Tires: Michelin vs. Bridgestone

Daveinet wrote:

topflite51 wrote:
The problem with the Firestone TransForce's is that they are not steel sidewalls like the R250's unless they have recently changed their composition...

Why is that a problem? Maybe not have same level of road hazard resistance, but how often do you hit something and puncture a tire? Usually its a nail, which goes right through any steel belt, so I'm not sure the steel is buying you a lot. Nylon belted tires run cooler, so they are less likely to suffer tread separation. Nylon is going to be lighter, so it should give a better ride.

Yes, Bridgestone and Firestone are the same company, just 2 different product lines. The difference between a Bridgestone tire and a Firestone tire is that Bridgestone uses a dual tread compound, so as the tire wears, the lack of tread is compensated for by softer rubber. Firestone is a single tread compound, which is why it is less expensive. My coach has traction weakness in snow, but I have found the Transforce to be very exceptable traction wise. Been running them for 8 years (multiple sets)

As per usual:

OP'er posted his rig originally had XPS ribs, he tried polyester casings and he is going back to steel. His question was has anybody used the R250's and someone suggested Firestone Tranforces(can't read I guess). I was simply pointing out that they were not steel reinforced sidewalls as OP'er was requesting info about. Where did I write that Transforces were not an acceptable tire to use. You use them and evidently like them, that is good, but it wasn't the question.