ST trailer tire 75 mph rated

[rexlion]

For those who prefer to tow a little faster than 65 mph, as well as for those who would like some extra cushion in their tires' speed rating, I recently learned that Hercules ST tires are rated for 75 mph. Just wanted to let folks know about this additional option. I am getting one put on my cargo trailer next week (they had to order it from the warehouse, the store didn't stock it).

[Huntindog]

gmw photos wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
Again-HuntingDog - that's your opinion, as it was the poster before you. A 3inch nail or road hazard will take out either one.

....sigh.... I reckon no one here is even trying to argue about a 3" nail.

You might as well say that "no tire out there can survive a hellfire missile from an Apache helicopter". We can all agree on that.

A 3" nail???? Hells bells that changes everything!
I thought it was a 2.75" nail!!:S:B

[gmw_photos]

CKNSLS wrote:
Again-HuntingDog - that's your opinion, as it was the poster before you. A 3inch nail or road hazard will take out either one.

....sigh.... I reckon no one here is even trying to argue about a 3" nail.

You might as well say that "no tire out there can survive a hellfire missile from an Apache helicopter". We can all agree on that.

[CKNSLS]

Again-HuntingDog - that's your opinion, as it was the poster before you. A 3inch nail or road hazard will take out either one.

[Huntindog]

gmw photos wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:

gmw photos wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

Read my post. A heavier tire is not necessarily a more reliable tire.

There is more to reliability and durability than puncture resistance.

Agreed. But the weight of a tire isn't one of them.

Once again I am going way out on a limb here, and saying something that is simply "opinion": I think when people quote the weight of a tire, the "implication" at least, is that that all things being equal ( same or similar construction materials ) it's difficult to make a "sturdy, durable, stiff sidewall, tough tread area" tire....and make it lightweight. So in the end, the tires that are built to be "tougher" shall we say for heavy duty use, end up often being heavier.

Now don't go all nutz on me here techno-folks ! I know that materials like kevlar can be used that are stronger and lighter, etc, and other cool stuff....... I'm just making an observation, that often the way the companies get toughness, is with "more material"....and therefore more weight. The flip side of that is that perhaps it's fair to say, that a tire that is thin and flexy in the sidewall and tread area may in fact be that way simply becuase they used a minimum of material.

"Opinion only....no engineering fact behind this post".:)

EDIT: the following is an example of where "thin and lightweight" is good: my motorcycles use Z speed rated radials. These tires are thin, and light. My understanding is, they need to be built this way to be able to shed heat sufficient to survive the "plus 149mph" speed rating. These tires are actually easy to mount and dismount ( I do my own mounting and balancing of the bike tires ) partially because they are so flexy. So this is a case where light and seemingly flexy is good. However, they don't have very high load ratings for their size either. Example, the tire on the back of the Honda is a 190/50-17, but only has a load capacity of 800 pounds at 42 psi.
Probably would'nt wanna use 'em on a trailer ! 🙂

I also would like to point out that I have never seen an ST tire that contained Kevlar or the like.
There is NOTHING hi tech about ST tires. So weight is in fact a very good indicator.

[gmw_photos]

CKNSLS wrote:

gmw photos wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

Read my post. A heavier tire is not necessarily a more reliable tire.

There is more to reliability and durability than puncture resistance.

Agreed. But the weight of a tire isn't one of them.

Once again I am going way out on a limb here, and saying something that is simply "opinion": I think when people quote the weight of a tire, the "implication" at least, is that that all things being equal ( same or similar construction materials ) it's difficult to make a "sturdy, durable, stiff sidewall, tough tread area" tire....and make it lightweight. So in the end, the tires that are built to be "tougher" shall we say for heavy duty use, end up often being heavier.

Now don't go all nutz on me here techno-folks ! I know that materials like kevlar can be used that are stronger and lighter, etc, and other cool stuff....... I'm just making an observation, that often the way the companies get toughness, is with "more material"....and therefore more weight. The flip side of that is that perhaps it's fair to say, that a tire that is thin and flexy in the sidewall and tread area may in fact be that way simply becuase they used a minimum of material.

"Opinion only....no engineering fact behind this post".:)

EDIT: the following is an example of where "thin and lightweight" is good: my motorcycles use Z speed rated radials. These tires are thin, and light. My understanding is, they need to be built this way to be able to shed heat sufficient to survive the "plus 149mph" speed rating. These tires are actually easy to mount and dismount ( I do my own mounting and balancing of the bike tires ) partially because they are so flexy. So this is a case where light and seemingly flexy is good. However, they don't have very high load ratings for their size either. Example, the tire on the back of the Honda is a 190/50-17, but only has a load capacity of 800 pounds at 42 psi.
Probably would'nt wanna use 'em on a trailer ! 🙂

[CKNSLS]

gmw photos wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

Read my post. A heavier tire is not necessarily a more reliable tire.

There is more to reliability and durability than puncture resistance.

Agreed. But the weight of a tire isn't one of them.

[gmw_photos]

CKNSLS wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

Read my post. A heavier tire is not necessarily a more reliable tire.

There is more to reliability and durability than puncture resistance.

[CKNSLS]

Huntindog wrote:

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

Read my post. A heavier tire is not necessarily a more reliable tire.

[Huntindog]

CKNSLS wrote:
What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

I don't recall anyone saying that any tire can't be punctured.

What argument are you trying to make?

[gmw_photos]

deleted

[SprinklerMan]

I just changed some 13 inch ST tires and replaced them with some "p" rated tires . The sidewalls on the old ST tires were less stiff than the car tires . ( its a dedicated trailer for a 800 lb compressor local roads only ) Now I have my own coats 10/10 tire machine . Why ? Because I have service trucks and trailers its faster and way cheaper to do it in house .

[CKNSLS]

What a tire weighs is an argument that is brought up here often. Weight has no relationship to durability or the ability of a tire to not puncture with a 3" nail. Any tire you run on a travel trailer will puncture with an 3" nail (under the right conditions) if it's either an ST or LT tire.

It's a bad argument.

[Huntindog]

rbpru wrote:
While I cannot comment on tire compounds and construction, I can say that the primary reason the RV and Tire industries recommended ST tires is their stiffer side walls and the rolling resistance of their tread design. These characteristics and a recommended speed rating of 65 mph are what the industries feel is proper.


If a person feels they are wrong or these features are less important than those found in LT tires, so be it.

There are not enough LT tire in trailer use to draw any meaningful conclusions of performance, when compared to the millions of ST tires placed into trailer service every year.

I have had my hands on quite a few ST tires. They feel weak overall and especially in the sidewall. They also weigh quite a bit less that a comparable LT tire.

[gmw_photos]

rbpru wrote:
While I cannot comment on tire compounds and construction, I can say that the primary reason the RV and Tire industries recommended ST tires is their stiffer side walls and the rolling resistance of their tread design. These characteristics and a recommended speed rating of 65 mph are what the industries feel is proper.


If a person feels they are wrong or these features are less important than those found in LT tires, so be it.

There are not enough LT tire in trailer use to draw any meaningful conclusions of performance, when compared to the millions of ST tires placed into trailer service every year.

Hello rbpru, perhaps you have had your particular ST tires off the wheels and compared them side by side to a LT of the same size ? Perhaps you found in your case, the ST tire to have a stiffer sidewall ? If so, that's great. And if so, I would love to hear what brands of ST and LT you were comparing. It would add some facts to the dialog.

In my case, my camper came with "Freestar" branded ST tires. When I took them off to replace them with Kumho 857, I used my hands to "flex and feel the sidewalls". In my case, I found the opposite to be true: the Kumho is much stiffer in the sidewall compared to the very flexy Freestar.
So please give us some feedback on the tires you have personally compared. Thanks.

ps, as an aside, the old Freestars I took off are still in use on two trailers that belong to friends. Both are small open utility trailers, one is used to take a riding mower around town, the other trailer is used to go to the dump once a month or so. These ST tires are working fine for these guys in slow speed, short distance trips.

[rbpru]

While I cannot comment on tire compounds and construction, I can say that the primary reason the RV and Tire industries recommended ST tires is their stiffer side walls and the rolling resistance of their tread design. These characteristics and a recommended speed rating of 65 mph are what the industries feel is proper.


If a person feels they are wrong or these features are less important than those found in LT tires, so be it.

There are not enough LT tire in trailer use to draw any meaningful conclusions of performance, when compared to the millions of ST tires placed into trailer service every year.