June Tire Review Magazine

[Q45tech]

14% percentage of drivers who correctly check their tire pressure.55%....................................who believe that the correct inflation pressure is printed on the side wall.45%....................................who believe that if their vehicle is fully loaded they are better off if the tires are a "little bit" underinflated.70%....................................who don't know how to check if their tires are bald.43%....................................who have NOT rotated their tires within the last 8,000 miles.

Source from a study conducted by RMA in Jan and Feb 2003.

[PalmerWMD]

45%....................................who believe that if their vehicle is fully loaded they are better off if the tires are a "little bit" underinflated.Source from a study conducted by RMA in Jan and Feb 2003.

[Jesda]

Rolling down the interstate I'm always worried about the minivans and such with one or two very underinflated tires. Definitely not vehicles I'd feel safe driving next to or behind.

People never check. You'd think they would find out at least during an oil change? Wait, some people rarely change their oil.

-J.

[SmithSR]

Good point about minivans. These drivers are the same people who accuse me of cheating them out of their hard-earned money when I tell them that they ran a tire flat and have ruined the sidewall... or when I say it looks like your front tires have not been rotated...ever...the shoulders on the front tires are worn down to the steel belt...they must be replaced. That's about the time I'm called a criminal. It's funny, because when they originally bought tires, they didn't leave a phone number to call them with a reminder that the car they drive needs maintenance.

The majority of drivers pay no attention to anything except the latte in their lap, the lipstick they are applying, or the screaming child who's unbuckled and climbing around in the back seat.

I totally agree with those percentage numbers. Even with the latest information campaigns following the much-hyped Ford/Firestone debacle, most drivers are still completely unaware.

[Q45tech]

Worse the new tire safety standards as orginally proposed would have take 50% of the tires off the market as not being in compliance. The final rules are so watered down that less than 11% will have to be strengthened by a redesign!

Now if we could only get owners to understand that most are near worthless after 2 years!

Look at our own site, so many seem proud, that they are able to find and use a $50-$70 tire instead of a $120 one, they surely are not demanding that the manufactures make a $200 15" tire for them.

[maxnix]

It's like passing those guys on the highway with the red MIL indicatior blazing away on their instrument cluster. You have to wonder what's eligible for imminent failure? Engine? Brakes? Transmission?

[SmithSR]

Look at our own site, so many seem proud, that they are able to find and use a $50-$70 tire instead of a $120 one, they surely are not demanding that the manufactures make a $200 15" tire for them.

I couldn't agree more. It's one thing to look for a fair deal. In my opinion, it's a whole different thing to go looking for tires on the cheap. I haven't been around the auto industry as long as some of you guys, but in the last six years, I have not come across a cheap tire that performs better than an expensive tire. The beauty of the tire replacement industry is that it does not suffer from too much "brand-hype". You really do get what you pay for. Sure, some performance tires are priced very high, but I have no problem paying extra for a tire that performs better. All too often, people go looking for phat tyte rims, blow their whole budget on those rims, then try and find the cheapest tire possible. To me, this is backwards thinking.

A tire has only so much contact patch. All the torque in the world is useless if you can't transfer that turning force to the ground. By the same token, big brake kits are cool looking and perform very well...but again, if you have tires that aren't up to the job of providing maximum grip, was your money wasted on the brake upgrade?? Usually not a *waste* to upgrade brakes, as few drivers near the limits of tire adhesion on a daily basis, but there is a general principle in play....better grip costs more, but gives a greater return on your total investment in performance(brakes+tires).

There's always a compromise with tires....grip vs. mileage. Grip means superior casing construction, softer compound(expensive), which also means the tire wears faster(cost of frequent replacement=expensive). Higher mileage means harder rubber compound(less expensive), also meaning fewer replacements(again, less expensive). Most popular tire makers build excellent tires in a number of sizes that offer a good compromise of grip/mileage, as well as tires for both extremes: soft compound tires and also 700 treadwear rated tires.

[reggiegsd]

I've resigned myself to replacing my Q's tires every year. Thats $500 or so a year in tires. So far the Yoko's are only lasting 20,000 miles or so.

Thats tires and upper links every year and shock and T/C rod every 18 months.

But then I did jump on a 944Turbo last week on a back road in the Poconos. The Q stayed on his butt no matter how twisty it got. And he was trying too.

Maybe that is why the Yokos and upper links only last a year.