

[guindilias]

Nice way to evade the question. Show your proof, or you are as full of shit as you seem to think others on this thread are.

[Trabi601]

guindilias said:

Nice way to evade the question. Show your proof, or you are as full of shit as you seem to think others on this thread are.

People who seem to want to justify fitting cheap ste on the word of a tyre fitter who makes an enhanced margin on them, you mean?

If these tyres really are just old premium tyres rebranded, why don't they perform as premium tyres when tested?

If you were offered 'Super Parachute Mega Pads' when replacing the brakes, over, say, Brembo, Ferodo or EBC, would you believe the fitter when they said 'yeah mate, they're just the old version of those Brembos. Just as good, but quarter of the price'... ? because I know I wouldn't.

[Vaud]

There is list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tire_compani...

Some have joint ventures - e.g. DoubleCoin with Michelin targeting the local China market (a common approach for Western brands wanting to scale in China)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Coin

I can find no mention anywhere of global tyre brands selling off/licensing old designs to Chinese manufacturers.

And why would they need to? The Chinese manufacturers already have production scale and the ability to copy a mould/process without needed to fork out IP licensing fees.

[guindilias]

Trabi601 said:

If these tyres really are just old premium tyres rebranded, why don't they perform as premium tyres when tested?

The tyre compound?

[guindilias]

Vaud said:

There is list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tire_compani...

Some have joint ventures - e.g. DoubleCoin with Michelin targeting the local China market (a common approach for Western brands wanting to scale in China)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Coin

I can find no mention anywhere of global tyre brands selling off/licensing old designs to Chinese manufacturers.

And why would they need to? The Chinese manufacturers already have production scale and the ability to copy a mould/process without needed to fork out IP licensing fees.

They would still need to fork out IP licensing fees if they want to sell them here, the US etc., surely? Much easier just to buy the moulds from the premium "manufacturer" at a discount price?

[Vaud]

guindilias said:

They would still need to fork out IP licensing fees if they want to sell them here, the US etc., surely? Much easier just to buy the moulds from the premium "manufacturer" at a discount price?

No idea.

I'm not saying that they don't buy them, I just can't find one single article with any evidence that they do.

The default seems to be for IP copying. Look at the many Chinese car "copies" with laughable safety. Those copies don't stop BMW, for example, investing to build the originals in China.

IP law seems to be largely theoretical when it comes to China.

Is a tread pattern even fully protectable? How much variation do you need for it to be a "new tread"?

I'm not saying you are wrong, or that I'm right (unusual for PH) I just don't have any evidence either way - but I do have a healthy dose of cynicism for Chinese IP law.

[guindilias]

I'm not certain what way it works either - just that it seems it would be a lot easier for a Chinese tyre company to buy old, redundant moulds from a premium maker, then pump them full of a far cheaper compound - rather than starting from scratch with moulds and plant.
Pirelli are already Chinese owned, it doesn't seem too far fetched to me...

[Centurion07]

Trabi601 said:

People who seem to want to justify fitting cheap ste on the word of a tyre fitter who makes an enhanced margin on them, you mean?

If these tyres really are just old premium tyres rebranded, why don't they perform as premium tyres when tested?

If you were offered 'Super Parachute Mega Pads' when replacing the brakes, over, say, Brembo, Ferodo or EBC, would you believe the fitter when they said 'yeah mate, they're just the old version of those Brembos. Just as good, but quarter of the price'... ? because I know I wouldn't.

You seem to be missing the point that they're NOT premium tyres with a different name on them.

As has already been mentioned, the similarity will generally stop with the tread pattern, which only goes so far in making up the overall performance of the tyre. I would imagine a far greater effect will be from the compound which is why cheap tyres are cheap i.e. they use a stload of cheap rubber rather than the expensive stuff that's had all the R+D money spent on it.

Electronics especially are known for re-branding, in particular, TVs.

[750turbo]

Sebring440 said:

Yes, but you're forgetting that Norris (TooMany2cvs) knows sweet FA about tyre technology.

Brilliant!

[GC8]

750turbo said:

Sebring440 said:

Yes, but you're forgetting that Norris (TooMany2cvs) knows sweet FA about tyre technology.

Brilliant!

He knows sweet fk all about most of the topics that he posts on (which on some days is nearly all of them). If you find yourself agreeing with him it is probably because that's what you thought too, but you didn't post whereas he is posting is bullst ill-informed opinion / Google mix everywhere.

Norris