New EU Tyre Labelling.

dalin80 · 1 Nov 2012 at 18:13

while a good idea in theory it wont make any difference to any tyre place at all, 99.99999% of customers don't give a damn as long as they get the cheapest tyres which are technically round.

Kenai · 1 Nov 2012 at 18:14

[TW]Fox;23081902 said:
For my size all the usual suspects - Eagle F1, ContiSport 5 etc etc - are all A for wet grip. Dunlop Winter Sport 3D is... E.

It's ok, I can get the same A rated grip for my car with some Michelin Energy Saver+ :cool:

I'd also get a B for rolling resistance, I bet your waste of money premium tyres don't manage that

[TW]Fox · 1 Nov 2012 at 18:18

Kenai said:
It's ok, I can get the same A rated grip for my car with some Michelin Energy Saver+ I'd also get a B for rolling resistance, I bet your waste of money premium tyres don't manage that

I wonder if it's got some daft EuroNCAP style logic in it where the tyre is rated against other tyres in its class, therefore making a 13" Energy with an A lower rated than a 19" Pilot Sport 2 with a B....

Kenai · 1 Nov 2012 at 18:23

[TW]Fox;23081976 said:
I wonder if it's got some daft EuroNCAP style logic in it where the tyre is rated against other tyres in its class, therefore making a 13" Energy with an A lower rated than a 19" Pilot Sport 2 with a B....

This is entirely the problem - it's completely meaningless because nobody has any idea what the criteria are, how it's measured, what is or isn't comparable etc.

They've tried to make it simpler to choose but as these things tend to do, they've just made it worse in all honesty.

Makes you wonder about energy ratings on home appliances really, whether they're really as informative as they first seem.

edit - "tyre label testing is self-certified using specific EU standardised methods that every test must adhere to."

So it's Michelin themselves effectively making the Energy Saver+ look like a better tyre than the Pilot Sport 2. hmmm.

Matt82 · 1 Nov 2012 at 19:00

Are the dangerous tyres outlawed? If not, people will not stop fitting the cheapest you can get

I know a lot of people at work who religiously buy second hand no brand rubbish

Third Opinion · 1 Nov 2012 at 20:46

Wont make a bit of difference imo. Like sunglasses people will still pay £100+ for Raybans even if they give you less protection than a £5.00 pair from Wilkinsons.

Tyre brands have become must have for petrol heads.

Simon · 1 Nov 2012 at 20:56

I think rolling resistance is really easy to understand :s (ISO 28580)

It seems you can use any method you want within the method.

http://www.us-tra.org/documents/ISOFDIS28580.pdf

jej_knowles · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:36

i think these ratings are actually showing up some of the big brand expensive tyres as you can clearly see that some of the cheaper brands ie falken / kumho are better rated and a fair amount cheaper!
This can only be good news as premium brands will have to lower prices surely?

Muffin` · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:36

Simon said:
I think rolling resistance is really easy to understand :s (ISO 28580)

It seems you can use any method you want within the method.

http://www.us-tra.org/documents/ISOFDIS28580.pdf

Was a bit like that with the BS for UK tyres iirc, the tyre had to be as good as the 'control tyre' which itself had to be of 'suitable performance' in the wet

:confused:

Firestar_3x · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:38

jej_knowles said:
i think these ratings are actually showing up some of the big brand expensive tyres as you can clearly see that some of the cheaper brands ie falken / kumho are better rated and a fair amount cheaper!
This can only be good news as premium brands will have to lower prices surely?

PMSL.

Best joke of the day that.

It would be great to hear from the top 3 or 4 UHP tyre company's on these ratings, no doubt they are a little confused by them as well.

jej_knowles · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:48

excuse my ignorance but im not into the whole abbreviations rubbish! what does pmsl mean?

Firestar_3x · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:50

Might be worth reading the rest of the thread, the new rating system is garbage and goes against any of the mainstream tyre tests.

jej_knowles · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:54

which mainstream tyre tests?
and you didnt answer my question! PMSL?

Glaucus · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:54

Is there a reason motorbike tyres are excluded. By the sounds of it the tests are useless anyway.

Firestar_3x · 1 Nov 2012 at 21:57

Evo mainly but a few others exist.

**** myself laughing........

Kenai · 1 Nov 2012 at 22:14

Firestar_3x said:
It would be great to hear from the top 3 or 4 UHP tyre company's on these ratings, no doubt they are a little confused by them as well.

According to the stuff on BlackCircles, it's the manufacturers themselves assigning these ratings.

So it's Michelin themselves giving the Energy Saver+ the same performance rating as their Pilot Sport 2 premium performance tyres, and it's Hankook themselves rating their mid range tyre Ventus Prime as superior to their performance Ventus Evo.

It's absolutely bizarre.

jej_knowles said:
i think these ratings are actually showing up some of the big brand expensive tyres as you can clearly see that some of the cheaper brands ie falken / kumho are better rated and a fair amount cheaper!
This can only be good news as premium brands will have to lower prices surely?

Kenai said:
The way these ratings have appeared, it seems to me it's only going to reinforce the view that high end tyres are just for 'boy racers' because all the mid range tyres have just as good scores, so must be just as good.

Firestar_3x · 1 Nov 2012 at 22:16

In that case it's even more confusing than I thought, what a crock.

jej_knowles · 1 Nov 2012 at 22:17

im sorry to say this but doing four laps and working out the average lap time does not sound like a very scientific way of testing the tyres true ability to me! there are far to many variables going on between each lap and different tyres!
I have always had the opinion that the famous name brands that you see on f1 and the like are over priced and people stupidly pay for the name so i'm just glad that now i can see that i was right all along....

Firestar_3x · 1 Nov 2012 at 22:21

That's not the only test is it?

jej_knowles · 1 Nov 2012 at 22:22

Kenai said:
According to the stuff on BlackCircles, it's the manufacturers themselves assigning these ratings.

So it's Michelin themselves giving the Energy Saver+ the same performance rating as their Pilot Sport 2 premium performance tyres, and it's Hankook themselves rating their mid range tyre Ventus Prime as superior to their performance Ventus Evo.

It's absolutely bizarre.

its not a performance rating though!
The rating is for wet braking which makes perfect sense