Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
1980s? That must be when I last read one!
I may be one of those in the majority, but I blame the paltry 121kW/226Nm and all-wheel-drive of my current car. I anticipate much more potential in my soon-to-arrive 225kW/400Nm RWD.I think Michelin did a survey about 15 years ago and found that something like 90% of drivers never exceed 50% of a tyre's ability. Perhaps some forum members fall into that category?
Agreed.
Anh said they are all the same, clearly they are not. BUT, when used by the average user in A to B travelling, they will mostly act in a similar way and would hard to distinguish by the average driver.
To address Anh's other comments It is not necessary to be pushing hard at the limits of adhesion to tell the difference. The subtleties of turn in and braking traction can be felt well within speed limits and normal considerate road use. Not to mention noise and ride comfort is far more sensitive at low speeds.
I agree some magazine tests on laptime can seem irrelevant (unless for a track day tyre) but they are often done as a part of an overall subjective measurement from the reviewer and do not rely purely on the lap time as the judgement. However I have read some US car magazines and they really do go nuts on the numbers measuring everything and ignoring the subjective.
Well its Clarkson and much as I like him, everything he says in print and on screen needs to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.
I remember the story from way back having been an avid car fan/magazine reader for many years and the test was of sports tyres and did not include low rolling resistance, mass market cheaper tyres or even run flats. Not a surprise that tyres designed to do the same job felt the same.
It's not what Clarkson is saying that is important.
It is the comments of the skilled / professional driver who said could not tell any performance centric differences between Sports tyres and he was the only one who had the skills to fully put the tyres to the test.
Corrected
"Not even close to audio. Tyres have very measurable benefits, braking distances, lateral grip, wet performance, noise etc etc."
It's not what Clarkson is saying that is important.
It is the comments of the skilled / professional driver who said could not tell any performance centric differences between tyres and he was the only one who had the skills to fully put the tyres to the test.
Corrected
In the wet, anywhere, track or road, they were nigh on lethal, ABS kicking in constantly, and the merest hint of throttle close to a surface with standing water and you were in bother. I suspect it's largely down to the materials rather than the construction: looked like they were made of hard plastic, with hardly any 'rubber' as such in them. Only tyres I ever bought where the tyre fitter (a big Polish chap) came over to me before I drove out and said "These tyres - not so good in the rain, you drive slow - Ok ?" The big lad wasn't wrong
.
Tyre pressure and geometry and correct load rating is important.
Did you not post this comment?
How is an ordinary motorist, amateur or occasional track day warrior supposed to reproduce these 'benefits' on the road where road surface, road type, suspension behavior, weather, traffic conditions are taken on board?
You cannot even translate non performance 'benefits' such as rolling resistance and aqua plaining resistance as this is easily influenced by geometry, tyre pressure and load.
. Sellers of part worn tires should be made to ,well best not to get me started on that one.
oldie
Yes, 335i Touring to be precise.335i?
However that's not what I am arguing, I am just disagreeing with your premise that all tyres are the same, when they are not.