CR Tests Wet Braking on Worn AS Tires

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michelin vs AAA:

http://www.thedrive.com/tech/21475/...-the-battle-over-how-safe-worn-tires-are


Quote
When approached about the AAA study last week, Michelin argued that the study matched—in broad strokes, at least—its own argument. "Michelin has begun a conversation about worn tire performance because we believe that consumers should have information about what they can expect from their tires throughout their legal life," the company said in a statement provided to The Drive. "AAA, like Michelin, is committed to safety, and we are pleased that AAA has added its voice to this topic. AAA's data supports Michelin's position that not all tires are created equal. The AAA research also supports our position that as tires wear, their wet stopping ability decreases."

"We also agree that tire degradation varies significantly among brands and even within brands," the statement went on. "In fact, some worn tires perform better than some new tires. Wear bars are legally required for all passenger tires sold in the United States. Michelin strongly believes that all tires should be designed to perform to current wear bars, thus resolving safety, financial and environmental concerns."



https://www.moderntiredealer.com/bl...traction-testing-for-worn-tires-is-vital

Quote
Tom Carter, technical communications director for product marketing, said Michelin wants to give consumers more information when they are buying new tires.....

"Technology exists to design and manufacture tires to perform well in wet conditions, even when worn. You don't have to have magic sprinkle dust or a magic tread pattern. You need to have good tread pattern, and you need to maintain it. You need to have good contact patch shape, and you need to maintain it. And you need to have an adherent rubber compound that maintains this traction throughout its life."......

Carter said tire designers know what they need to do to make sure tires perform acceptably when they are significantly worn. Now it's time for them to do so, and for the industry to develop a wet traction test that will give consumers critical information they need to know when buying tires.
 
It seems this happede:
Why I would spend so much money on overhyped Michelin, when Yokohama does same thing?
CR results in:
Nah, it is methodology, it is not Yokohama.
 
Originally Posted by eljefino
Originally Posted by ctechbob
Well, that's all fine and dandy, but it is really only comparing the difference in the tread design. That test isn't going to take into account the hardening of the rubber over the life of the tire.


Yup this.

It's hard to be scientific and relevant though because after 5-6 years they won't still be making the tire and even if they did the survey results would be nearly useless as other tires come on the market.

+2
IMHO this is a totally irrelevant test. It is the hardening of the rubber over the tire's lifetime that has the most dramatic affect on braking distance, not the tread depth. This test would only be relevant to hydroplaning. I have owned tires that still had plenty of tread left and I had to replace them because of the rubber hardening (Michelins). What you have when you shave the tread on new tires is new tires with sticky new rubber and less tread.
 
I'm kinda surprised that the Toyo Celsius was ranked as one of the "worst", since this is marketed as a "bad weather" tire. I wouldn't consider Toyo a third rate bargain brand (but I might put Maxxis and Uniroyal in that category) so I wonder the Celsius performed so poorly in the CR test?
 
Last edited:
I can agree with their Yokohama ascend findings. I used to be a Yokohama guy, and still don't hate them, I see them as a great value tire. But I ran the ascends on my accord and below 7/32", I think right at 6/32", they started really sucking traction wise. It was a really noticeable difference.
 
Originally Posted by krzyss
Here you go:

"How We Tested


These evaluations were based on standard tire tests that CR performs on every model it rates.

In the wet braking comparison, we measured the stopping distance from 60 mph on a surface covered with 1.2 mm of water (about the thickness of a dime). That is like stopping in a heavy rain storm, and it is an evaluation that we perform hundreds of times a year.

We also recorded each car's speed when the tires start to hydroplane (losing contact and control) on 10 mm of water. This challenging test is comparable to driving through standing water on a rutted road."

KrzyÅ›


Thanks for that.

I note that the results for the hydroplaning test weren't included in what was published in this thread. Is that because CR didn't publish them or was it because CR didn't emphasize them? In either case, I think the issue of tread depth is important - and I find it particularly galling that CR is chastising the tire manufacturers when their testing methodology skews the data.
 
I also find it really strange that the Michelin Premier A/S ranked 2nd behind the other Michelin tire and the General Altimax RT43 was mid-pack but in their standard tire rankings for performance all seasons on their tire rankings page (separate from this article) the Premier tire does not do nearly as well as Altimax RT43. Even their own tests don't agree with each other.

I really wish CR would publish their testing data instead of or in addition to their color coded rankings.

This is the only data the article had on hydroplaning.

"Tires hydroplane more readily as the tread wears. All tires saw a decline in hydroplaning resistance by an average of 13 percent. As tread grooves become shallow, it's harder to channel water, which is to be expected. As a result, there is a greater tendency to skim on water—so cars hydroplane. As in the wet braking tests, some tire models experienced more of a loss than other tires when it came to hydroplaning resistance. "

I do own a pair of Premier A/S tires on my Buick wagon in size 235/60R17, they are a few years old now and still perform great. I run winter tires in the winter so I don't know how they do on snow and ice.
 
Originally Posted by WishIhadatruck

I do own a pair of Premier A/S tires on my Buick wagon in size 235/60R17, they are a few years old now and still perform great. I run winter tires in the winter so I don't know how they do on snow and ice.

They actually do OK on the snow and ice for what it is. Michelin does claim a "sunflower oil enhanced" compound like the Pilot Sport A/S 3 Plus and Primacy MXM4 uses to ensure a more pliable tread at cold temps. But I wouldn't use them too often in the snow.
 
I've had both the Primacy MXM and the Premier A/S. The Premier is OK on snow, the MXM not as good, but the Premier only has effective tread of 3.5-4/32 because it starts at 8.5/32. You need 5/32 to have effective grip in the snow. If Michelin had made a Premier A/S with 10/32 to start it would have been a lot more economical.
 
^ that's why I steered a friend towards the Defender T+H for his Forester. Stiffer compound but a full 10/32" tread. Yes, Michelin should make a full-tread Premier A/S, or bring back the MXV4 series with the Premier compound.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top