Michelin tire blow out!!

pnichols wrote:
Intrinsically, I'm assuming that whatever it takes to make burst pressure higher will also make the tire "stronger" in at least some respects. The two seem to have to be related, although certain strength related criteria - such as perhaps puncture resistance - may not improve with higher burst pressure construction depending upon the design techniques the manufacturer uses. Remember - my Load Range upgraded tires in the past did not get stressed by higher pressure because I didn't use that in them ... all their improved construction had to do was provide more toughness from objects outside the tire......

There is all kinds of contradiction in that paragraph, so bare with me while I try to sort it out.

Yes, a higher burst pressure equates to stronger casing - BUT - that also equates to stiffer. So in most respects the idea that a higher load range is stronger and stiffer is saying approximately the same thing.

You seem to be implying that a higher usage pressure equates to a higher burst pressure - and that is only sort of true.

Also, you've also equated stronger with more penetration resistance - not true.

So in most respects, using a higher load range at a lower pressure doesn't really get you where you think it gets you.

pnichols wrote:
.......Hence I shoot for higher Load Ranges for higher strength in at least some areas, if available......

Please note that I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with specifying a higher load range. I'm trying to point out that it isn't the magic elixir you think it is.

pnichols wrote:
........I actually prefer the old "number of plies" approach to the manufacture of tires. As I remember it, oftimes one could buy a variety of tires - all built for the same rim size - but of different ply counts. This made it possible to "tailor" how reliable you wanted your tires to be - independent of needing any change in load carrying capability but depending only upon how much money one could afford to spend for the higher ply tires to gain tire ruggedness.....

OK, first is has been decades since they adopted the "Load Range" as opposed to the "Ply Rating". Prior to that was the adoption of "Ply Rating" as opposed to the actual number of plies. That's because the actual number of plies is not an indicator of strength or anything else - BECAUSE that doesn't tell you about the strength of an individual ply.

Put a different way, I can design a tire to have 20 plies of a very weak fabric, or a stronger tire with a single ply of a very strong fabric. The number of plies doesn't tell you something of significance.

- AND -

You will find that the standard construction for an LT tire regardless of load range is 2 + 2 - that is 2 sidewall plies of polyester and 2 steel belts. You can, of course, find some variations utilizing nylon cap plies, or an extra sidewall ply for off road application - but if you survey the field of street all season LT tires, the construction is generally 2 + 2 regardless of load range.

pnichols wrote:
.......I've even seen in the forums mention of routes to certain RV spots requiring that one's RV tires be of a certain minimum ply count!

I don't believe that for a moment, because it makes no sense. I think you are misinterpreting something. Perhaps you can supply a link to help sort this out?