New EU Tyre Labelling.

On the face of it, it's a victory for getting people to realise what the black thing does, and decrease the amount of accidents people have from lack of grip.

But will it go the way on getting the tyre to perform well in just the tests; much like claimed MPG and real world MPG e.g. FIAT 1.2 TwinAir. EURO NCAP is another, Volvo often voice concern that it should be a harder test with more varying impact areas and speeds as certain manufacturers like VX were building cars around the predefined tests.
 
It's also total and utter BS, according to the figures a Runway Enduro has the same wet weather performance as a Bridgstone Potenza or Sport Contact 2.
 
The question has to be who does the testing? If left to the manufacturers will the results be trustworthy? It should be down to an independent testing facility
 
Yeah out of interest I had a quick look on black circles - according to the labelling eagle f1's and sport contact 5's are there or thereabouts with each other....fine

Hankook evo's are better in the wet....not sure about that but they're still a good tyre from experience

Pirelli P6000's don't on the face of things look like much worse a tyre than any of the others, I know from bitter experience of this terrible, terrible tyre that this simply cannot be the case! There must be something seriously wrong or too simple with the grading system
 
Last edited:
Looking at 205/55/16 size tyres, virtually everything is rated 'B' or 'C' for Wet Grip, with a few exceptions. The one that stood out to me being the Hankook Ventus Prime, which got an 'A' rating and from personal experience of those vs Conti SC2s on my Golf, they must have been tested in a universe with different physical properties to the one I live in.

The Hankooks were appalling tyres in comparison, especially so in the wet, couldn't pull away with revs any greater than about 1300 or the TC light would start its own personal disco display in the dash. Try and stop quickly and the ABS would have a heart attack.
 
Had a quick read through of the article, but couldn't see who will be testing or regulating this?
 
Kaka said:
Had a quick read through of the article, but couldn't see who will be testing or regulating this?
Click to expand...

probably the same sort of machine that tests them to make sure they meet standards etc . spin the wheel , apply friction , measure resistance

good for braking distance sort of tests , bad for anything that involves the cars moving weight , the suspension setup , pressures , etc etc
 
I think this will help stupid people pick a tyre better than the worst simply by informing them how much worse the cheap tyre is. We have all been there when buying anything - 'oooh i could get one slightly better for only a fiver more'

Educated drivers will always just go on the forums of their car choice to find out what works.
 
Vanilla said:
Educated drivers will always just go on the forums of their car choice to find out what works.
Click to expand...

To find out what works or to just get a bunch of unqualified user opinion* from people who are subjectively and unknowingly biased in favour of all sorts of random factors, usually price? Then once one or two reaosnably cheap tyres find favour thats that - they become the best tyre ever on the car in question. According to some owners forums Falken is simply the best tyre maker in the world ever.

*I include myself in that - every tyre view I have is simply unqualified user opinion.

There is a place for unqualified user opinion but it's very poor to use it as your sole method of tyre selection.
 
Vanilla said:
I think this will help stupid people pick a tyre better than the worst simply by informing them how much worse the cheap tyre is. We have all been there when buying anything - 'oooh i could get one slightly better for only a fiver more'
Click to expand...

Well it would but the rating categories seem to be either so vast or so wrong that only the absolute worst of the worst is getting lower than a C. Mid range tyres are getting A ratings, with great rolling resistance scores too, whilst some high end premium cars are even seeing their rating for grip drop to C, just based on manufacturer fitment.

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.

Take the SportContact2 I currently run in 205/55/16 91 W.

Eff: E
Grip: B
Noise: 70dB
£77 fitted.

Ah but SIR, you have an AUDI, you should buy the Audi endorsed variant.

Eff: F
Grip: C
Noise: 71dB
£85 fitted.

Really? Just because Audi endorse that particular tyre it suddenly becomes a whole grade less efficient, with worse grip and more noise? Yeah, sure it does.

Perhaps I should look at some alternatives, like the Hankook Kingery Eco - B/B/70 for £72, or wait, the Kumho Solus KH17 is just as good as the Conti, E/B/71 for £63.

Apparently if you want the best grip in this size, you need only look to the Michelin Energy Saver + or the Michelin Primacy HP. If you don't like Michelin, there's always Hankook's midrange tyre, which outperforms their own performance tyres.

It's absolutely barmy really.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
My Bridgestone runflats rate pretty poor under the new labelling system
F rolling resistance.
C wet grip
71 dB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom