Re: Ultra low profile tyres for sedate drivers only?

#21

Adrian wrote:

Quote:

Bod <bodron57 (AT) tiscali (DOT) co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Hey, here's a novel idea... How about "not hitting kerbs" and "looking
where the fuck you're going"?

Avoiding potholes on a dark or foggy road can be a tad more difficult.

Only if you're outdriving your lights and/or visibility.

What if it's a sack of anvils, not a pothole?

True, there's not many a day goes by, that I don't
see a sack of anvils or an upright piano in the road.

Bod

#22

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

Quote:

Anyone who has tyres other than 65 profile is a fashion victim.

Umm, most of my fleet has 80 profile or taller.

Yebbut you're weird.

But am I a wierd fashion victim, or just wierd?

Quote:

Hey, here's a novel idea... How about "not hitting kerbs" and "looking
where the fuck you're going"?

Every hire car I've had in the last five years has had kerbed alloys.

"Hire cars frequently driven by people who don't give a fuck!"
Shock news! Hold the front page! Pictures at ten!

Quote:

I get the feeling that one of the reasons off-roaders were getting so
popular in London is that they cope well with sleeping policemen, raised
kerbs and bloody big potholes.

....without having to look where you're going.

Quote:

Swerving to avoid the ruts and potholes in the road can be a tad
difficult.

It can if you don't look where you're going, yes.

#23

Bod <bodron57 (AT) tiscali (DOT) co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Quote:

Hey, here's a novel idea... How about "not hitting kerbs" and
"looking where the fuck you're going"?

Avoiding potholes on a dark or foggy road can be a tad more difficult.

Only if you're outdriving your lights and/or visibility.

What if it's a sack of anvils, not a pothole?

True, there's not many a day goes by, that I don't see a sack of anvils
or an upright piano in the road.

Let's just hope your complacency doesn't catch you out, eh?

#24

Adrian wrote:

Quote:

Bod <bodron57 (AT) tiscali (DOT) co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Hey, here's a novel idea... How about "not hitting kerbs" and
"looking where the fuck you're going"?

Avoiding potholes on a dark or foggy road can be a tad more difficult.

Only if you're outdriving your lights and/or visibility.

What if it's a sack of anvils, not a pothole?

True, there's not many a day goes by, that I don't see a sack of anvils
or an upright piano in the road.

Let's just hope your complacency doesn't catch you out, eh?

What complacency?
Haven't hit anything in 44yrs.
Must've been very lucky.

Bod

#25

Bod <bodron57 (AT) tiscali (DOT) co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Quote:

Hey, here's a novel idea... How about "not hitting kerbs" and
"looking where the fuck you're going"?

Avoiding potholes on a dark or foggy road can be a tad more
difficult.

Only if you're outdriving your lights and/or visibility.

What if it's a sack of anvils, not a pothole?

True, there's not many a day goes by, that I don't see a sack of
anvils or an upright piano in the road.

Let's just hope your complacency doesn't catch you out, eh?

What complacency?

This complacency!
<points down>

Quote:

Haven't hit anything in 44yrs.
Must've been very lucky.

Of course, the other alternative explanation is that it's really not that
difficult to avoid hitting things in the road.

#26

Adrian <toomany2cvs (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

I get the feeling that one of the reasons off-roaders were getting so
popular in London is that they cope well with sleeping policemen, raised
kerbs and bloody big potholes.

...without having to look where you're going.

I think you will find that's normal for 90% of the driving, cycling and
walking public.

Quote:

Swerving to avoid the ruts and potholes in the road can be a tad
difficult.

It can if you don't look where you're going, yes.

No, in North London at least it can be difficult because any serve
simply takes you into another pothole.

#27

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

Quote:

I get the feeling that one of the reasons off-roaders were getting so
popular in London is that they cope well with sleeping policemen,
raised kerbs and bloody big potholes.

...without having to look where you're going.

I think you will find that's normal for 90% of the driving, cycling and
walking public.

Indeed it is. But is that a _good_ thing?

Quote:

Swerving to avoid the ruts and potholes in the road can be a tad
difficult.

It can if you don't look where you're going, yes.

No, in North London at least it can be difficult because any serve
simply takes you into another pothole.

Slow down, then.

#28

Adrian wrote:

Quote:

"Ret." <xxx> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

I laughed my socks off at this Watchdog article. Ultra low profile
tyres on UK road going vehicles are no different to stick-on boot
spoilers.

What profile are the tyres on your Rover, Kevin?

215/55 R16. Hardly 'Ultra-Low' !

By the standards of a decade or two ago, very much so.

There is a development amongst manufacturers now to somehow *assume*
that owners want low profile tyres. Many 'upper-spec' cars in a
model's range have bigger wheels and lower profile tyres. Why?
Don't you think that prospective purchasers should be given a choice
(and given information on the implications of that choice?)

We've been here before. You clearly don't understand the money that's
spent on market research and customer clinics by manufacturers.

If my memory serves me correctly, when I was looking recently at the C5, the
lower spec cars had 16" wheels whilst the higher spec had 18". It is my
belief that this is simply a way for manufacturers to add on expensive items
to customers who are prepared to pay more for higher spec trim - but don't
fully understand the implications. Tell me this: if the larger wheels were
an option, and C5 purchasers were told: "You may if you wish upgrade to 18"
wheels and low profile tyres. The extra cost is Â£600. You should be aware
that although the 18" wheels may look better - they will result in a harder
ride, greater road noise in the cabin, and replacement tyres will cost
considerably more than the 16" tyres" - how many purchasers do you think
would opt to 'upgrade'? (I put the word 'upgrade' in inverted commas because
as far as I am concerned, opting for a harder ride, more road noise, and
greater expense down the line, is far from being an 'upgrade'!)

Quote:

It's difficult to do precise comparisons but, for example, a Pirelli
195/65 R15 costs Â£58.40 A Pirelli 255/45 ZR18 costs Â£197.00.

A Michelin 125/90 15 costs about Â£100. So?

I'm not suggesting that those two tyres/wheel sizes would be
interchangeable on any particular car

Good.
What's the speed rating on that 195/65 15? What's the load rating?

Precisely. Larger, lower profile tyres will invariably have higher speed
ratings and higher load ratings, despite the fact that the lower ratings for
the smaller tyres are more than adequate for the car being purchased. It's
a wholly wasteful and unnecessary extra expense.

Kev

#29

Adrian <toomany2cvs (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

%steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

I get the feeling that one of the reasons off-roaders were getting so
popular in London is that they cope well with sleeping policemen,
raised kerbs and bloody big potholes.

...without having to look where you're going.

I think you will find that's normal for 90% of the driving, cycling and
walking public.

Indeed it is. But is that a _good_ thing?

I don't think anyone has suggested that it is, but it is a fact of life.
I don't consider influenza to be a good thing but it's still going to
run rampant no matter how much I protest about it.

Quote:

Swerving to avoid the ruts and potholes in the road can be a tad
difficult.

It can if you don't look where you're going, yes.

No, in North London at least it can be difficult because any serve
simply takes you into another pothole.

Slow down, then.

It still doesn't prevent alloys from being damaged if one has low
profile tyres. And I'd object if the low profile merchants all slowed
down and started swerving frantically to avoid potholes when I can just
drive through/over the damn things.

#30

Ret. <xxx> wrote:

Quote:

It is my belief that this is simply a way for manufacturers to add on
expensive items to customers who are prepared to pay more for higher spec
trim

I'll add "car trim levels and market prices" to a long list of things
that you don't understand. A friend's father used to work as a Ford
designer at Dagenham. The father told me that the biggest difference
between the base spec and the high spec models as far as the
manufacturers were concerned was the profit. The top of the range (at
the time) Ford Escort cost not much more than £50 more than the base
model to make.

What the manufacturers do is to dress the top spec model to make people
think that it is worth paying more for. They're not "adding expensive
items" they are deliberately dressing the car with "bling" which costs
not more or little more than the stuff attached to the base car.

I was surprised at the time, but as he pointed out a 1.3L four cyclinder
engine really doesn't cost much less to make than a 2.0L four cyclinder
engine. A seat has much the same price if it's covered in Dralon or
Leather, most of the cost is in the labour which is the same in both
cases. Alloys cost slightly more than steel, but not that much more to
the maker who isn't buying at Halfords prices.

So, the reason for the low profile tyres as you've been told is
"marketing".