The new ST tires. Fact or fiction (marketing)

[Huntindog]

It is good that some manufacturers seem to be stepping up the quality of their ST tire offerings.. And even better that many of the proponents of ST tires on this forum are welcoming these new tires with open arms.... Though I must point out that since they are now so happy about this, that they must recognize the inferiorority of the previous tires... Despite many past statements to the contrary.

Now to the point of this post: Years back I studied the govt. testing standards for LT tires vs ST tires. It was a real eye opener and cemented my decision to pass on ST tires.

I am not interested on doing that again. It is a very hard read, and takes a lot of time. And having found my tire solution, I am not interested in go back to STs.

The question I have is about the new Higher speed ratings. Are these tires tested to to that by the govt? I am not so sure. Having an ST tire designation may limit at least some of the testing to the 65 MPH speed limit for ST tires. I doubt the regs have been changed because of these new tires.

If they are not being tested to the new ratings, then it is just marketing..... Again!

I tend to believe the worst as these new tires still have a very low price point. That was one of the primary reasons for the ST.
"The ST tire is an affordable solution for your trailer tire needs"
IOW, a cheap tire that is good enough.

Premium materials and construction cost money and should raise the price... Yet these new tires are still much less that half the price of a premium LT tire.

I smell a rat.

If I were an ST tire fan, I would want to know the truth.

[Ron3rd]

GordonThree wrote:
Why are you all in such a hurry? What's wrong with going 55 or 60? All I see are positives, better gas mileage, less stressed behind the wheel, tires run cooler, etc.

x2, in California the speed limit towing is technically 55 mph, though they let you go 60-63 with no problem.

[gmw_photos]

GordonThree wrote:
Why are you all in such a hurry? What's wrong with going 55 or 60? All I see are positives, better gas mileage, less stressed behind the wheel, tires run cooler, etc.

60 is 92% of 65. I don't run my engine for extended periods at 92% of it's redline either.

The tires on my trailer are rated for 99mph. 60 is 60% of 99. I like that kind of reserve.

[GordonThree]

Why are you all in such a hurry? What's wrong with going 55 or 60? All I see are positives, better gas mileage, less stressed behind the wheel, tires run cooler, etc.

[gmw_photos]

Huntindog wrote:
...snip

And even better that many of the proponents of ST tires on this forum are welcoming these new tires with open arms....

snip.....

I am not interested on doing that again.

And having found my tire solution, I am not interested in go back to STs.
...snip

I'm with 'dog on this.
Bless the beta testers, but I'm not interested in doing that. I found my solution.

It'll be interesting to watch the "data" on these new tires over the next 6 or 7 years.

[K_Charles]

The last two TT we got came with ST tires made who knows where. We had one 10 years and one 5 and never had a flat. I drive the interstate at around 70, I picked up a nail in one and because I only check the pressure if they look low or every few months, I ran it soft one day. I had it plugged and it was still on the TT when we traded it. I never put max PSI in the tires but go by the weight it is carrying. I think ST tires work fine for most people.

[coolbreeze01]

While Government testing can be helpful finding defects, the end user is the real tester.

Fatal flaws in automobiles, airliners, and tires are just a few examples.

[ktmrfs]

AFAIK from reading gov't regulations on tire markings if the sidewall has a speed rating letter, and a load index stamped the the tire must be tested to the requirements for that speed rating and load index and pass to be sold as such.

Now, the endurance has a Load index and N (87mph) speed rating stamped. And like pointed out by huntindogm the testing for st 65mph speed rating is way less stringent than testing for any other higher speed rating such as N.

I haven't gone through all the details, to much reading, but I believe that an ST tire with a load index and speed rating stamped on the sidewall has to pass the same test sequence as any other tire with that load index and speed rating. and that test is much more severe than the ST 65mph test. basically the same test that a LT tire would need to pass with the same speed rating and load index.

now, in the past maxxis and goodyear and a few others didn't stamp load index or speed rating on the tire and had a derating with higher pressure or reduced load published for higher speeds. but without the sidewall stamp they wouldn't have needed to pass any test, just their recomendation.

But the endurance with speed rating and load index would have to pass the gov't testing for the sidewall stamps.

for many of us, switching to an LT tire is not a viable option. In 15 inch tires there are NO tires I could find that had a load index high enough, anything over LRC is hard to find, and one that I do know of that had a high enough Load Index and rating the mfg is very emphatic that it is never to be used as a trailer tire.

If you already have or have room to go up to 16 inch tires, another story. lots of options open up.

So recently I needed new trailer tires, old Maxxis had given me close to 25K trouble free miles but tread was near worn out, I decided to give the goodyear endurance a try. We shall see. Neighbor has done the same, his Carlsie were in need of replacement as well.

and just because two different tires pass the same test, does not mean they are equals. One could just barely pass, the other could pass with flying colors.

[tragusa3]

Another perspective: Goodyear obviously wants to stay in the ST market. A disaster on the Endurance would cost them everything knowing the reputation of the Marathon. I don't think they're in a position to "play a game". Not if I were CEO.

FWIW, I just returned from 6k mile trip in 100+ temps with my Endurance.

[SoundGuy]

RinconVTR wrote:
The Goodyear Endurance series looks alright so far too, and it too has a speed rating well over 65mph. But its much too new to have any real feed back.

I have no idea how or what govt testing may be applied to ST rated trailer tires but it's not like there a lot of choice anyway if you want a manufactured in the USA ST tire as is the Goodyear Endurance. 😉 When my own Endurance tires were installed last week I had the opportunity to compare a brand new left over Marathon to one of my Endurance, before it was mounted ... and there was no comparison. The Endurance is a far more rigid tire, when I put my entire weight on it the tire hardly deflected, the Marathon sagged noticeably, not surprising considering it's 8 ply construction compared to the Marathon's 6 ply. Inflated, my new Endurance runs a LR D 65 p.s.i. compared to the Marathon's LR C 50 p.s.i. Obviously not a technical test but certainly an indication this new Endurance is not anywhere near the same tire as the previous Marathon and a far better alternative to the originally supplied China bombs, one of which simply disintegrated of it's own volition even though it was less than 4yrs old, had plenty of tread left, displayed proper wear pattern, was always properly inflated, and was never overloaded. :M

It will be interesting what GY does with the Marathons. I question why they still produce them if the Endurance is that much better.

My understanding is that production of the Marathon has been discontinued, at least for distribution here in N America. I do know that the distributor my own dealer here in Ontario buys from has discontinued the Marathon entirely and only sells the Endurance, leaving only unsold Marathons already sitting on dealer shelves still available for sale.

[RinconVTR]

There is no rat. And the ST vs LT debate is foolish now.

Pay more for the LT if you want to, no one cares, its a personal choice, each have had their share failures and in most cases the reported failure is questionable.

IMO companies who make ST tires are simply feeling the heat and some have finally improved their offerings. I believe Carlisle started it all about 5-6 years back with their RH series. But very little was known about how good they were, nor their higher speed rating and many lost trust in the name due certain tires in years past failing. Now they have the HD series appears to be an even bigger leap.

I'm currently running a mix of Westlakes (75mph rated) and Carlisle HD's (81mph rating) and the HD is clearly looking better after a few thousand miles. And I ran their RH series on my previous TT for nearly 10,000 miles and they still looked great when I sold it. I'm sold on the Carlisle's and have no reason to change.

The Goodyear Endurance series looks alright so far too, and it too has a speed rating well over 65mph. But its much too new to have any real feed back.

It will be interesting what GY does with the Marathons. I question why they still produce them if the Endurance is that much better.

[LarryJM]

Huntindog wrote:
It is good that some manufacturers seem to be stepping up the quality of their ST tire offerings.. And even better that many of the proponents of ST tires on this forum are welcoming these new tires with open arms.... Though I must point out that since they are now so happy about this, that they must recognize the inferiorority of the previous tires... Despite many past statements to the contrary.

Now to the point of this post: Years back I studied the govt. testing standards for LT tires vs ST tires. It was a real eye opener and cemented my decision to pass on ST tires.

I am not interested on doing that again. It is a very hard read, and takes a lot of time. And having found my tire solution, I am not interested in go back to STs.

The question I have is about the new Higher speed ratings. Are these tires tested to to that by the govt? I am not so sure. Having an ST tire designation may limit at least some of the testing to the 65 MPH speed limit for ST tires. I doubt the regs have been changed because of these new tires.

If they are not being tested to the new ratings, then it is just marketing..... Again!

I tend to believe the worst as these new tires still have a very low price point. That was one of the primary reasons for the ST.
"The ST tire is an affordable solution for your trailer tire needs"
IOW, a cheap tire that is good enough.

Premium materials and construction cost money and should raise the price... Yet these new tires are still much less that half the price of a premium LT tire.

I smell a rat.

If I were an ST tire fan, I would want to know the truth.

While I'm not 100 percent sure you're apparent belief that the gov't actually does all or even most of the testing is probably incorrect. While the gov't might set the standards and even establish the testing protocals it is the manufacturer thru contracting with independent agencies who do the actual testing and pay for that testing. They way this often works is the manufacturer tasks the independent agency/company to test using some protocols with the test results/deliverables given directly to the gov't (i.e. the manufacturer might not even see or have access to the reports and the gov't is the specified COTR for that contract).

This along with the reasonable less strenuous testing for non passenger carrying vehicles like trailers and the fact that passenger/LT tires must carry a speed rating that equals or matches the max speed of the vehicle they are put on naturally makes LT passenger carrying tires much more expensive and exhorbantly over designed and tested for use on a trailer which doesn't need 110mph speed tires and a failure rate say multiple that which is reasonable for a non critical trailer application.

The one thing I do blame ST tire manufacturers with is there less than stellar QA oversight especially if their tires are made overseas. I would bet that the majority of ST tires are used on cargo/equip/utility type trailers that are mostly used locally by individuals and businesses and never see the sustained highway speeds of RV use. Thus lower quality and testing standards that might result in higher failures, especially catastrophic type such as tread loss/blow outs is a very reasonable trade-off for the much lower cost of say an ST tire from a business prospective which profit wise is the driving market for ST tires and not the RV industry.

I'm a firm believer that if an ST tire users understands and accepts what he is buying, and it's design limits and adheres to those most ST tires are totally acceptable for use. With the exception of one set of Kumho 857 tires, I have been running GY Marathons since 1995 on two trailers with no catastrophic failures and generally excellent service. As a SWAG, I've probably bought 20 to 30 ST tires in the last 20+ years and generally run them at very close to their max load and in that time have put probably close to 150-200K towing miles on ST tires.

With all this said I will be giving the GY Endurance tires a try the next time I need tires for my trailer.

Larry

[rjshiflet]

To each their own - that's a decision I made. My brother-in-law uses LT tires on his fifth wheel and he's had far more blowouts than I have sticking with ST tires.

Life would be very boring if everybody thought exactly the same way. Happy trails to you!

[Huntindog]

rjshiflet wrote:
The new Goodyear Endurance tires show some promise - and I have them on our new Cardinal fifth wheel (since the day after we bought it). They are American Made so far are very smooth riding. Before each trip (we use our trailer a minimum of 8 days/nights each month) I check air pressure in each tire and so far it's been 80 PSI in every tire before every trip.

Previous tires almost always lost some air during the month and I'd have to add 3 to 10 pounds.

Time will tell, but I'm a happy owner of Goodyear Endurance tires so far. I know the naysayers will say they're not going to pay to be a tester for Goodyear - but, after some serious damage from a blowout with a previous trailer (another brand of tire) - I'll happily pay for quality and that's what I see from this Goodyear tire.

Are they government tested/rated - can't tell you that.

And your post is my whole point. There have been MANY promising reports over the years. None of them have stood the rest of time. The industry has played the consumers for suckers again and again. They call it marketing.

It it isn't being tested by independant labs in accordance with govt. regs. (internal testing doesn't count) then it is just more smoke and mirrors.

The real point of interest is do the govt. standards even allow/require an ST tire to meet any standards above the 65 MPH ST limit... And just what does that testing if it exists entail?

[rjshiflet]

The new Goodyear Endurance tires show some promise - and I have them on our new Cardinal fifth wheel (since the day after we bought it). They are American Made so far are very smooth riding. Before each trip (we use our trailer a minimum of 8 days/nights each month) I check air pressure in each tire and so far it's been 80 PSI in every tire before every trip.

Previous tires almost always lost some air during the month and I'd have to add 3 to 10 pounds.

Time will tell, but I'm a happy owner of Goodyear Endurance tires so far. I know the naysayers will say they're not going to pay to be a tester for Goodyear - but, after some serious damage from a blowout with a previous trailer (another brand of tire) - I'll happily pay for quality and that's what I see from this Goodyear tire.

Are they government tested/rated - can't tell you that.