Jump to content

Tyres & Why They're Important


Ekona
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know that I appear to be the 'expert' on tyres on this forum, and as a consequence of that I tend to find myself commenting on just about every tyre thread that gets posted on here. I'm aware that sometimes I take a basic level of knowledge as a given when replying to questions or making a point, however not everyone has that understanding of why I keep banging on about tyres and so I thought it might be a good idea to actually try and explain myself and my reasons in a separate thread.

 

 

 

First off, I'll start with the caveat that I have no qualifications in tyre production, or chemical engineering, or any professional racing experience at all. Everything I say from this point on is simply a mixture of my understanding along with my own experiences. If you wish to disagree with me or correct on any point then by all means do, but at least give a reason for it: In turn, I'll try to do the same. If all I achieve with this post is to make just one person stop and think before they order a set of ditchfinders, then that's good enough for me. :)

 

 

WHY TYRES SHOULD BE EXPENSIVE

 

A tyre is a consumable, nothing more and nothing less. They come with the car when we buy it, they get used as we drive it, and they get replaced about once a year. Viewed in that sense, they are no more important to your car than brake pads or wiper blades. That said, I'd argue that brake pads are pretty vital to driving as they stop the car, and wiper blades tend to be invaluable when trying to see out of the windscreen when it's raining! What I'm getting at here is that although they are just a consumable, they are also a key part in the everyday operation of a car, be it on road or on track.

 

The perfect tyre should do and have many things: Low road noise, be comfortable, low wear rate, good grip in all conditions, communicative, and be well priced. Sadly there's not many tyres out there that can do all of these things at once, so we always tend to find the compromise and inevitably the first thing to be compromised is the cost. This is even more true in the current financial climate where every penny counts, and yet I'd argue it should be the last thing to be considered.

 

As is often said, tyres are the only thing keeping your car in contact with the road, and so that's what you're relying on to get you around safely. If you actually look at the exact contact patch of the tyre to the road you'll see it's scarily small, which makes tyre choice even more important. Manufacturers of cars and tyres alike spend millions year upon year trying to make the small differences to give a car the edge, whether that's in terms of comfort for the luxo-barges to shaving tenths of laptimes for the trackday specials. To put it into numbers I'm going to pick off the top of my head, so say spending an extra £30 per tyre could be the difference between a manufacturer who spent £1M on tyre development and one who spent £10M.

 

I've pinched the following numbers from the Camskill site today (20-1-12) to give an idea of this:

 

225/45/18

 

RE050A - £157.20

VUS - £130.80

452 - £99.95

 

Chosen deliberately on the grounds that these are probably the most popular tyres for the Zed. Almost £30 between them, and a world apart in terms of quality, and again you're looking between a budget manufacturer (Falken), one that spends a hell of a lot in design but is still relatively unknown (Vredestein), and one of if not the largest tyre maker in the world today (Bridgestone). I don't have access to their accounts, but I'm fairly confident on saying that the R&D budget of Falken is dwarfed by Vredestein, and their one is tiny compared with Bridgestone. You probably see where I was going now with the price difference between tyres and R&D working in terms of percentages. I wouldn't want a tyre that had £4.23 and a couple of rubber bands used in its design.

 

 

 

WHY A GOOD TYRE IS A SAFE TYRE

 

I've briefly touched on this on my Mixed Tyres thread, but it's worth mentioning here too. Ignoring any factors about tread design or grooves vs vees, in simple matters a tyre with a good compound will be a tyre that will stop quicker, grip harder and last longer than a poorer rival. Add back in the tread type and you then have a tyre that disperses water well too, so we're left with a tyre that stops and handles in both wet and dry conditions. You know in QuikFit et al where they put those signs on the wall that say how a worn tyre can take twice as long to stop you as a new one? Well they're right, but you can get the same difference between a good tyre and bad tyre. If you have a look through various tyre tests that the press do (EVO magazine is an easy one to find, however I take their results with a pinch of salt given their huge advertorials these days) you'll see the difference between various tyres, and between the top premium ones and the bottom budget ones the stopping distance can be twice as much. Scary when you go pace out an extra 20m of stopping distance and realise how far into the car in front you could end up.

 

Moving away from braking distances, there's also the issue of grip to consider from a safety point of view. Sadly the muppet to decent driver ratio is increasing on the roads, and there are more and more times where you need to avoid someone else being an idiot. In times like that would you really want to find yourself running out grip because you saved a few quid per corner? It's a rhetorical question, but one worth thinking over.

 

 

BETTER TYRE = MORE FUN

 

Well, it doesn't always as in the right situation a shagged set of cheapo tyres can be far more fun than a set with too much grip (I'm thinking wet airfield on a drifting day), but for the most part none of us bought a Zed because we drive like Miss Daisy. We drive performance cars because we like performance, and part of that comes with the promise of fast speed.

 

A good experiment is to find your favourite wide roundabout and go round it normally, then go round it 5mph faster, and then 5mph faster again (conditions allowing, of course!). Even 5mph makes an incredible change to your perception of what is fast, and if you were offered the chance of an extra 50bhp for £120 I'm pretty sure you'd snatch someone's arm off. Cornering speed is the extra bhp equivalent when it comes to those of us that prefer the twisties to straight line stuff, and as much as it would be fantastic to be able to find a tyre that gives you improved grip at a lower price, I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. Sure, you could settle for a set of four budget tyres and still enjoy the Zed, and indeed you would, but you'd also be removing something that makes the car so very special.

 

Referring back to the above section on safety and braking distances, you also have to remember that a tyre that shortens that distance means you can brake later before the corner, and then because you'll have more grip you can then accelerate faster too. I suspect that a good tyre will shave a fair bit off a 0-60 time, if that's what floats your boat.

 

 

BETTER TYRE = MORE CONTROL

 

This is where it gets very personal and every one will have a different opinion on what makes a tyre 'feel' good. For me, it's one that lets me know exactly what is happening between rubber and road, regardless of whether I'm crawling through town or holding a 15deg slip angle. Normally a tyre with good grip will have good communication as you need one to be able to rely on the other, however some of the most communicative tyres I've ever used haven't actually had that high a grip. The ones that spring to mind are the Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta (on a 350Z) and the Yokohama Advan Neova (on an S1 Elise). The best way I can describe how good these two tyres are at letting you know what is going on underneath is to imagine there's a bloke in the passenger seat beside you, telling you in no uncertain terms whether the road surface is starting to get a little worn, or the camber is changing by half a degree, or if the rear offside tyre is down by 1psi compared to the rest. You may ultimately not end up going as fast as a tyre with more grip, but you'll have so much fun you may not care.

 

If you can get that communication from a tyre then you can really start to explore the limits of the car, and when pushing on that's when you can really get a sense of oneness with your car.

 

 

WHY CHEAP TYRES ARE A FALSE ECONOMY

 

Of course, it would be churlish of me not to mention the cost of tyres here. To take it to extremes, a set of four Falken 452s would set you back £425.90 but a set of Michelin Pilot Super Sports would be £842.80. Give or take that's twice as much, and that's a lot of money. It's about five tanks of fuel, or a track day at Silverstone GP, or a years RFL, or an extra £1.16 a day if you really want to break it down. That said, I suspect that people who are considering the F452s probably aren't going to be considering the PSS anyway, so it's a slight unfair comparison. How about comparing 452s to VUS? £579.80 for the VUS, or a difference of just £155. That's about 700 miles worth of fuel, or an extra 42p a day. Sorry, but when we're talking about the running costs of a £30K sports car then that's peanuts, it really is. For your extra cash you get a tyre that is much better in both wet and dry grip, and a light year ahead in terms of communication, and it also happens to look pretty good too!

 

Even if you stick to the top end, so comparing RE050A with PSS, £692.80 plays £842.80, or the same £150. Again, we're talking about a tyre that really is very good (I run them on the 911) compared with one that is out of this world. More grip, more feel, and they will last longer too. Suddenly that £150 really doesn't seem a huge amount, not in terms of what you get back if you do spend it. A better quality tyre will usually have a harder compound anyway, so by spending that bit extra you usually will get more miles out of it anyway.

 

Just for a giggle, I priced up the cheapest set of tyres too. AutoGrip F107s, £236.40. Almost half the price of the 452s then, so you're actually better off going super-cheapy if you want to save a few quid. I jest of course, as clearly no-one in their right mind would put those on a performance car as they'll be awful, but if you're trying to justify spending less then why not take a 50% saving over a 36% one? Of course, you'd end up in a ditch after 30m, but hey, at least you've saved the cash, right?!

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I'm trying to get across here is that there's more to tyres than just the price versus how quick you can go. There's a lot more to it than that, and without hitting the science I hope I've covered most of it here. I didn't touch on ride comfort or road noise too much as unfortunately these tend not to go hand in hand with performance tyres due to the lower profile, but generally the better the tyre the less the noise. If there's a demand for it I could always do a follow up piece later if people want.

 

I hope that's put my opinion across without sounding too preachy or over-dramatic: At the end of the day, I'm just a car nut like the rest of you and I don't want to be lectured either, but I also don't mind admitting when there's gaps in my knowledge where I can learn more. Next time either myself or anyone says that you're better off buying X tyre over Y tyre despite costing more, have a read through this and decide for yourself after taking all the facts into consideration and you could end up with a car that gives you that little bit wider grin on your face, which the Zed is already top of its class at. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbs: super post that Dan

 

I suppose to some degree its horses for courses as well, someone tearing it up wherever they go would benefit from PSS vs someone who drives like its sunday every day would they need PSSs, not so sure. Regarding the costing, I think comparing the costs my view is that they are somewhat irrelevant as:

 

- Bridgestone may well do more R&D than Falken, a sunk cost that Bridgestone have to recover, however doesnt mean that Falken are massively under developed as replication of R&D is common place, I'm pretty sure Falken get by by taking apart PSSs and making something similar.

- You pay for branding, like it or not, the cost is not all about the quality and build, you pay a premium on top for the Bridgestone brand, if other markets and products are to go by can be anything up to 20%

 

So the difference I suspect is not one is twice the cost of the other if you take this into account, probably more like about 25%-50% higher - but still a noticable difference but not as marked.

 

..and on a common sense point, better tyres does not make for driving faster on public roads, they wont save you if you are rattling along at 100mph on a motorway or driving 10 yards behind a car at 70mph on a motorway, no matter what they are!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having driven on both the VUS and the F452's i know both tyres well, i would also point out that in your discussion the 452's are possibly a bad choice for comparison.

 

my reason for saying this is that you refer to research budget and that falkens must be quiet small, but i was recently informed that falken 452's are actually made by dunlop, or under licence from dunlop. and if you look at the 452 and compare it to the dunlop sport maxx they are very similiar

 

dunlop_sp_sport_maxx.jpg

 

 

When speaking to a tyre shop recently he said that as far as he was aware they were manufactured by the same people.

 

also as far as i am aware Vredestein didn't design the tyre they bought the design from an other manufacuturer (or the designer from somewhere whos company weren't using it.) i think the info is on their website somewhere.

 

I'd agree the falken is a budget tyre but i wouldn't say thats neccessarily a bad thing.

 

Toyo are a prime example of this, when they first came out no one knew them, but because their tyres were competitive in price they gained popularity. they are no longer as cheap as they used to be. personally i think the toyo T1R is crap but they make a good track tyre in the R888.

 

just because its cheaper doesn;t make it worse. it may not be as competitive in performance as the PSS but it meets the needs of most drivers needs. the difference between them and ditch finders is that you stay on the road with falkens.

 

if we were taking this stance then i would argue that those who don't swap to winter tyres for 4 months of the year are taking the same risk.

 

if i had money to burn i wouldn't be as picky with how much i spent on tyres, but on my jag the difference was £600 between the falkens and the Pirelli Assymetricos and after driving on the both i'd actually say the falkens were better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great write up Dan :thumbs:

 

 

I had the 452's on my car for around 18 months. Covered 15,000 miles and endured a number of seasons, conditions, types of endurance (Track/Hooning over the welsh hills) as well as my commute to work. For me the tyre is a budget tyre and you pay budget price. Don't get me wrong, it's not a terrible tyre, just doesn't fit my driving needs. It's great for A-B and spirited driving, but I found a number of flaws with the tyre but overall it's good middle of the road contender.

 

I had the RE050's on the car when purchased and changed to the Falkens, I'm now reverting back to the RE050's as they perform better and I trust them. Next step would be to try the elite package of the dunlop SPS. But that's another year away thank god ££££££!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great read and it will make me think twice about putting 452's on 19" when I do get them. I've never really rated the 452's but sometimes you don't realise how important tyres are when you're constantly thinking about power gains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuff about Dunlop making the 452s

I hadn't heard this, I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the heads up :thumbs:

 

You're right about Vredestein using outside designers, I believe it's Giugiaro but would have to check. That said, if a massive design company can help make a tyre as good as the VUS are, I wonder what they could do with the real big guns...?

 

- Bridgestone may well do more R&D than Falken, a sunk cost that Bridgestone have to recover, however doesnt mean that Falken are massively under developed as replication of R&D is common place, I'm pretty sure Falken get by by taking apart PSSs and making something similar.

- You pay for branding, like it or not, the cost is not all about the quality and build, you pay a premium on top for the Bridgestone brand, if other markets and products are to go by can be anything up to 20%

Agree with both of these points, to an extent. My costs for R&D were plucked out of thin air for example, I have no idea if their budgets are actually 10x less/more! :lol: You're right though, they will rip each others' tyres apart and study it, but nothing is quite as good as doing the original research yourself.

 

With regards to the extra for branding, again I suspect there's a good element to this as to get market share because of their lesser-known name, the smaller companies will have to reduce the cost of their stuff to make it seem a viable alternative, but I've yet to meet a budget tyre as good as the premium alternative. Rich gets closest to this with the R888/A048 comparison, but having tried both extensively the 048 is still the better tyre by some margin and even more so now Toyo have massively increased their prices on their good tyres (R888 and R1R) over the last couple of years. Possibly this could be more down to them realising they've made a name for themselves in that market now so can afford to bump the prices up to increase revenue? I don't know.

 

Re40 are more expensive then VUS and not half as good.

Not entirely a fair comparison as the RE040 is now a very old tyre, and it's deliberately priced high because Bridgestone really don't want to have to make it any more: They'd much rather people went to the 050A, but some manufacturers still request it for OEM spec on older cars.

 

Great read. Im off to buy a set of yingyang specials now for £100 a set. :thumbs:

:lol::lol::lol: This made me chuckle :thumbs:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...maybe to a point....but then again....hmmmmm

 

Decent write up as a vague general rule. I wouldn't take the brand names into consideration at all. On top of that a few quid difference doesnt mean better tyre...it could be different company sales policy. In addition, a tyre that is crap here ie 040 would be superb in Dubai lets say, for weather and temperature reasons alone....

 

Then it's the driver. My gf is happy with her 452s on her TT but I think the grip is horrible and the previously worn contis were better. But she only drives around town and always 20 mph slower than the cars grip level. If you are asking me they are fab for her and she can spend the change in face plaster and paint!

I just try and avoid driving it as for my driving style they are dangerous....if I dont want to write another car off I need to stick to my PSS. :)

 

Ps don't mention braking btw....discs and pads are cheapo stuff too....they can't lock the wheels on ice let alone tarmac! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Re40 are more expensive then VUS and not half as good.

Not entirely a fair comparison as the RE040 is now a very old tyre, and it's deliberately priced high because Bridgestone really don't want to have to make it any more: They'd much rather people went to the 050A, but some manufacturers still request it for OEM spec on older cars.

 

 

What about the rest? Have you used VUS on your car? Have you used fk452 on your car?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:thumbs: super post that Dan

 

 

..and on a common sense point, better tyres does not make for driving faster on public roads, they wont save you if you are rattling along at 100mph on a motorway or driving 10 yards behind a car at 70mph on a motorway, no matter what they are!

Couldnt agree more. Also,knowing the limits of the car,but more importantly,isnt knowing your own limits,more important? Does a really good driver avoid most accidents? I know if a big lorry was to plough into you,then its nothing to do with the driver,or the tyres they have,but in most cases of accidents,driver awareness and knowledge and anticipation,could probably have avoided them. Im no traffic expert,or police officer,but i know that being aware of my surroundings,and aware of what other people are doing,or what they are about to do,has saved my skin countless times. Non of which has anything to do with the tyres that are on my car.

Im not saying what you are stating is false,its not at all,and really makes some good points. However,i have Falken 452's,and yes,il admit,they are probably not as good as MSP's,though iv never driven with them. However,as you have stated,its a £30k car,its not a 60-70k car,like your 911,which id happily admit is very nice. I know people get a hard time on here about tyres,and yes,some questions are pretty silly,and obvious. However,if you drive a 50,60,70k car,then you can probably afford to put the very best tyres on it. What im trying to get at,is that isnt the cost of the tyre proportional to the cost of the car they are going on? Im not picking holes or fights,as i think what you are saying is great,as it promotes using some common sense,and thinking about what goes on your car,like what goes in the fuel tank,or in the engine. Im a case in point,i have previous experience with the 452,and know they are good tyres (though will happily admit they are not the best) so i had no hesitation in getting them on my 19"s for the zed,especially taking into consideration that i do 30 miles each way to work,mainly on A roads,and through MK. If i were to spend another £400 on tyres,i think i would not have appreciated them,as my driving is mainly the trip to work. On icy or wet roads,maybe i would have been able to go faster with the really expensive tyres,but then isnt that more dangerous as having low spec rubber,but driving to the conditions?

 

This has turned into a long one,sorry. Its not a rant,and i am certainly not criticising what you have written,merely that there are alot of other factors that can save peoples lives,not just tyres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with above also, getting better tyres doesnt make you any safer really as if you know the limits of your tyres your fine. Your probably pushing far to hard on public roads to need MPSS IMO. Plus if it does go all up then you will be doing more speed too. I put falken tyres on my mum and dads car as they are great tyres. They are much grippier than your run of the mill stuff. You talk down to people like they dont know. As said above we know these tyres are DECENT. Not the best but we drive accordingly. If we all had the money we would all run PSS wouldnt we? But this isnt practical for most people nor do they need the extra performance or cost.

 

You talk about R&D money like its proportianal. Its not an exact science though. Look how much money intel pumped into their prescott cored pentium 4's compared to little amd with their athlon 64s. Intel spent billions, amd didnt. Amd's product was better.

 

You still only answer half my post in your last responce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the rest? Have you used VUS on your car? Have you used fk452 on your car?

No, because I wouldn't put rubber like that on a 911, warranty issues aside. If you mean did I have them on my 350Z, the answer is still no because of the reasons I mentioned in my first post. If you actually mean do I have any experience of using those tyres on the Zed, then yes I do as my brother ran both tyres on his Zed.

 

 

especially taking into consideration that i do 30 miles each way to work,mainly on A roads,and through MK. If i were to spend another £400 on tyres,i think i would not have appreciated them,as my driving is mainly the trip to work. On icy or wet roads,maybe i would have been able to go faster with the really expensive tyres,but then isnt that more dangerous as having low spec rubber,but driving to the conditions?

Sorry, didn't mean to cut off all your post but I didn't want to quote too much text to keep the thread legible.

 

All good points, but if I could respond to the direct point I've quoted: A tyre like the RE050A would still be better for a long commute as the road noise is far less than the 452, and it's also a harder compound so will last longer and you'll get more miles out of them before needing to change. I'm not convinced that any argument about being able to go faster in wet or icy conditions just because you have better tyres is realistic as you should always drive to the conditions regardless, and if something were to go wrong through no fault of your own surely you'd want the best tyres available to give you the most grip to get yourself out of it? I have to admit that I enjoy driving in wet conditions more than in the dry due to the lower grip levels allowing exploration of the limits at lower speeds, but again it's all about making sure that I'm still well inside the limits of both my own skill and that of the vehicle I'm driving.

 

It's a fair comment that my budget does allow me to run better rubber than a smaller one, but I still used to put the MPS on the Zed because it was worth the difference. I also used to run A048 on the VXR220 before that, and as soon as the MPSS become Porsche-approved I'll jump ship from the RE050As and get those because the benefits far outweigh the cost. We're also talking about Zed owners who will spend £2000 on posh wheels but wrap them in cheap rubber, so it's not like the budget isn't there to spend if they so choose. Of course it's all down to how the individual wants to prioritise their budget, and they're absolutely entitled to do so, I'm just offering an alternative opinion on why I think it's a false economy.

 

 

Thanks for the comments though Daryl, it's exactly that kind of debate I was hoping this thread would start. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with above also, getting better tyres doesnt make you any safer really as if you know the limits of your tyres your fine. Your probably pushing far to hard on public roads to need MPSS IMO. Plus if it does go all up then you will be doing more speed too. I put falken tyres on my mum and dads car as they are great tyres. They are much grippier than your run of the mill stuff. You talk down to people like they dont know. As said above we know these tyres are DECENT. Not the best but we drive accordingly. If we all had the money we would all run PSS wouldnt we? But this isnt practical for most people nor do they need the extra performance or cost.

 

You talk about R&D money like its proportianal. Its not an exact science though. Look how much money intel pumped into their prescott cored pentium 4's compared to little amd with their athlon 64s. Intel spent billions, amd didnt. Amd's product was better.

 

You still only answer half my post in your last responce.

I didn't realise you had a question, if you'd like to re-phrase it I'll try my best to answer.

 

Do you NEED decent tyres on the road? No, you only NEED legal ones, so a set of Ditchfinders would do on any vehicle. A statement of need is not the point I'm trying to make, it's about promoting why a better tyre is a better choice for any application for a multitude of reasons. Of course if you're going faster there's a risk of a bigger accident, but I'm not talking about driving balls to the wall everywhere. It's not about speed alone, it's about control.

 

 

I would also guess that Intel also spent billions more on their current multi-core CPU range than AMD have on theirs, and they have a much, much better product. What's your point? I didn't say it was an exact science, and if I have to point out again that my numbers were made up off the top of my head I may just explode, my point was that overall as a rule the bigger manufacturers make better tyres. Every now and then there's an exception, but it's very rare. It's the same in any field, not just tyres. Vacuum cleaners, ballpoint pens, mobile phones: The best ones are the ones made by big companies, are they not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries Dan,i like a good debate. I totally understand where you are coming from. As you said,it depends on how people what to prioritise their budget. Luckily when i move house at the end of March,the car will be spending more time in the garage during the week hopefully,and when my Falkens do run out of life,then il hopefully be in a position to buy something like MPS or similar. I had no idea that the cars warranty was affected by the the tyres you put on. As surely the tyres will have no affect on stuff breaking on the car would it? If you were to put rubbish tyres on you are more likely to have a crash,but thats not a warranty issue,thats an insurance issue. I think if you buy something like that,especially new enough to have a warranty,then its surely a given that people will put,and will be able to afford to put the best rubber on?

Where do you stand on tyres like Maxxis? From the little iv seen,they are a new ish company,but meant to be a very good performer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the other point you are trying to get across,is that the expensive rubber,like the MPS,can handle more of different environments. I know that i was overheating my Falken abit on track,as i could see large clumps of rubber on the tread blocks,though my mate with his V8 M3 with MPSS,also had the same issue. Maybe thats what happens on softer rubber,i dont know. Are you saying that its not just the level that is raised of what the tyre can do,its also the variety of scenarios that it can handle?

I still think that evasive driving is an absolute last resort,and that better awareness and foresight into what people are about to do,and what they are thinking about doing will save more lives,and cars. An expensive tyre is more likely to get you out the poo if you need to yes,i just think that in most instances that if you are aware enough,then you shouldnt have to be in that scenario.

Im dreading the drive to and from work today. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

photo.JPGDan you were right about Giugiaro, just went out and checked my new Vred's, see picture. Can't comment on them too much compared to the Falkens which they replaced as I've only done about 300 miles or so and want to make sure I've got all the tyre manufacturing goo off them before I put them through their paces.

 

 

 

Stuff about Dunlop making the 452s

I hadn't heard this, I'll have to look into it. Thanks for the heads up :thumbs:

 

You're right about Vredestein using outside designers, I believe it's Giugiaro but would have to check. That said, if a massive design company can help make a tyre as good as the VUS are, I wonder what they could do with the real big guns...?

 

- Bridgestone may well do more R&D than Falken, a sunk cost that Bridgestone have to recover, however doesnt mean that Falken are massively under developed as replication of R&D is common place, I'm pretty sure Falken get by by taking apart PSSs and making something similar.

- You pay for branding, like it or not, the cost is not all about the quality and build, you pay a premium on top for the Bridgestone brand, if other markets and products are to go by can be anything up to 20%

Agree with both of these points, to an extent. My costs for R&D were plucked out of thin air for example, I have no idea if their budgets are actually 10x less/more! :lol: You're right though, they will rip each others' tyres apart and study it, but nothing is quite as good as doing the original research yourself.

 

With regards to the extra for branding, again I suspect there's a good element to this as to get market share because of their lesser-known name, the smaller companies will have to reduce the cost of their stuff to make it seem a viable alternative, but I've yet to meet a budget tyre as good as the premium alternative. Rich gets closest to this with the R888/A048 comparison, but having tried both extensively the 048 is still the better tyre by some margin and even more so now Toyo have massively increased their prices on their good tyres (R888 and R1R) over the last couple of years. Possibly this could be more down to them realising they've made a name for themselves in that market now so can afford to bump the prices up to increase revenue? I don't know.

 

Re40 are more expensive then VUS and not half as good.

Not entirely a fair comparison as the RE040 is now a very old tyre, and it's deliberately priced high because Bridgestone really don't want to have to make it any more: They'd much rather people went to the 050A, but some manufacturers still request it for OEM spec on older cars.

 

Great read. Im off to buy a set of yingyang specials now for £100 a set. :thumbs:

:lol::lol::lol: This made me chuckle :thumbs:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you slag off tyres you have never driven with or put on your car? You tell people that they are rubbish or to avoid them yet you have not even tried them?

 

LoL

 

I believe Dan has driven his brother Zed alot on the tyres he is discussing here.

 

I wouldn't say he is slagging them off either. More just discussing the pros and cons of certain brands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you slag off tyres you have never driven with or put on your car? You tell people that they are rubbish or to avoid them yet you have not even tried them?

 

LoL

 

I believe Dan has driven his brother Zed alot on the tyres he is discussing here.

 

I wouldn't say he is slagging them off either. More just discussing the pros and cons of certain brands.

 

In this thread look at others. Why a post based on here say and telling everyone we are idiots because we don't know the function of tyres and should buy the most expensive even if we don't need the extra performance, was stickied i dont Know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this thread look at others. Why a post based on here say and telling everyone we are idiots because we don't know the function of tyres and should buy the most expensive even if we don't need the extra performance, was stickied i dont Know.

Sorry, but that post doesnt make a lot of sense to me :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...