Tread Separation on Maxxis M8008

[1_Happy_Camper]

Has anyone experienced tread separation on Maxxis M8008 tires? I bought 4 of them in 2010 and just replaced 2 this past weekend do to separation. I am concerned because the 2 tires in question were on the same side of the 5th wheel. The tires are ST 225 75R15, 80PSI. I always check the PSI before a trip, so that was correct.

Any input of thoughts as to whether this is a "tire" issue or a possible axle issue? Also, whenever I level side to side, I always have to put the side in question on a 2" board to level the coach, even on "level" pavement campsites.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-5voKlZ0LBCU/UpTPzoU71vI/AAAAAAAAADw/j3qbLUp2LP0/s512/Maxxis%25202...


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-OBCkcWz6p98/UpTP0Arj9EI/AAAAAAAAAD0/RGGXWtHRgnE/s128/Maxxis%20Tir...

[JohnnyT]

This thread is closed... Too many edits and deleted posts for trolling, flaming and just plain off topic or posts only transcendentally related to thread topic.

JohnnyT Moderator

[SailingOn]

Though returning the tire to the tire manufacturer is emotionally and intellectually satisfying, on average the tires (4) I have seen fail did so 550 miles from home.
Waiting a week, or maybe six, negotiating with a dealer who knows you'll not be returning isn't the answer.

[gmw_photos]

Barry,
Thanks for the response on how the return and testing process works, and addressing some of my comments. As always, I learn new things reading your posts. Folks with real world experience in these kinds of issues are a large part of what make these forums worth reading on an ongoing basis.

gmw

[CapriRacer]

Me Again and GMW Photos (and anyone else who is interested in following this conversation),

First, there are 2 different situations being discussed:

1) What is called a "Property Damage Claim" - that is a claim where the tire failure caused damage to a vehicle. AKA, a "PDC".

Normally the tire manufacturer bypasses the dealer and handles the claim directly with the consumer - but there are some variations where the tire dealer might be involved.

Also, normally the tire manufacturer will want the tire back - along with documentation about the incident and the amount of damage. Regardless of what the determination is (that is, manufacturer at fault or not), it is required by the Federal Government that this be reported to them. But without the tire being returned, there isn't anything to report.

Usually the consumer can negotiate a settlement - even on a road hazard claim - so it is always worth the trouble to do so.

And just so you know, at one point in time, I was the guy who examined those tires.

2) A tire failure without damage to the vehicle. This is covered by the warranty. Please note that EVERY tire has a "materials and workmanship" portion of the warranty and even though there may be a time limit, the warranty period is usually long enough to make this issue of value to the consumer.

In this case, the tire dealer is directly involved. The tire dealer's incentive to do this is the money (credit) the tire manufacturer will give the dealer when the tire is returned. So, "No!", the dealer has a good reason NOT to throw the tire away.

And there is a reporting requirement for those tires as well - just like the PDC's. They are reported separately, in different formats, but they both have to be reported. Most people take this very seriously - and the folks that don't are risking some severe penalties.

But let's look at this from the tire manufacturer's point of view (and here I'm going to address the "Beta testing" remark).

I'm sure everyone is aware that there are minimal testing requirements for tires sold in the US - commonly called "DOT Tests". Those tests were based on standard industry tests - one of which is called a "Step Load" or Step-up Load".

This test consists of a tire mounted on a wheel and loaded against a test wheel at a certain load. The wheel turns at a certain speed for a certain length of time, then the load is increased and run for another increment of time. This is repeated until the tire reaches the rated load - at which point the tire passes the test.

But the industry tests continued increasing the load (in steps) until the tire failed - AND - (an important point) it is common for tire manufacturers to require their tires to meet some elevated level to assure that ALL their tires pass the test. While the government only does spot checks on compliance, there are severe penalties if the tire is found not to comply. (A recall at the very least, but there can be more penalties if needed.)

And another important point - it would not take very long for anyone observing tire performance to realize that passing the government minimums does NOT insure good tire performance. - AND - that the Step Load test can be indicator of the level of performance in the real world. This is where returning the failed tire to the manufacturer comes in.

Testing is great if it correlates to the real world. Returning the tire to the tire manufacturer not only gives the manufacturer a way to describe how the tire is performing, but it gives him a way to determine if his testing is producing the same kind of failures. If not, then the test needs to be modified.

I'll give you an example: In the process of trying to comply with the TREAD Act (the law that came out of the Ford/Firestone incident a few years back), the company I worked for developed a test which was faster to do. Unfortunately, it produced a failure mode that no one had ever seen - and more importantly, it did not produce the typical "belt leaving belt failure". Quick test, but of little value.

Further, improving the performance of a tire on the Step Load test results in an incremental improvement in field performance - as measured by the rate of return. Without these returns, the tire manufacturer will not know what the problem areas are and whether improvements actually worked.

And just so you know, at one point in time, I was the guy who analyzed the rate of returns and whether the improvements worked.

What I just described above was specific to tires, but the general system is applicable to virtually anyone offering a product or service. In other words, you won't know how you're doing if you don't get feedback. Even Starbucks offers a free coffee if you fill in an on-line form. It's their way of gauging things.

Now let's talk practical matters: Do tire dealers actually return failed tires to the manufacturer? For the most part, they do. They have contacts either directly with the manufacturer or through a distributor. Everyone involved is actively returning tires to the manufacturer. It's just part of the business.

[Me_Again]

rhagfo wrote:


I find that very hard to believe! LT's have a far stiffer sidewall one of the reasons many feel that using LT tires on a tandem axle trailer stress the tire too much when turning.

We have been telling people for years to go to a few tire stores and ask to handle a few tires themselves. One will soon see that there is a noticeable difference in the tire types.

An addition difference is shown it all the tire threads about failed tires. Which type is noted in 90% of the threads?

You have to omit that somehow they have managed a great marketing program that keeps the main stream tire companies at bay and out of their segment of the market.

Or is it that other than GY no other main stream tire manufacture wants to deal with all the issues?

One has to ask how did we get here? Everyday logic says that a large box on wheels it not going to fair that well on tires designed years ago for local use on utility type trailers. Then the RV manufacturers started building larger and larger trailer around the inflated ratings. The results of which we regularly read about in tire threads.

Chris

[malojeer]

I've had problems with 3 of the 4 Maxxis tires I purchased in May of 2009. I keep my tires covered and in garage. All of them have shown tread separation. I am going to change last one so as not to have problems on road. Discount Tires have replaced the 3 because I bought replacement coverage. I can't afford to go to LT's since I have same tires as OP and would have to purchase rims too. We will see how this batch holds up.

[gmw_photos]

Me Again wrote:

gmw photos wrote:


We can certainly hope that you are right about the dealer actually sending the tire back for evaluation.
gw

Once a case is open with the manufacturer, then there is a process that kicks in if the manufacturer request the tire to evaluate the failure. We are talking main line manufacturers like Goodyear, Michelin/BFG/Uniroyal, Bridgestone/Firestone etc. I firmly believe this process takes place as advertised!

Do Tredit or Tireco actually get tires shipped back? They do not have engineers on site as they are only middle men! Probably cheaper for them to have the tire store junk the tire and send out another tire. Their actually cost of the ST tires they import would be surprisingly low.

It would be interesting to know if Goodyear drop ships the Marathon ST directly to these two major suppliers of the trailer manufacturing companies. Large trailer manufacturers buy truck or train car loads of pre-mounted wheels and tires from them.

Chris

Good point about US wholesale importers being middle men.
I would not hold out great hope that the tire engineers at BCT or Freestar ( or fill in the blank of numerous other chinese tire manufacturers ) have a great interest in evaluating failed tires from us.

[Me_Again]

gmw photos wrote:


We can certainly hope that you are right about the dealer actually sending the tire back for evaluation.
gw

Once a case is open with the manufacturer, then there is a process that kicks in if the manufacturer request the tire to evaluate the failure. We are talking main line manufacturers like Goodyear, Michelin/BFG/Uniroyal, Bridgestone/Firestone etc. I firmly believe this process takes place as advertised!

Do Tredit or Tireco actually get tires shipped back? They do not have engineers on site as they are only middle men! Probably cheaper for them to have the tire store junk the tire and send out another tire. Their actually cost of the ST tires they import would be surprisingly low.

It would be interesting to know if Goodyear drop ships the Marathon ST directly to these two major suppliers of the trailer manufacturing companies. Large trailer manufacturers buy truck or train car loads of pre-mounted wheels and tires from them.

Chris

[gmw_photos]

Me Again wrote:
gw, I believe you are wrong about returning tires. I had a friend have a BFG Commercial TA fail in Arizona this spring. The Discount Tire store in Mesa did all the paper work to return the tire. He said it was like a police report!!! This TA was not on the recall list.

BFG paid for a new tire and damage to his trailer, so taking time to work the process does have advantages to the consumer.

The big take away I get from Barry's post above is that most internet want to be experts do not know what WE are talking about most of the time. Yet some seem to run for forum to forum making post like they do know something.

Barry's " the most common cause is a deficiency in design " statement reads volumes into all the ST tire threads that appear repeatedly on here and other forums.

Now that Barry's has retired, maybe he will tell us which tire company he worked for? Chris

We can certainly hope that you are right about the dealer actually sending the tire back for evaluation.
I do know that we regularly read on this and other forums that the dealer "made good" on a bad tire, right then and there for some consumers. It would be interesting to know in that case whether the dealer actually sent the tire back for eval. Or, if the sales rep, or warranty rep came by the store for his usual visit and simply signed off on a reimbursement....and again, just said, "done deal...toss the tire".
What I am saying is that I don't hold out a great deal of hope that this whole procedure gets played out by the book in the real world. Busy shops very much like to move on to the next customer, the next deal...and then go home at the end of the day.
But I could be wrong. It could be that every failed tire is dutifully documented, sent back to the mothership and dissected by in house engineers.

In the mean time I buy what I have found and observed works better. I have little time and interest in trying to help these companies try to improve a bargain product line, when I already have a better alternative available to me for just a few dollars more.

gw

[Me_Again]

gw, I believe you are wrong about returning tires. I had a friend have a BFG Commercial TA fail in Arizona this spring. The Discount Tire store in Mesa did all the paper work to return the tire. He said it was like a police report!!! This TA was not on the recall list.

BFG paid for a new tire and damage to his trailer, so taking time to work the process does have advantages to the consumer.

The big take away I get from Barry's post above is that most internet want to be experts do not know what WE are talking about most of the time. Yet some seem to run for forum to forum making post like they do know something.

Barry's " the most common cause is a deficiency in design " statement reads volumes into all the ST tire threads that appear repeatedly on here and other forums.

Now that Barry's has retired, maybe he will tell us which tire company he worked for? Chris

[gmw_photos]

Barry,
I always read your replies, and am glad that you hang out here on the forum to help shed some light on, and bring a level of expertise to the discussion. So again, thanks for your comments.

Having said that, your suggestion of "returning the tire to the manufacturer"....to be honest, I am not feeling real compelled here. First of all, the consumer is literally doing the beta testing here for both the tire company and the trailer designer who sometimes underspecs the tire for the application. Then mister consumer has a failure, takes it to the dealer and asks them to send it back to the manufacturer. I suspect most busy tire stores are simply going to nod their head, and after the customer leaves, toss the failed tire on the recycle pile, and that's the end of that.

For most average consumers, they are just going to replace the tire, and get on with their life. The dealer has little incentive to see this line of tires improve. He's making money on the idea of having to toss these tires after three or so years ( if they make it that far ) or he is making money by replacing failed tires.

My opinion is these tires are going to continue to be produced at whatever quality level they are currently at. Reason is, there is always a certain demand for the least expensive product to purchase. It's always been that way. Remember back in the day in the Sears and Monkey Wards catalog, there was often a "good, better, best" in a product line.

The price point of these ST tires is really not that much less than a similar sized LT tire. To bring the ST up to a better level would likely make it's price point cross over into the same retail territory as the LT. At that point, the ST would no longer hold ANY advantage in real retail terms.

Personally I vote with my feet and wallet. Anybody that tries to sell me a ST tire, I walk.....and go to someone who will take my dollars for a LT. I literally did just that some months ago. A local trailer dealer where I had bought a equipment trailer only sells china ST tires. I needed a set of tires for one of the horse trailers, so I ended up at a Firestone retailer to buy LT.

But again, there will always be someone to buy cheap tires. We see it all the time even here on this forum, someone will come on and be discussing a tire that retails for $20 less, and will state that is why they bought it. As I have said before, many folks either don't understand, or won't admit the difference between cost and value. Wally world is making a fortune selling us disposable products that cost little but often have even less value.

respectfully submitted..... gw

[CapriRacer]

FastEagle wrote:
Tread separations don't just happen overnight. They are most often caused by some form of tire damage - inflicted or built-in - that will eventually cause the tire to fail completely.....

I'm going to disagree with that.

While in service damage to a tire can cause a "belt leaving belt separation" (what is commonly called a "tread separation"), the most common cause is a deficiency in design - meaning the type and placement of materials in a tire (per the specification) and the material specifications. Manufacturing issues (commonly called defects) are hardly ever the cause.

FastEagle wrote:
......A professional tire expert can determine the exact cause of the damage to the tires shown in the pictures.......

I'm going to disagree with that as well.

If there is in service tire damage or an actual defect, then, yes, a tire expert would be able to pinpoint the cause. But because most tire failures (and I'm excluding road hazard related "failures" here) are design deficiencies, there is an absence of evidence and therefore any "cause" is speculation about the design.

And lastly, tire experts of the caliber to be able to examine a tire failure and at least have something intelligent to say about it, do NOT reside at tire dealerships.

But tire manufacturers have such experts and returning a failed tire to them is a good idea. But do NOT expect any honest assessment in response to you, the consumer. There are legal liabilities in play and anything written down can be used in a court of law. Any expert who can do such an examination would be aware of those legal liabilities and would be very careful about what he said.

[MrVan]

I've come to the following conclusion: Tread separation only occurs when ST tires are used in their intended application!

[FastEagle]

Atom Ant wrote:

FastEagle wrote:

Tread separations don't just happen overnight. They are most often caused by some form of tire damage - inflicted or built-in - that will eventually cause the tire to fail completely.


FastEagle

So by "built-in" tire damage, do you mean poor assembly skills, inferior raw materials, inferior design, or just somebody dropped the cargo container on the pier!?

Sometime during the manufacturing process. Maxxis has a nice easy to read chart. It's provided in the reference below.

Maxxis tire building

FastEagle