More on no more R Tires?

[Scirocco-Al" <scirocco-Al@insight.rr.com (Scirocco-Al)]

This was written by a Ed Wahl, a friend of mine.  I thought you guys might
find it interesting.

Alan



I never sign anything I don't read, so I decided to look at the new law
thing.

So I went and read the proposed law changes, and many of the comments left
by
the tire companies, the rubber manf. assoc. and others.   Thought I'd
compose this to
kindof give you an idea where things are going.

I found a few interesting bits of info that folks may find interesting:

-motorcycles and heavy vehicles are not covered (gvw over 10,000lbs, newer
than 1975)
- The current testing laws have been in place since 1968.
- different laws exist for P (passenger) and light truck(LT) tires (109 and
119 resp.)
- The industry trade association suggested updating them back in 98 with a
new initiative but even though the NHTSA looked at it, but years later were
still dragging
their feet until Congress lit a fire under their asses after the
Ford/Firestone nonsense.
- tread seperation seems to be driving the new tests even though it is a
minor % of
all tire failures. Thank the damn lawyers and idiots who can't put enough
pressure in their
SUV tires for that one.

- the newly proposed law would come up with lab tests that would test all
tires for
crazy endurance at high speed & temp., and simulated aging.  They also seem
to mis-suse
the SAE "wheel" collision test for tires. a few folks mention the misuse.

- The Rubber Man. Assoc. wants ALL cars to have pressure sensing devices
required
by law.   Anyone know much about these?

- the RMA also recommends increased tire pressure as speeds increase.  They
ask for MUCH higher pressures over 120km/h(75mph) and mention that the only
reason the
US hasn't had such problems before is due to low speed limits.
-Current "speed" (W,Z,V,H,etc) ratings on tires are from 1 test only and do
NOT
reflect "real world" conditions.
- the "new" proposed tests seem to me (and to several tire companies and
the RMA) to be
designed to Fail tires and then collect data on when they failed.
- Car & Tire Companies and the RMA would rather come up with some arbitrary
performance test
and propse all tires meet it without failure.
- 23 % of passenger tires sold in the US are NON speed rated. (how is that
legal?)
- 48% of the tires sold in the US are "S" rated (Sad, ain't it?)
(one wonders then how Car manufacturers can legally ship a "piece of crap"
tire
on a car that can outperform it just leaving the dealership for a test
drive! )

- based on the new tests, ALL tires would be forced to use "T" rated tests
(190km/h 118mph)
meaning that almost 71% of all tires sold in the US would be tested at
rates over their possible rating
and WOULD fail. (Seems stupid, doesn't it?)
- total sales of the 3 miniature tire companies dont even make up 1 day of
manuf. of the big companies
- Bias ply tires (racing, offroad, camper/RV usage,etc) would most likely
cost huge ammounts
to bring into alignment with the new testing procedures. Most would NEVER
be able to meet
them, meaning they would be made illegal. (heat buildup problems)
-small manufacturers that make specialty and bias ply tires are screwed.
(hoosier, denman,specialty)
based on the testing costs. Denman estimates it would cost them more to
test than they make
in profit.

- everyone agrees the govt.'s cost to benefit analysis is a complete joke
and WAY under $$'ed.
- everyone disagrees on the "wheel" the govt. plans to use: a steel one
piece.  Everyone seems to
want to shape it slightly differently.

- the Europeans, who've had true high speed tests for a while, feel that
over 30% of all US "LT" tires
will fail the initial testing.  They also feel more thought should be put
into LT testing procedures
as most Light Trucks can't even GO 118mph.
- the Europeans feel that the tests don't have a thing to do with "real
world" conditions and should
be re-designed to more closely resemble this.  (a few others mention this
as well)
- no one likes the artificial aging testing procedures.
- no one likes shearography (looking for the miniature bubbles trapped in
the rubber during casting)
and there is no data that it can predict real-world failures.
- the european and US trade associations both feel there should be
something added for
grip and traction but make no suggestions.  tire sales companys  feel this
is the leading
cause of traffic accidents and that should shape the testing.

- the wackos that comment on everything else the govt does still come out
the woodwork to
comment on this.  Where do they come from??   How do they find out about
this stuff?


-Too much time on his hands and shopping for new 17x7.5" tires:

Ed