RE: The PH guide to the EU's new tyre labels

[jon-]

Nyphur said:

CTE said:

If you decide at a later point ot fit different specification tyres (not size) to the OEM fitment, will it be used as an excuse by insurance companies to not pay out?
Definately agree that most will always by the cheapest tyre no matter what.

Have to say that my first thought was with regards to insurance.
How long before an insurance company refuses to pay out because your car was supplied with AB blah blah rated tyres, but at the time of an incident it was only fitted with BB rated tyres, and as such was a death trap.

That will never happen.

If, however, it makes using tyres that don't meet an F in wet braking illegal that can only be a good thing. I've seen how fast a car would be travelling on F tyres from 50mph under wet braking when the A tyres would have stopped the car, and it's the difference between stopping and a shockingly large accident.

Anything which gets the really st tyres off the road is a good thing to me.

[GC8]

jbi said:

Because they prioritise a green agenda... instead of the most important things like grip.

If they had done it correctly than maybe... but low rolling resistance tyres are not brilliant yet will no doubt be given A+ ratings

This¹º

[mybrainhurts]

More costs for tyre manufacturers to pass on to us.

Thanks for nothing EUSSR, you pointless bunch of control freaks.

[dandarez]

MGgeordie said:

Will there be labels saying 'This Tyre was made in China - avoid like the plague!'

No. Do you know where 'your' tyres were made?

A large majority are 'Made in China'. But it doesn't say so, you need to know what to look for.
Let's take a supposedly German tyre. If on the current label it says 'Engineered in Germany'... guess what?
Probably made in China under licence!

The only way to find out, is to look at the DOT code - How many ever do that? It also gives the year of manufacture of the tyre.
Regards the origin of manufacture it is the first two letters that follow the word DOT in the code tell you.
There are hundreds of coded letters for origin!

If you have Maxxihindicheepirunwaykangnang, obviously Far East or China.
If you have a Continental... are you sure it was made in Germany?

Regards the new labels - it's just more EU interference, more waste of money, totally pointless to the average punter except he/she will be paying more £££s to fund this excercise.

Edited by dandarez on Sunday 1st April 01:30

[dandarez]

mybrainhurts said:

More costs for tyre manufacturers to pass on to us.

Thanks for nothing EUSSR, you pointless bunch of control freaks.

Spot on and totally accurate assessment.

[PoleDriver]

And how do we differentiate for the cases where a particular tyre works well with one type of car and is rubbish on another?

[dandarez]

jon- said:

Nyphur said:

CTE said:

If you decide at a later point ot fit different specification tyres (not size) to the OEM fitment, will it be used as an excuse by insurance companies to not pay out?
Definately agree that most will always by the cheapest tyre no matter what.

Have to say that my first thought was with regards to insurance.
How long before an insurance company refuses to pay out because your car was supplied with AB blah blah rated tyres, but at the time of an incident it was only fitted with BB rated tyres, and as such was a death trap.

That will never happen.

If, however, it makes using tyres that don't meet an F in wet braking illegal that can only be a good thing. I've seen how fast a car would be travelling on F tyres from 50mph under wet braking when the A tyres would have stopped the car, and it's the difference between stopping and a shockingly large accident.

Anything which gets the really st tyres off the road is a good thing to me.

Except Mr and Mrs average Joe Public never checks their tyres.

Go to a tyre fitters and have a look at their piles of removed tyres - guarantee you'll find plenty of the top brands and bloody expensive ones at that, in conditions that would make you seriously wince!

[johnpeat]

PoleDriver said:

And how do we differentiate for the cases where a particular tyre works well with one type of car and is rubbish on another?

Doesn't happen - ever - seriously, it's not like the tread pattern or compound of a tyre changes because of the weight distribution or suspension setup of your car.

You talk of 'working' but you're not talking about rolling resistance, wet grip or noise changing - you're talking about nuances of steering feel and other things they're not measuring here.

You're also talking about over- or under-tyring and under-tyring is pretty rare (non-existant?) on new cars wheras over-tyring is rife bit not a really a safety issue.

In other words, putting the 'wrong' tyre on a car and it won't perform as well just like putting the 'wrong' driver in the car and not seeing the stated MPG or service intervals...

Edited by johnpeat on Sunday 1st April 12:47

[Fox-]

johnpeat said:

Doesn't happen - ever - seriously, it's not like the tread pattern or compound of a tyre changes because of the weight distribution or suspension setup of your car.

You talk of 'working' but you're not talking about rolling resistance, wet grip or noise changing - you're talking about nuances of steering feel and other things they're not measuring here.

Much of the internet has convinced themselves that the reason Falkens come out crap in tyre tests is because they were tested on the wrong car and are infact the pinaccle of tyre performance, so I suspect this is the angle he's coming at it from.

[Mojocvh]

GC8 said:

jbi said:

Because they prioritise a green agenda... instead of the most important things like grip.

If they had done it correctly than maybe... but low rolling resistance tyres are not brilliant yet will no doubt be given A+ ratings

This¹º

and once, after an indeterminate period of time, the next "logical" step is of course to force manufacturers to only produce tyres that match the selected profile....

[andyroo]

And how will this stop the majority of people from buying the cheapest ditchfinders Kwikfit sell?

[PoleDriver]

johnpeat said:

PoleDriver said:

And how do we differentiate for the cases where a particular tyre works well with one type of car and is rubbish on another?

Doesn't happen - ever - seriously, it's not like the tread pattern or compound of a tyre changes because of the weight distribution or suspension setup of your car.

You talk of 'working' but you're not talking about rolling resistance, wet grip or noise changing - you're talking about nuances of steering feel and other things they're not measuring here.

You're also talking about over- or under-tyring and under-tyring is pretty rare (non-existant?) on new cars wheras over-tyring is rife bit not a really a safety issue.

In other words, putting the 'wrong' tyre on a car and it won't perform as well just like putting the 'wrong' driver in the car and not seeing the stated MPG or service intervals...

Edited by johnpeat on Sunday 1st April 12:47

Having looked at various user inputs for different tyres over the years I've seen many cases where 4 or 5 people say that a particular tyre has performed brilliantly (grip, noise, longevity and economy) on a specific car then a few owners of a different type of car come along and say that the tyres are rubbish!

[havoc]

johnpeat said:

PoleDriver said:

And how do we differentiate for the cases where a particular tyre works well with one type of car and is rubbish on another?

Doesn't happen - ever - seriously, it's not like the tread pattern or compound of a tyre changes because of the weight distribution or suspension setup of your car.

You talk of 'working' but you're not talking about rolling resistance, wet grip or noise changing - you're talking about nuances of steering feel and other things they're not measuring here.

You're also talking about over- or under-tyring and under-tyring is pretty rare (non-existant?) on new cars wheras over-tyring is rife bit not a really a safety issue.

In other words, putting the 'wrong' tyre on a car and it won't perform as well just like putting the 'wrong' driver in the car and not seeing the stated MPG or service intervals...

Does happen (albeit perhaps not to the level that Poley is suggesting), for the following reasons:-

- Tyre sidewalls. A 'good' tyre with a soft sidewall will work well on a car with ultra-low profile tyres, as the soft sidewall will give the right amount of compliance without robbing the wheels of precision on turn-in. Conversely, fit it in a much higher sidewall application and the car will feel 'imprecise'. Certain mfrs 'tune' sportscar handling based on a certain mfr - Honda and Bridgestone have a long-standing relationship and often Hondas feel less-responsive on squidgier rubber than the OE Bridgestones.

- Weight / 'work done' - Caterhams and Elises tend to favour very different rubber from uber-barges simply because of the very different weight being applied and thus the energy being put through the rubber...use an Elise-spec tyre on an M5 and it'll overheat and be rather a mess in short order.


I'm not suggesting that a Nanking Never-grip will ever be better than a Michelin or a Conti, BUT for a given 'class' of tyre, application does make a difference.

[Yiliterate]

Limiting it to three categories of information is slightly concerning as it inevitably encourages producers to design tyres specifically to perform well in those categories, whilst other measures of tyre performance become 'out of sight, out of mind'.

[biggy888]

There are quote a lot of vehicles that need specific tyres fitted or the car will drive like a bag of st. For example. Fit anything other than a BMW starred tyre to an X3 and your car will clunk in low gears and eventually screw the diff. This is down to tolereances in size of the tyre. for example a 235/55/17 can be manufactured within certain parameters and some tyres of that size can in reality be slightly wider or narrower, which serisouly affects how the tyre fits to the wheel and the rolling circumference. Tyre labelling will not show a customer that they are buying the completely wrong tyre for the car. Another good example is fitting Porsche rated tyres to anything but a porsche. These tyres will wear much quicker than a standard fit tyre of the same model and brand.

It seriously does matter!

[Captain Muppet]

r11co said:

Low rolling resistance (ie. reduced friction) eco tyres...

It's exactly this level of tyre ignorance that has lead to a need for a simple banding system.

Not this banding system, obviously, we need one that is useful.

[EDLT]

fk me there is a load of tin-foil hatted nonsense being spouted in here.

[PoleDriver]

EDLT said:

fk me there is a load of tin-foil hatted nonsense being spouted in here.

They're having fun!

[robinessex]

Now, let's see if I've got this correct. We're being subjected to buying tyres that, I guess, will be (eventually), subjected to specific wet grip (minimum)values. Meanwhile, the complete lack of funds to keep the roads we use these tyres on is non-existent, the roads deteriorate, so the number of 'slippery road' signs will keep growing.

[Captain Muppet]

robinessex said:

Now, let's see if I've got this correct. We're being subjected to buying tyres that, I guess, will be (eventually), subjected to specific wet grip (minimum)values. Meanwhile, the complete lack of funds to keep the roads we use these tyres on is non-existent, the roads deteriorate, so the number of 'slippery road' signs will keep growing.

The tyre companies pay for the testing and the labels. It's not paid for out of our taxes, it's amortised in new tyre costs (although as the tyre companies already test their tyres and already stick labels on them it shouldn't be a massive increase in cost).