>From the spit list today. Thought it might be interesting in light of the
tireless discussion of tires. <snicker>
I'll stop now.
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Terrick [SMTP:dterrick@home.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 2:02 PM
> To: triumphs@autox.team.net
> Cc: spitfires@autox.team.net
> Subject: Remember the radial tire discussion? - answers from 1972
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> In my quest for full page TR ads for the naissant Spitfire "club", I came
> across the "R&T Bonus Feature, Comparison Test: Radial Tires For Your
> Car"
>
> Here's the precis:
>
> It begins by offering that the North American manufactures of cars and
> tires
> have been late to adopt this technology due to a "cushy ride syndrome"
> (my
> words, but close). Their objective was to illustrate the difference among
> 9
> different tires, including the Michelin XAS, often seen on our cars.
>
> All tests were conducted on a 240Z, and were either 185/70 or 195/70 14.
> This size is smack in between the spit and TR sizes, so it is a good
> indication of what we "would have expected". Tests included dry and wet
> braking, dry and wet 200 ft skidpad, and a slalom.
>
> As now, the Michelin topped the heap on a points score. Cornered at
> .745G,
> this compares with the worst, the Yokohama at .713G. Midpack in the wet
> at
> .615, the wet range was .625 (Continental) down to .574 (Yokohama).
>
> The Pirelli slowed best in the dry at 138 ft from 60 mph, and the
> Bridgestone faired worst at 151 ft. In the wet, the Continental won at
> 168
> feet, compared to a dismal 226 ft for the Yokohama..
>
> The Michelin won the slalom at 28.37 sec, against the Uniroyal at 29.78
> sec.
>
> For "ride and noise" the Uniroyal was quietest and had the highest "ride"
> score. The Pirelli, well, sucked at both.
>
> All the above said, the overall points went like this:
>
> Michelin 477, Semperit 476,Continental 475, Pirelli 472, Dunlop 460,
> Goodyear 458, Uniroyal 445, Bridgestone 441, Yokohama 419.
>
> Interesting, yes? Even back then, their final comments went like this:
>
> "..in the end, it is the reader's decision which factors mean the most to
> him, but the staff of R&T is inclined to lay the heaviest emphasis on
> performance characteristics....".
>
> How about prices back then?!? The Michelin was most expensive at $72.46
> and
> an extra $6.44 for the tube (!!!). The Yokohama was a flat $50.
>
> Tires today are cheaper, even without inflation adjustment, and stick much
> better. 0.745G ?!? Remember this when you complain that the TR's and
> Spitfires don't have enough power to slide around the corners. On "the
> best
> and most modern" tires of their day, I bet they did !!!!
>
> I hope this has been an interesting glimpse into the past when "bias ply"
> was the standard and not just a concours-addict's Holy Grail for a
> TRailer
> Queen :)
>
>
> Dave T
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.
If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. CREDIT SUISSE GROUP and each of its subsidiaries each reserve
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except
where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state
them to be the views of any such entity.
|