Just had four tyres fitted but........

[jimbof]

I was probably a bit short; I think I typed it on my phone.  Love and peace all around

 

I find http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyres_For/Skoda/Suberb-MkII.htm quite useful.  You can see a neat table of how the crowd rate various tyres, and then if you click on a particular tyre it will take you to a price comparison for delivery of the various vendors (best to look at tyres with high amounts of miles covered in the last column).  Of course things like this only add to herd mentality, and might mean you miss a real bargain if you've got some real good info the rest of the world doesn't.

 

I usually have a quick google for the tyre vendor name and voucher codes.  I think I found a 5% voucher code for mytyres.co.uk at the time I ordered for that.  People like quidco also offer cashback, which can amount to a fiver or so.

 

I don't know enough about tyres myself so I tend to stay with well reviewed big brand models, and work on getting the price as low as possible.  I work on the premise that I do a lot of miles commuting to / from work (110miles a day, around 30K / year), and that while I might get lucky with cheaper tyres / part worns, doing so many miles I really want to load all the dice in my favour where I can, as accidents become perhaps more a matter of when than if...

Edited 2 April, 2016 by jimbof

[RapidReaction]

Ken, you have my sympathies and I hope you get things resolved to your satisfaction.  Personally, I would never recommend part-worns as their history is unknown and there is less comeback.

 

A few things for anyone else to consider (so if the cap fits...):

 

1) Tyre tests are currently a controversial subject in the industry just now with some premium manufacturers acknowledging they have submitted special tyres for tests.  Although brands imply consistency there are better/worse products within the brand leading to occasional surprises as with the two brands the OP refers to: http://www.tyrepress.com/2015/03/landsail-beats-michelin-surprise-result-in-finnish-tyre-test/

 

These test are almost exclusively on new tyres so make no account of lower tread depths as they age.

 

2) Alternative brands/patterns, service descriptions (load and speed ratings) and even sizes are not in themselves illegal and can indeed be the only way to fit an obscure pattern to your car.  The considerations when you are selling a car can be different to those if you intend to keep it.  I would always urge at least a matched axle pair.  I would argue that drivers who make these decisions are more in tune with their car than the iSheep   that just replace the OE fitment like-for-like.  I would, and have, pointed out these conversions (and their logic) to a buyer when selling cars BUT the fuel flap/driver's door sticker is there for them to check against, so caveat emptor.  A single unmatched tyre would ring alarm bells to me too.

 

3) I've tried the BTMA returns system which is there as a logistics system to support the British tyre industry and those manufacturers that have signed up.  It provides a defined process and formula, but you may have more success relying on goodwill with the backup of legal instruments which can be referred to even if not used.

 

Just my thoughts...

Edited 2 April, 2016 by RapidReaction

[jimbof]

1) Tyre tests are currently a controversial subject in the industry just now with some premium manufacturers acknowledging they have submitted special tyres for tests.  Although brands imply consistency there are better/worse products within the brand leading to occasional surprises as with the two brands the OP refers to: http://www.tyrepress.com/2015/03/landsail-beats-michelin-surprise-result-in-finnish-tyre-test/

 

These test are almost exclusively on new tyres so make no account of lower tread depths as they age.

 

2) Alternative brands/patterns, service descriptions (load and speed ratings) and even sizes are not in themselves illegal and can indeed be the only way to fit an obscure pattern to your car.  The considerations when you are selling a car can be different to those if you intend to keep it

 

I read that report too;  On one occasion a particular set of Landsails in a particular application performed a little bit better than some Michelins (it wasn't exactly a pasting...).  Not sure this this marks the vindication of budget tyres for now...  And of course things like sample to sample variability (which it sounds like the OP might be suffering from) can never be covered.

 

Alternative service descriptions and sizes are notifiable to insurers, so by fitting them prior to sale you are giving purchasers a potential headache, and really you should do them a favour and point out that they are not as per the vehicle type approval.  Of course caveat emptor does apply, but in my opinion you do have a bit of a moral obligation to not leave folks uninsured at worst.

[zorst]

I was probably a bit short; I think I typed it on my phone.  Love and peace all around

 

 

 

no apologies needed, if anything it's me. It's your car innit? And it's just got to be right.

 

 

Busted, I am just an interested amateur.  

 

 

If anything..............when I first read that, I really did laugh out loud because I saw where exactly where you were coming from.

 

I'll live with it for a while because the insurance is around the corner and I like to pay that in one go.  Then I'll regroup and see.

Edited 2 April, 2016 by zorst

[Ootohere]

So when Michelin that manufacture tyres in the likes of Dundee Scotland does the rest of Europe then call Michelins 'imports' and the TIGAR tyres. manufactured in a wholly Michelin Factory and good performing and value, are these to be dismissed as 'cheap rubbish' even if you have never tried them.?

Edited 2 April, 2016 by GoneOffSKi

[jimbof]

I'm not totally sure I understand your point; I could counter that parentage means little; you only need to look at Martin and Charlie Sheen to see that!  Panasonic and others have some pretty rubbish tellies made with their names on by Vestel in Turkey.  Hence the brand gives you some confidence, and you should seek other information (reviews, user opinions, etc) to figure out if the product carries the brand values you believe you are buying.

 

Michelin's involvement in Tigar is I understand a relatively recent thing (less than 10 years).  I know nothing of their products, they may be great; but I'm not sure you can assume they're a Michellin with another name on it, though.  They get middle of the road reviews from what limited information I've seen from their users over here (http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Tigar/Syneris.htm) - certainly nothing like the scores that any of the Michelin models receive there.

Edited 2 April, 2016 by jimbof

[Ootohere]

No they are not Michelin with another name, but then Michelin makes some pretty rubbish tyres from time to time as all the big name manufacturers, ECO tyres to suit the legislation and manufacturers want for the false EU test results on Mpg, while forgetting the rubbish traction on wet roads, and these sell for higher prices when bought as like for like replacements because of the name, I like my AT and MT Bf Goodrich which are from part of the Michelin group, but then they are horses for courses, there are tyres as well made and which perform better that cost less. I just happen to get a good discount on them. Testers are good at what they do, it is just the world is a big place and many people have different neeDs and wants, and sometime find the test results far from the real world. Experience with products they buy themselves.

Edited 2 April, 2016 by GoneOffSKi

[Greenline3Matt]

I normally vote for branded only but I have read very good reviews on Winrun and Jinyu tyres recently that make me think...check out tyrereviews.com and see for yourself.

[trundlenut]

I would say cheap tyres are not necessarily crap, but crap tyres are normally cheap.

My nokian winter tyres are better than the accelera alpha summer tyres I had and that's at high temperatures. But not a big difference in terms of cost.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

[RapidReaction]

I read that report too; On one occasion a particular set of Landsails in a particular application performed a little bit better than some Michelins (it wasn't exactly a pasting...). Not sure this this marks the vindication of budget tyres for now... And of course things like sample to sample variability (which it sounds like the OP might be suffering from) can never be covered.

Alternative service descriptions and sizes are notifiable to insurers, so by fitting them prior to sale you are giving purchasers a potential headache, and really you should do them a favour and point out that they are not as per the vehicle type approval. Of course caveat emptor does apply, but in my opinion you do have a bit of a moral obligation to not leave folks uninsured at worst.

Agree with that, and yes, I did point out the tyres before the buyer bought insurance over the phone from my house. I'm really pointing out that thinking a bit more laterally about tyre choice can provide solutions that are "better" (vs your criteria) than blindly following like-for-like replacement etc. and the brand and price only imply suitability.

Looking at a conversion size for our other car came up with this interesting set of Michelin owned brands of the same pattern and speed rating (not that I'm buying them):

Riken

Kormoran - slightly more

Taurus + 15% compared to Riken

Tigar + 50%

I'd have more confidence with Michelin's 2nd tier brand Kleber, but that came up with a different pattern.

Edited 3 April, 2016 by RapidReaction

[Michaelski]

Well, it sounds as though the story is coming to an end – I trust, hopefully a happy one!

 

No luck whatsoever in trying to get Michelin CrossClimates in size 175 x65 x R14 – Michelin’s swear that they do do ‘em, but all the Tyre Factors that I’ve tried (actually, more than a few) are equally adamant that they can’t get their greasy little hands on them?       Also finally, albeit regretfully, dropped the notion of fitting Nokian Weatherproofs, as a number of reviews have stated that their dry handling isn’t as good as other brands - & we do get the occasional “dry” day in the U of K.   Also, they seem to be extremely reasonably priced, & in my view, if you pay about ½ of what another, & competing, tyre costs, you’re only going to get perhaps ½ of the necessary requirements – but my personal assessment only.

 

So, I had to drop my sights (or in reality, did I???) & come Thursday, I shall have a set of Goodyear Vector 4Seasons Generation 2, FO’s fitted, instead of the Conti Premium E2’s which are currently not the state-of-the-art black roundy things on my car.    According to my friendly (I hope he’s friendly, & not just out for a quick fistful of ackers) Tyre Fitter, Goodyear have now introduced the Generation 3 in their Vector 4Seasons, but again, (according to aforesaid FTF) the “FO” was the precursor to the Gen 3, & is the Gen 3 in all but name.  

Also according to FTF, Goodyear have again raised their game with the Gen 3, & rolling resistance/fuel economy has been raised to “C”, & both wet & dry handling raised to “B”.  

   

So, we shall see what we shall see, & come Thurs, whilst I hope to be lighter in heart, I know that I’ll definitely be lighter in pocket.

Edited 4 April, 2016 by Michaelski

[Michaelski]

If "it is" of any interest to any Citigo'er, I'm really impressed with the 4Seasons.  In the wet (of which we've had more than enough of late) they're totally reassuring: in the dry, they're equally impressive, & their noise levels are barely discernible.    So, I'm happy (skint, but happy) & regard the dosh as very well spent.