Tyre Rating Trap.

Submitted: Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 19:52
ThreadID: 71025 Views:5496 Replies:10 FollowUps:24
This Thread has been Archived
Hi All. I have been looking to replace the tyres on my 04 Prado. I wanted something with at least 4ply walls to be a bit more resilient in the rough stuff. Settled on some BF Goodrich A/T’s. Enquired at my local tyre place and was told they would not comply with my factory tyre rating. My tyre placard states, 265/65-17 116S Minimum load rating1160Kg. Minimum speed rating 210KPH.
The BFG’s say 265/65-17 120T which is a higher load rating (120) but a LOWER speed rating (180KPH) Checked with my insurance co. and was told the Tyre Guy is correct. In the event of an accident claim it may not be allowed as the tyres would not comply with the Factory rating. I wonder how many owners have unwittingly fitted non complying tyres to their vehicle.
I can understand not being able to fit a lower LOAD rating but beats me how 180KPH can not be considered when most Aussie roads are limited to 110KPH, but them’s the rules at the moment. BUGGER.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Tony & Julie (FNQ) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:00

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:00
Worse than a joke isn't it? Cheers Tony
AnswerID: 376466

Reply By: Muddy doe (SA) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:03

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:03
so some retard steals your car and does 185km/h in it down the highway and loses it into a tree. The insurance company refuses your claim because you should have had tyres rated at 210 km/h.

Meanwhile if I do 115km/h down the road in a 110 zone which is the fastest I am legally allowed to travel (excluding NT which is now 130 tops I think) then Mr Plod pulls me up and hands me a ticket.

Why do we even bother taking the thing out of the garage!

Muddy
AnswerID: 376469

Follow Up By: Member - Toyocrusa (NSW) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:20

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:20
Muddy. I wonder if the Prado would even get to 185kph. Maybe down hill with the wind behind.I'm sure it wouldn't get to 210kph. Bob
0
FollowupID: 643882

Reply By: olcoolone - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:46

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 20:46
If you have an accident at the maximum Australian speed limit you would still be covered as you have not exceeded the tyre's maximum speed rating.

The Insurance company has to prove why a tyre rated for 180Kph is not as safe as a tyre rated for 210kph when you were traveling at 130kph.

Even insurance company's have to follow common law.

What insurance companys try to tell you and do is different to what they can do legally.

Ask them if you have the 210kph rated tyres fitted if the will still pay out if you have an accident while traveling over 160kph.

What I'm saying is a 180kph tyre will still be well above the speed rating for anywhere in Australia when the maximum speed in Australia 130kph.
AnswerID: 376481

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:15

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:15
Thats good advice , and in Victoria its in law , your tyres only have to go to about 120kph , forget the actual number , might be an L but important point is as said , they only have to exceed the max legal speed.
0
FollowupID: 643887

Follow Up By: olcoolone - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:35

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:35
Some people get edgy when dealing with insurance companys.

The tyre places are doing the right thing regarding the law and ADR's.

It limits there liability against a claim from an unhappy customer.

I think most 4x4's would be illegal in some way if insurance companys wanted to get nasty.

But at the end of the day they still have to prove that the illegal thing was a contributing factor to the accident.

It's legal to have a tyre with 5.1mm of tread but illegal to have a brand new 180kph known brand tyre fitted to a Prado....got to love it!
0
FollowupID: 643903

Reply By: George_M - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:00

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:00
New South Wales is one of the tougher States in terms of legally changing tyre sizes. There is a National Standard that permits going up a size (or more precisely, no greater than 50mm increase in diameter), but New South Wales has not implemented it. This probably impacts 120 series Prado owners more than most...

Must be a real PITA!

George
Come any closer and I'll rip your throat out!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 376488

Reply By: Flywest - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:15

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:15
I know if someone - works for a tyre co, who won a tender and fitted something like 180 new tyres to a govt fleet of vehicles - supplying the tyres to the specs requested in the tender. Turned out, same as above, didn't comply with the placarded tyre specs on the vehicles and had to ALL be removed.

Even tho only 1 or 2 vehicles had actually done ANY Km's since they were fitted ALL the removed tyres had to then be sold as second hand at lower prices because they had been fitted and removed from a vehicle - most still had their new molded "stipples" on the tyres, having not been driven since they were fitted before they were removed.

This represented a BIG LOSS for the tyre co concerned.

Tyre retailers etc are NOW looking out for their interests in what they will sell or supply to you - for just these reasons, losses to them if they have to later remove them and try to dispose of them as second hand.

The speed rating is a standard where bye tyres must be able to withstand a certain speed for a sustained period to attain a particular speed rating!

It has nothing to do with what the states max speed limit is!

We all know - that at times you might deliberately speed up to pass a particularly long vehicle as quickly as possible in order to spend as little time on the wrong side of the road as possible for safety reasons.

Tyres must be capable of sustaining such circumstances - not just barely meet the states max speed limit - hence the speed rating requirement.

Manufacturers do have the right to make a minimum specification for a tyre of their vehicle ion order for it's warranty etc to be valid.

Maybe people should take that into account - when buying a new vehicle if the type of brand tyre they like won;t meet the spec.

From what I have seen on here - most people here buy good tyres - BUT thats only because they are influenced by the amount of $ those tyre manufactiurers spendon expensive advertising - it might NOT represent the equation of "best value for money on a c/km costs basis".

I know of a guy, has a contract to keep a fleet of buss' shod with tyres & maintained serviced etc & who gets paid on a cents per KM basis by the bus co. It works well for the bus co - they don't have to worry about road worthiness etc etc - or employing their own mechanics and so on - all of that is contracted out.

His MAIN buying stipulation for tyres (as long as they meet the required placarded specification, is NOT what they cost etc - BUT how any cents per kilometer they cost over their projected lifetime - simply because he gets paid on a cents per km basis and the less cents / km the tyres are as a component of that fee - the more cents per KM he gets to keep as the contractor.

Really speaking WE should buy our tyres on the same basis - if we are interested in value for money - purchase price has no influence if it is cents per km oerpational cost that is the most important factor.

Who here has ever posted a question =- whats the cost cost effective on a cents per Km operational cost tyre for my vehicle xyz?.

Nope - we see posts like "who has had a good run from Mickey T's" or "how are your Coopers treating you" type questions influenced entirely bye advertising spend by the tyre manufacturer.

No that Desert Duelers or Mickey T's or Coopers aren't good tyres.

But how do they stack up against others on a cents per kilometer operating cost basis?

The manufacturers CAN actually tell you what the cents per kilometer operational costs of their tyres are, IF YOUR SMART ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY ASK THE QUESTION!

They do indeed sell tyres to such contractors as the Bus maintenance Guy I mentioned, entirely on a C/km operational cost basis........not interested in brand not interested in cost of each tyre - ONLY interested in c/km operational cost as long as all other required placarded specs are met!

Hopefully - this post might get some here to rethink how they buy their tyres.

There are tyre co's who actually decide to deliberately not try and compete (in advertising $ terms) with the high priced fashionable brands like those described - rather concentrating on making good tyres at a great price that kill in the c/km operational costs war - working on the theory that word of mouth will eventually bring people around - when they see others running their vehicles ofr less c/km operational costs than their neighbors and competitors.

Lower operational costs are an industry advantage over competitors for large companies with fleets & THEY are only interested in C'km operational costs!

It's a whole new way of looking at tyres.

Eventually others will catch on!

Cheers
AnswerID: 376494

Follow Up By: Muddy doe (SA) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:27

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:27
Set of top brand 4wd tyres @ $400 each and get 60,000km works out to 2.6 cents per km for set of 4.

Fuel at 14l/100k, and $1.20 a litre is about 16.8 cents per km.

Tyre cost works out to be a reasonable % of the cost of driving. We just notice it les as we only 'rubber up' every 2-3 years as opposed to filling the tank every week or so.

Muddy
0
FollowupID: 643892

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 08:50

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 08:50
Personally we don't take the cents/Km into account.

I want mine to hang on to the road. I think it was Michelin (a few decades back now) that claimed huge mileage but in the wet they were like driving on ice as my brother said. Couldn't wait to get rid of them. I believe they make a good tyre now though. But not for us.

We are happy with our current brand and, to tell you the truth, I don't even remember how much we paid for them. Nope! I want the tyres to work not satisfy the bank account. They are the last thing holding you on the road/track etc. Not your wallet.

Sorry to disagree but this is my two bobs worth.
0
FollowupID: 643924

Follow Up By: downtools - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:10

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:10
I agree 100% with vk1dx!!

I will always use tyres that I believe are as safe and practicable as possible.

If we tried to save every extra cent by using the cheapest(over time) tyres, shocks, oil filters, oil, etc etc then the car would suffer and probably not as safe or reliable.

At the same time, there is no need to throw money at name brands just because they look good.

Rant over, Cheers nifty.

0
FollowupID: 643928

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:41

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:41
Cooper Tyres "guarantee" has to be the stupidest bit of rhetoric I have ever read.

"we make the best offroad tyres AND a milage guarantee!"

But the guarantee is only good if you live in the city. What a croc of s++t.
Its an insult to a consumers intelligence, along the lines of the warning on Maccas coffee cups "beware of hot liquids"
0
FollowupID: 643934

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:11

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:11
Fisho Thats just normal advertising. Fancy Maccas or KF saying their food is healthy. Its been done in one way or another I bet you. The thing is that under the "conditions" they set, then they can actually be correct. Note the word in quotes. Who knows what those precise conditions are.

For tyres I think its a bit of a shot in the dark. You look into it and put a set on and by the time you either like or dislike them its too late to get your money back if you don't like them. Forget the guarantee as there are too many "gotchyas" there. So what do you do! Catch 22 isn't it.

So far we do not have any problems with the set we have on so only time will tell if we stick to them. And then to top it off the manufacturers will change the design and these exact ones will not be available again.

And worst of all. Have you ever heard anyone say something like "We put XXX on and they are lousy". Nope, no-one will ever admit that they chose the wrong brand and to suggest you get brand YYY. Boy did we bag those Aquajets.

0
FollowupID: 643938

Follow Up By: Rob! - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:59

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:59
Flywest,

No wonder this guy only looks at c/km. He doesn't have to drive the busses. For everybody else, the cost of the tyre per km is only part of the whole equation. All those other people also care about noise, comfort, resistance to punctures, handling in the wet, handling on gravel, availablity in outback towns etc.
0
FollowupID: 643949

Follow Up By: Flywest - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:05

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:05
Safest
Best road grip
Longest lasting
Resistance to punctures
Handling in the wet
Availability
They are the last thing holding you on the road/track etc. Not your wallet.

I actually didn't address any of those issues.
They are just excuses to continue to ignore the cost effectiveness criteria I addressed and keep buying your "favorite brand" because you've been advertising indoctrinated and don't know any better (or how to think for yourself).

I'd defy anyone here, who isn't in some way involved in tyre manufacturing industry, to actually KNOW, (without extensive unbiased testing of the Choice magazine variety) Which tyres are going to be:_

Safest
Best Grip
Longest lasting
Puncture Resistant
Wet Handling
Availability
Grip/versus wallet

Look at availability?
What influences this?
Is it what the wholesaler sells him that determines what a tyre retailer stocks?
YES
Is it what cash rebates the wholesaler gives him at the end of the monthh that influences the retailer?
YES
Is it what sells the best and turns over quick
Yes
Is it what has the best MARGIN in it for the retailer
Yes

Is it whats advertised most, and as a result is overpriced and undervalued?
No

Is it the most expensive tyre that when the idiot purchaser stakes the sidewall is gonna come back crying about his expensive tyre and want a new one free because it cost so much and NOT because he was an idiot and ran it over some reoh bar at the worksite and tore out the sidewall?
No.

These are all at best a subjective guess.

I could pretty much BET that the respondents above when they buy a car (whether new or second hand) and it has new rubber on it - as they all do these days - that they don't race off to the tyre shop - to sell (give away) those new tyres to the tyre shop and pay top dollar for their favorite brand for the reasons stated Safety etc etc etc those points listed.

No - you drive on what it came with till their work out THEN you go pay top dollar for whatever the adverts induced you to believe and thus justify spending $ on.

You don;t do any testing etc of your own - you reply on the adverts.

Yopu MIGHT have hada good run out of a p[articular brand set of tyres in the past BUTare the new ones (out of their new chinese factory) as good as the old ones out of their Korean Factory? You tested independently to know this?

Crapola is what was just posted.

I noticed an attempt even to paint the best c/km tyres as the "cheapest" (hence nastiest) when often that's FAR from the case, with the MOSt expensive (best) being allso the most cost effective..

Lets look just at longevity...versus expense.

The rubber compounds harness and tread depth are what influences longevity - and this costs $ to produce.

Little known fact - tyre rubber compound hardens with age, the best way to get hard rubber and best mileage is to wharehouse the tyres for at least a year - 2 would be better.

That costs $, some of the most expensive (i.e. slow turnover) get warehoused a LOT longer than others that were dripping out of a tree 3 weeks before you put them opm your sled.

It costs$ to warehouse harden rubber - someone has to pay for that store-age - the manufacturer has to get paid for making them - so there's lost interest on the $ purchase cost from the manufacturer, while they sit in a dark storeroom/shipping container somewhere being wholesaled before they go out to the dealer to sell to you.

Quick turnover is what it's all about - time is money and soft tyres grip way better than hard ones -but wear out twice as fast.

Everyone in the game wants fast turnover - the tyres in warehousing a week at most before they are out to the dealer and on your car!

Hence regardless of the brand - you get softer tyre rubber compound these days that we, used too in the old days when the retailer had stock on the shelf maybe up to a year before someone came in wanting that exact tyre set.

"Time's money" as the saying goes.

The most expensive tyre might be the one that is harder because someone paid to warehouse it long enough to harden to compound for you to get good mileage.

Tread Depth also helps longevity IF the compounds hard, BUT it is noisier.

All the other design construction and materials (steel belts etc) have an impact on puncture resistance handling and so on. Tread type influences wet handling and so on.

The very best tyre for c/km might be the most expensive with the deepest tread hardest compound and most steel belts so on IF it gets sufficient more KM's than it's cheaper rivals, when it comes to C/km.

It also might be the best grip, handling, noise, quickest stopping, best wet handling, and so on....

"Cheapest c/km operational cost doesn't necessarily stop a trye excelling in ALL the areas stated as reasons NOT to consider operational costs as a valid part of the whole evaluation process - something most of us have never done.

Transport (trucking) fleets do consider operational costs c'km within their purchase equation for tyres - i have a couple mates who wholesale tyres to trucking fleets & contract fit them etc, and they often (nearly always) fit some of the most expensive tyres on the market - to the trucks purely because purchase cost isn't the consideration - c/km operational costs are (assuming all the other factors are equal (safety tread stopping handling etc etc etc)

There are different tyres go on the steering wheels (sometimes up to 4 steering wheels) to the motive wheels which are different again to the trailer (un-driven & non steering) wheels.

For trucks and buses etc it's a much different equation with all those aspects taken into consideration.

Its all about staying competitive and in business, and if the trucks off the road due to tyre issues (for example if they don;t handle or stop and the driver refuses to drive on them) everyone's losing $ - the freight co - the driver and the contract fitter who fitted them and now has to remove them and refit something else and the wholesaler who supplied them etc etc.

These guys are professionals at what they do, keep the fleet shod with product that meets the client needs,and keep the wheels turning with a minimum fuss, that's how they keep their lucrative contracts!

Something they consider is cost per Km in the equation.

If the pros consider all these things and we don't then in tyre selection stakes - we are but amateurs - influenced by tyre co advertising and nothing else.

There are plenty people out there just like you if you fall into that category.

After some coaching from the pros - I've learned to be a little more professional in my approach, my home fleet runs 22 tyres, and the cost savings have been great so far, and we have zero tyres issues - no flats etc and great wear (longevity) features, and we pay a fair price for our tyres.

We as a rule don't run around with a lot of the highly advertised brand name tyres - because a LOT of what we would be paying for is those companies saturated advertising budgets - I'd sooner put those $ into harder compound warehoused tyres, that get better mileage etc and where all the other issues also stack up.

I just get tired of a lot of the less informed responses sometimes on inane subjects like tyres selection.

We might as well post "what fotty team do you barrack for and do a count to see who's the best team based on the responses and barracking noise level...because that's the level of info in most tyre thread responses.

I'm suggesting maybe we should have some criteria - like the pros do, for assessing and making recommendations about tyres, in our threads and have introduced just that concept to much ranting and raving!

Maybe some just aren't ready yet to talk intelligently about tyres and as I already posted some tyre co's aren't interested the unnecessarily steep advertising costs games, required to in those type clients, (the ones who shout/barrack the loudest for their pet brand).

They just want to deal with the pros, who know a good tyre when they see it & don't need as much again as that tyre costs to make added to the cost again, to pay for saturated Saturday football TV advertising. Generally speaking they don;t sponsor racing teams either in these tight times - something again I don't want t pay for.

To each his own.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 643960

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:24

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 15:24
Hi Flywest,

According to the tyre manufacturers modern tyres are fully cured in LESS then 3 months and the stories about tyres getting harder with age are now not valid and have been that way for many years. Ford (USA) recomend that tyres should be replaced on a vehicle every 5 or 6 years.

KK
0
FollowupID: 643964

Follow Up By: Rob! - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:36

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:36
Flywest,

Don't confuse enlightenment with tunnel vision.

R.
0
FollowupID: 643979

Reply By: Gronk - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:54

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 21:54
I could be wrong ( not again ) but I understood that 4x4 tyres had to be a minimum rating of T...and as long as it was above this ( and disregarding the placard ) it was legal ??
AnswerID: 376502

Reply By: Member - Matt H (SA) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:28

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:28
Toyocrusa,

I guess the extra sidewall plies will affect your speed rating. Makes sense in the fact the there's less flexiablity and an increase in heat build up at "high" speed...

Ive just checked the Missus's 2006 Prado placard, and the minimum is 108S. Thats 1000kg/ 180kph.

We've got Cooper ATR's fitted and their rated at 112T, or 1120kg/190kph.

So the insurance is fine, but 2 ply short of what you want.

It would appear that Toyota changed the tyre spec since 2004....

Cheers, Matt

AnswerID: 376510

Follow Up By: Member - Toyocrusa (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:11

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:11
Hi Matt. The S = 210kph so they have only lowered the load rating. Regards,Bob.
0
FollowupID: 643915

Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:32

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:32
Sounds like garbage.
According to the RTA NSW (link here) the speed rating is N (140kph) or greater - doesn't matter what the placard says. Same in every state of Australia.
Your tyres are fine.
AnswerID: 376512

Follow Up By: WYSIWYG (Bundaberg Qld) - Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:59

Monday, Jul 27, 2009 at 22:59
Yes Phil I beliieve you are right. The same applies in Qld also. His tyres are fine and the legislation backs it up.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 643907

Follow Up By: Member - Toyocrusa (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:30

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:30
Hi Phil.Thanks for that info. I have copied and saved it. I actually tried to contact the RTA first but after going through push button 1,3,4 and then waiting for ages I gave up. The ins.co. had the same amount of button pushing but answered reasonably quickly. Just love the modern way of dealing with big business and government dep'ts, not. Regards,Bob.
0
FollowupID: 643917

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 08:19

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 08:19
Bob,
The tyre guys and insurance companies are as confused as the rest of us. Usually they just say that if its legal, its OK and skip the detail.

Theres actually a lot of common sense in there. The Load Index rule stops people putting flimsy underrated tyres on.
The Speed Rating of at least 140kph is sensible, given our speed limits, and you'll find that every tubeless tyre available to you - even the muddies have a speed rating thats OK.

Yep and pressing the buttons and talking to a computer voice irks me as well. I reckon its their way of telling us to look it up on their website!

Cheers
Phil
0
FollowupID: 643921

Follow Up By: tim_c - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:26

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:26
I'd prefer pressing the buttons over Vodafone's stupid 'voice recognition system' anyday, at least the buttons work!
0
FollowupID: 643946

Follow Up By: StormyKnight - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:41

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:41
Yep this is right 140km/h in NSW

In Vic it is only 110km/h


Found this out when I wanted to put larger diameter tyres on the car. NRMA said as long as it registerable we will insure it. So I have an engineering certificate for the oversize tyres (by 30mm diameter) & the speed rating is less than the placard.

BFG MT 265/75R16 rated @ 160km/h

I'm supposed to have a sticker though on the windscreen so a driver can see that I have mud & snow tyres on the vehicle.

Only the load capacity needs to be equal or higher which is easily done going to a light truck tyre over a passenger construction.
0
FollowupID: 643981

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:54

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 18:54
Yeah, it gets more confusing with different states. Hopefully they will all adopt the national regs one day! The following link is a fairly recent summary of all the states' regulations:
Toyo website tyre regulations
0
FollowupID: 643985

Follow Up By: George_M - Wednesday, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:18

Wednesday, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:18
It's a little more confusing in Victoria, Phil.

According to the Toyo link you posted, and also the Vic Roads website, the most recent VSI bulletin is dated 2003. This is quite restrictive, particularly in respect to increasing tyre sizes.

On the other hand I have an email from Vic Roads, dated June 2008, which states (in part) "It is acceptable for vehicles to comply with Vehicle Standards Bulletin (VSB) 14, the National Code of Practice for Light Vehicle Construction and Modification".

This latter advice allows me to increase the tyre size on my Prado to 265/70 R17, and take advantage of a much greater range of ST tyres.

Needless to say I've told my insurance company, and I keep the email in the vehicle just in case.
Come any closer and I'll rip your throat out!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 644043

Reply By: Member - Toyocrusa (NSW) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:23

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:23
Thank You all for some informative replies. I am going to go with my replacement choice. I am a long standing gold member of the insurance Co. without ever having a claim so hopefully that should be in my favour in the event that I did have to make a claim. Regards,Bob
AnswerID: 376524

Reply By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 07:08

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 07:08
Be aware that you should not only have the minimum speed rating but the tyres on the same axle should also be of the same LOAD rating. Tyre companies are not always indicating the number of plies in a tyre these days as it is difficult to compare a 4 ply with a 6 ply etc if the ply materials are different. Tyre companies are now often just indicating a load rating instead of the number of plies. In NZ, the inspection authority (which is VERY closely associated with their Australian counterpart) is now demanding that tyres on the same axle must be of the same load rating. Note that this is not just the same or above the placarded rating but they must be the same rating ! Tyre side wall flexibility (effects vehicle stability) is now being taken into account during inspections. So all tyres on a vehicle including the spare should be of the same load rating then you can rotate or replace with the spare when needed and still be legal.

KK

AnswerID: 376527

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 13:14

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 13:14
The 'ply rating" has only been around for historical reasons - it used to tell you how many cotton plies was in the tyre. These days it doesn't tell you much because the load that can be carried is different for different sizes.

Load Index (eg 112 or 120 or whatever) is universal and found on every tyre and tells you how many kgs can be carried.
In addition there is a "load Range" where
Load Range C = the old 6 ply rating
Load Range D = the old 8 ply rating
Load Range E = the old 10 ply rating.

The actual construction of the tyre varies a lot. BFG have long advertised their "3-ply sidewall". But their plies are not as strong as say the 3 sidewall plies on a Goodyear MTR and may actually be the same strength as other 2 ply sidewalls.
0
FollowupID: 643951

Follow Up By: Member - Kiwi Kia - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 13:27

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 13:27
Hi Phil, Yes, and I have also seen the term "equivalent ply rating" - means whatever the manufacturer wants it to mean :-))

KK
0
FollowupID: 643952

Follow Up By: Peter_n_Margaret - Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 14:00

Tuesday, Jul 28, 2009 at 14:00
"Ply rating" is a nonsense.
So is wanting tyres with 3 or 4 plys in the sidewall so you don't damage them IMHO.
We are running an all steel Michelen tyre on the OKA with a SINGLE ply sidewall. Single ply means the sideall is very flexable, bags out well in sand and rock work AND stays cooler under all conditions.
In 130k of bush work over 5 years, we have staked 4 tyres through the sidewall or shoulder (none through the tread) and have never lost a tyre because of physical damage.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 Motorhome
0
FollowupID: 643956

Follow Up By: Member -Signman - Friday, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:15

Friday, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:15
Hi Peter & Margaret
Nice pic on the cover of The Wanderer this month !!!

0
FollowupID: 645299

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)