Re: Re[2]: Bridgestone tires

[John Greenstreet <jgreenst@motown.ge.com>]

> From quattro-owner@swiss.ans.net Thu Oct 20 09:56:07 1994
> Date: Thu, Oct 20, 1994 9:31 AM
> From: "Barton P. Chambers"  <bchambers@atlantic.nos.noaa.gov>

> 
> Well, John, in response to your question (YMMV of course), my recommendation
> of Comp T/As is based on actually owning and *driving* on the tires.  I
> have Dunlop D40M2s on my li'l red toy presently, and I don't like them as
> well as either the P7s or P700s that proceeded them (and they are truly
> "dated designs").  The Dunlops are adequate tires, but I *personally* don't
> find them as communicative as the Pirellis were in the dry conditions I
> usually try to limit the Pcar to. OTOH, the Dunlops *are* superior in the
> wet, but see the preceding sentence.

But how do the D40M2s compare to the Comp T/As?  My experience with
both was like night and day, and having the D40M2s on my 1989 190E made
it an easy sale--these tyres were far superior to the already-good
stock Uniroyal 340s, which, BTW, are an OEM tyre for the BMW M5.
And the D40M2 is already one generation old.

> 
> My experience with BFG Comp T/As started with their first generation.  I
> replaced (whatever junk) OEM tires were on my '80 Scirocco S with BFGs. I
> had a full aftermarket Bilstein BTS-172 suspension on the Scirocco, and
> always "drove the living snot out of it" (your indulgence is requested for
> the artistic license), wet and dry.  I have used BFGs to replace OEM rubber
> on both my other VW/Audi products ('87 Cabriolet, departed, and the Syncro)
> because of my *delight* with the tires.  I find them very civilized and
> controllable; they communicate what's going on clearly, and grip well under
> all conditions.  In addition, they give better wear than they should (they
> are the *only* tires I have *ever* gotten more than 20K Mi with on any
> car).

I'm not saying they're bad tyres, just that there may be better available
today.

> 
> So what do I know?  I've only been a licensed driver since 1955.  Well, I
> do know that the considerations used by a manufacturer to select OEM tires
> for a particular car are not always those the consumer would use.  

No, but they will generally fit the best tyre for the car's intended 
purpose, e.g. Goodyear GAs for touring cars; Dunlop SP 4000s or Conti
CZ91s for serious driving; Silver-, er, Bridgestones for econoboxes
and a few top-of-the line cars.

> 
> Auto, Motor Und Sport is, IMHO, just another motor-rag (Gasp!).  Road tests
> of Autos or Tires are no better than the *journalists* who conduct them.
> YM*Will*V.  These tests are a good place to start, but YOUR test should be
> the deciding factor in YOUR case.  

I agree.  However, the ams tests are by far the most comprehensive I
have ever seen, measuring at least 10 objective parameters for each
tyre, and then separately listing the subjective measurements.  The
objective measurements show that there are huge differences between
tyres of different ratings, e.g. S and V-rated.  Hydroplaning speed
among V-rated tyres varies as much as 10 mph, and can be 20-30 mph
higher than S-rated tyres.  Call me crazy, but I'd much rather have a
tyre that hydroplanes (in 6 mm. of water) at 75 mph rather than 45
mph. :^)

BTW, what other "auto rag" crash tests twelve cars a year with far more
sophisticated dummies and instrumentation than our own government can
muster?  What other measures tailpipe pollutants and drive-by noise as
part of auto tests, and measures "Seitenwindabweichung"--the deviation
in a car's course from a straight line, in meters, when subjected to a
90 km/h side wind while driven at a speed of 100 km/h?  Come to think
of it, what other auto rag costs $130/year for a subscription? (Yikes!).
They also do about three comprehensive tyre tests a year.

I find that most of ams' comments regarding cars and their associated
products correlate with my experiences, while many of the domestic rags
are hit-or-miss.  If ams ever lapses in objectivity, they hear about it
in the four pages of letters from readers (serious flames!).  They also
feature excerpts from car mags around the world showing other
viewpoints.


  Finally (the crowd roars it gratitude),
> tire technology is so good today that the differences in test results isn't
> worth the Position of Vice President of the US (i.e, a bucket of warm
> spit).  

I drove S4s with three different types of rubber and there are
significant differences between them.  The grip of the Dunlops is
nothing short of phenomenal, and these were all top-rated tyres
of the newest generation.  However, I liked the ride of the Conti CZ90s
better; that with the Dunlops was quite punishing.

> 
> No offense intended, John, I'm still smilin'...

No offense taken!  Now I hope you're not offended! :^)