S T tires
:)Here is the most informative post I have ever seen on ST tires, Thank You Shaowcatche of irv2.com for this information. As many of you have figured out I am a bit obsessive about information an...
Forum Discussion
JJBIRISH wrote:Ah yes....But they are being recalled due to a manufacturing error of some sort...Never heard of such a program for ST tires...They must all be made perfect...LOL.Huntindog wrote:JJBIRISH wrote:It's not apples to apples. One tire is larger and holds more air. Air is what supports the load. Even so, it is a very small difference. Not 10-20-30# differences between some of the best LT tires and their ST cousins.
Good, well sounding article full of a lack of real knowledge as to why a tire weighs what it does… tire weight alone isn’t a measure of quality…
Tire weight is part bulk, and part material selection and or processes used… to many variables to equate weight alone as evidence of quality…
Recipes of chemical or rubber compounding are one of the most closely guarded secrets of the tire industry…
cap ply’s might be made from single yarn or twisted cords… the single yarns can be cheaper, lighter, and thinner, but they can also be higher quality, improve heat dissipation, and reduce belt edge separation…
even tires from the same mfg. might have different LT model tires of different weights even in the same size and LR…
Quality can be made with lighter or heavier components, lighter or heavier compounds, and lighter or heavier cords or belts… one might be built with a heavier bead area and another with a heavier tread area…
For example from the 2012 Carlisle catalog to keep it apples to apples, that list the radial trail RH 205x75x14 LR C with a load rating of 1760 listed at 25.9 pounds…
Yet the Carlisle 215x75x14 LR C with a load rating of 1870 listed at 25.8 pounds… how is it that the tire with the higher load capacity has a lower weight…
The 225x75x15 LR C is bigger and weighs more than the 205x75x15 LR D but both have the same rated carrying capacity… citing and using weight as a leading indicator is misleading at best…
We outsiders don’t have enough information to know or say what the weight alone means…
All we can do is ask questions as to why is one tire heavier and what is the construction differences accounting for the differences…
I suppose that a tire with high tech expensive materials such as Kevlar could be a lot lighter and stronger than a much heavier tire using cheaper materials.
I have never seen such a ST tire...Have you?
The point of the OP and the original author was to offer weight as a leading indicator of quality when choosing tires, and that weight equals and guarantees the reserve capacity in the tire…
MY POINT AND MY ONLY POINT !!!
WEIGHT ALONE DOESN’T EQUATE TO QUALITY or anything else… it only gives reason to question…
As shown in the same brand and type (apples to apples) comparison…
So let us compare the 2 tires the author didn’t rule out to make his comparisons with the GY ST tire…
They are the BFG Commercial TA LT235/85R16 LRE(rated to 3042lbs) Weight 44.44 and the, and the Uniroyal Laredo HD/H LT235/85R16 LRE(rated to 3042lbs) Weight 44.44…
His intent was to show the superior quality of the LT tires and offered as proof of that quality the weight difference between them and the GY Marathon ST235/80R16 LRE(rated to 3420lbs) Weight 35.4… he leaves no other explanation and wants you to believe weight alone can be relied on as the deciding factor…
Here is the real proof of quality of the tires he mentioned… and the proof that that weight he so praised did nothing to offer a quality built tire…
Michelin North America, Inc. is recalling certain BF Goodrich Commercial T/A A/S LRE and Uniroyal Laredo HD/H LRE tires, sizes LT235/85R16 120 Q and LT245/75R16 120 Q. These tires may develop a separation at the tread/belt edge.
The separation of the tire can cause rapid air loss which could increase the risk of a vehicle crash.
