jamesp010 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com proclaimed:
Forums you mean. And I cannot imagine why you posted to equestrian
group unless you plan on putting horseshoes on your car.

Short answer. Do NOT risk your life or the lives of your passengers
on unbranded cheap tires. Or by trying to interpret specifications
where you are so obviously out of your league.
There is absolutely no rating of a tire that will tell you anything
about the tire OTHER than the manufacturer's reputation concerning
how honest that manufacturer is in rating their tires. NOTHING.

Case in point, find a single difference between the Firestone
Exploding tires and a similar tire from Goodyear, Goodrich, Michelin,
etc.


NO. All else being equal, the thicker the tread the more the
tire will squirm and overheat at speed. NOTE that all else is
NEVER equal.
Plys can be made of steel, nylon, rayon, aramid, etc. etc. All
weigh different, and with the exception of rayon that doesn't do
too well if the ply ever gets wet due to a cut, once you know the
number of plies and what they are made of, you are still just as
ignorant of the worth of that tire as you were before you knew this.

You can make a tire last a long time. So long the rubber will be
pretty much completely oxidized before you ever see tread wear. OR
you can make a tire with traction. Pick ONE. Some manufacturer's do
a pretty good job of compromising between tread wear and traction,
most don't and the smart ones rarely try.

None, unless the resulting tire track happens to spell a dirty word
in Arabic or something. A blockier tread will be noisier, but again
you can look at tread patterns all day and still be just as ignorant
about that tire quality than you were before you started.

No. The heaviest component in a tire tends to be steel cord and tread
belts.
Good quality sidewalls are good quality sidewalls and bad quality
sidewalls are bad quality sidewalls. And that is about it.
There is no single sidewall construction appropriate for all
designs, vehicles, or driving patterns.

Sand decreases traction if on a dry road. You have heard nothing of
truth.

Post your vehicle, whether you ever go offroad, and how fast you tend
to drive plus your geographic location. Nothing beats a GOOD steel
belted radial but only Pirelli and Michelin make those with the full
wrapped tread belts. You can literally drive over a railroad spike
with either tire, and even Consumer Reports has tested this. However,
some of their models have more protection in the sidewall than others.

Or there are several other brands with consistently good, durable
tires.

KWS proclaimed:

It isn't just a joke, it is a cruel joke on anyone who actually
believes ISO has a single thing to do with actual product quality.
All it means is that you have document revision control for the
documents you CLAIM to use in your processes. It says absolutely
nothing about whether those processes should best be written on
toilet paper. And yes, I have been trained as an ISO Auditor.

larry moe 'n curly proclaimed:

tread wear rating is done by the manufacturer against their own
designated "100 rating" tire. In other words, the ratings have
not a lot of meaning within a brand and even less between brands
from different source manufacturers--of which there really aren't
that many left.

Nomen Nescio proclaimed:

Even better are the Sears private brands, typically made by Michelin
and a coupla others. You can easily tell by getting the DOT code off
the tire and looking it up.
Well, thank you for sharing, but yes, on a regular basis, I see tires
blow out. Spectacularly. And sometimes with deadly consequences. As
for your other claim, the number one cause according to DOT is simple
dead brained driver neglecting to check air pressure.

rantonrave (AT) mail (DOT) com wrote:
And Firestone is ISO 9000.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

Also, even if the process per se does not change, at least in the
automotive industry, if location of a production line changes - whether
from one room in a building to another room in the same building OR from
a plant in the US to a plant in Mexico or vice-versa, the production
line has to be certified all over again (in the automotive industry,
that is called PPAP'ing - pronounced pee-pap - what in the "old days"
was called "first article approval").

Yes - and even that is a joke in the U.S. auto industry. The process
"requires" that a FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis - pronounced
feemah - just like the federal agency for disaster relief) be done both
for the assembly or component design *and* for the manufacturing process
for same. A FMEA on the simplest part can take a team of various
disciplines several man-weeks to complete - a very tedious process that
sometimes requires those involved to lock themselves in a room or rent a
hotel room for several days.

By its very definition, the paper work and numbers generated by the
design FMEA had to feed into the beginning of the process FMEA. If you
follow the book, it is, by definition, impossible to do the process FMEA
(P-FMEA) without the design FMEA (D-FMEA) already in hand.

When I was in automotive, our first tier customer (the ones that imposed
all this crap on us) were the designers. It was their responsibility to
feed us the completed D-FMEA before we started the P-FMEA. But the way
it really worked was that they would tell us that they did not have the
resources to do the D-FMEA, but they were still going to require a P-MEA
out of us - even though that was a philisophical, technical, and
practical impossibility. When we protested, we were told that that's
the way it had to be. It was clear that not to do it would mean we
could not do business with them. Inevitable results: We had to fake the
intitial input to start our P-FMEA (prime the pump so to speak), yet a
meaningful and useful P-FMEA relies on the starting point being good
information. Ever hear the expression "Garbage in, garbage out"? Well
that was it by definition.

So there you have it. The faking of the entire quality system started
with firm direction and winking from the customer themselves - the ones
who required us to use the system. Any wonder the suppliers end up
faking the rest of it when the faking was formally kicked off by the
customer themselves? Any wonder the Firestone/Ford tire debacle
happened, followed by the inevitable finger pointing?

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

"Lon" <lon.stowell (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote

Since you see tires blow out regularly, are you able to make a correlation
between the intial price of the tire and the propensity to fail? For
instance: do you commonly hear the owner express regret over purchasing a
"cheap" tire? If so, would you agree that these are tires that failed
because some aspect of being inexpensive made them prone to failure?

On the other hand, if DOT is correct: would that not cause even "expensive"
tires to fail? Does your experience agree with the DOT observation?

I ask because you apparently have greater insight into this matter than
those of us who have opinion based solely on our experience. You see a cross
section of the experiences of others.

Ken

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:41:15 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn (AT) kinez (DOT) net>
wrote:

And both the 500 and the 721 predate ISO by a good 20 years.

On 23 Sep 2005 20:54:39 -0700, "larry moe 'n curly"
<larrymoencurly (AT) my-deja (DOT) com> wrote:


AND - Many vehicles are under-tired from the factory so the tire
doesn't stand a chance.

Of course, that is revalidating a previously validated process. (Not a
function of ISO 9000 but of GMP - good manufacturing practice, at least in
the pharmaceutical industry.)

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"Bill Putney" <bptn (AT) kinez (DOT) net> wrote

[...]