Originally Posted By: BHopkins
What are these "additional complications" with directional or asymmetrical tires, that you speak of?.....
I'm going to start at a different spot, but I will be running over the same territory as others.
Many years ago, the company i used to work for conducted a test of a directional tire - running it forward and backwards. The wet traction only changed by 10% - which means there was only a 5% difference between a directional and a non-directional tire. That's not enough for the average motorist to notice - plus it is smaller than the differences between tires (meaning make and model).
Asymmetrical tires dependent on difference in camber to gain an advantage - and by "camber" I mean relative to the road, not relative to the car. Softly sprung cars would amplify this, but the usual usage for asymmetrical tires is - ironically - performance cars.
So I don't think there are significant differences in performance for either directional or asymmetrical tires. I also think this is done more for marketing and "saleability" than anything else.
That said, the initial problem with these types of tires is getting them mounted correctly. I've made the mistake myself, so I can understand why an overworked tire buster might make the mistake also.
That means that the initial mounting needs to be checked after purchase.
Then rotating tires also needs to be checked.
And every time a tire is repaired.
And when changing from winter tires.
And did we talk about staggered fitments?
That seems to me to be a lot of hassle for such a small amount of performance.
Now, I'm not saying people shouldn't buy directional or asymmetrical tires. I'm saying that I wouldn't specifically go after them just because there appears to be some performance advantage.
What are these "additional complications" with directional or asymmetrical tires, that you speak of?.....
I'm going to start at a different spot, but I will be running over the same territory as others.
Many years ago, the company i used to work for conducted a test of a directional tire - running it forward and backwards. The wet traction only changed by 10% - which means there was only a 5% difference between a directional and a non-directional tire. That's not enough for the average motorist to notice - plus it is smaller than the differences between tires (meaning make and model).
Asymmetrical tires dependent on difference in camber to gain an advantage - and by "camber" I mean relative to the road, not relative to the car. Softly sprung cars would amplify this, but the usual usage for asymmetrical tires is - ironically - performance cars.
So I don't think there are significant differences in performance for either directional or asymmetrical tires. I also think this is done more for marketing and "saleability" than anything else.
That said, the initial problem with these types of tires is getting them mounted correctly. I've made the mistake myself, so I can understand why an overworked tire buster might make the mistake also.
That means that the initial mounting needs to be checked after purchase.
Then rotating tires also needs to be checked.
And every time a tire is repaired.
And when changing from winter tires.
And did we talk about staggered fitments?
That seems to me to be a lot of hassle for such a small amount of performance.
Now, I'm not saying people shouldn't buy directional or asymmetrical tires. I'm saying that I wouldn't specifically go after them just because there appears to be some performance advantage.
Last edited: