WOW!!! Tires are expensive.

[jsoto]

Not what I meant but close..

I was looking at Super Sport Tires. Let's say 10/32 was the general tread depth of all the sizes. There was one size with a F (Ferrari Code) and the tread on it was 7/32.

[TwinsPoppa]

Originally Posted by jsoto

Not what I meant but close..

I was looking at Super Sport Tires. Let's say 10/32 was the general tread depth of all the sizes. There was one size with a F (Ferrari Code) and the tread on it was 7/32.

Yes, I understood what you meant. I just wanted to throw out the general relationship between tread depth and performance rating.

[Quicksilver]

Thanks. I knew that. I just found it interesting
that the Michelin site would provide a tire specked for P when my search was for OE.
I didn't see anything that had a BM designation.

EDIT: after nosing around the Michelin site I found my OE tires.
Energy MXV4 Plus | Michelin Tires

Originally Posted by TwinsPoppa

P = Porsche

[JCL]

I think it is great that this is a balanced discussion with a lot of info. I didn't know the Porsche code, never looked at a tire in an OE Porsche size I suppose, but I found these additional codes:

Originally Posted by Michelin web site

OE [Vehicle Manufacturer] Sidewall Marking: * = BMW, M0 & R01 = Mercedes-Benz, V0 = Volkswagen, NO = Porsche

OE Code [Original Equipment Key]: AC=Acura, AU=Audi, BM = BMW, F=Ford, MB = Mercedes-Benz, VW = Volkswagen, I = Infiniti, K=Kia, L=Lexus, LR = Land Rover, P=Porche, T = Toyota, V=Volvo

Interesting about the Ferrari tread depth. I had seen that on one other code once, on a specific Michelin tire.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by FSETH

Obviously, if you are talking the entire range of tires, Goodrich is below Michelin. However, I would replace your #2 Pirelli with Bridgestone. This is all personal opinion of course and probably the reason you were hesitant to list your top brands. You knew this would happen.

My number 2 isn't necessarily below my number one, I just have a small collection of brands that for me, are clustered near the top. Yes, I knew this would happen.

[FSETH]

Originally Posted by JCL

My number 2 isn't necessarily below my number one, I just have a small collection of brands that for me, are clustered near the top. Yes, I knew this would happen.

I hear you. I had Bridgestone, Toyo and Pirelli on my old e53 sport and I would say the Bridgestone and Pirelli tires were much more comfortable and more quiet than the Toyo's. In Toyo's defense, they were the original Proxes ST's and not the better ST II's. The Toyo's looked the best though, imo. The sidewall on the Toyo looked a little beefier and more SUV/truck like compared to all the other tires. The Bridgestones on our e70 have plenty of tread left, so I haven't been shopping SUV tires in a while. I am getting new tires on my M3 though and Pirelli really wasn't much of a thought. Not many people with M3's run them. They are typically the most expensive and seem to fall somewhere in the average catagory as far as ratings and reviews are concerned. I don't doubt the quality, but the performance is just not on par with the price in many cases.

Back to the e53, the General Grabbers are rated very well on the Tirerack's site, but for some reason, I don't feel completely comfortable with General as a brand. Perhaps this is one of those situations where one particular tire is much better than the brand as a whole.

[jgold47]

Originally Posted by FSETH

I hear you. I had Bridgestone, Toyo and Pirelli on my old e53 sport and I would say the Bridgestone and Pirelli tires were much more comfortable and more quiet than the Toyo's. In Toyo's defense, they were the original Proxes ST's and not the better ST II's. The Toyo's looked the best though, imo. The sidewall on the Toyo looked a little beefier and more SUV/truck like compared to all the other tires. The Bridgestones on our e70 have plenty of tread left, so I haven't been shopping SUV tires in a while. I am getting new tires on my M3 though and Pirelli really wasn't much of a thought. Not many people with M3's run them. They are typically the most expensive and seem to fall somewhere in the average catagory as far as ratings and reviews are concerned. I don't doubt the quality, but the performance is just not on par with the price in many cases.

Back to the e53, the General Grabbers are rated very well on the Tirerack's site, but for some reason, I don't feel completely comfortable with General as a brand. Perhaps this is one of those situations where one particular tire is much better than the brand as a whole.

General Tire is actually owned by Continental. Not that it matters to you, but a lot of tires are identical, but with different branding.

Firestone, Bridgestone and Fuzion are usuallly the same tire at different price points/marketing...

[FSETH]

Originally Posted by jgold47

General Tire is actually owned by Continental. Not that it matters to you, but a lot of tires are identical, but with different branding.

I think it matters a bit as I stated earlier with my Michelin/Bf Goodrich comments. I also think it is possible for a tire brand that may not be considered top tier, such as General, to produce a really good tire, which may very well be the case with the Grabbers.

Continental makes really good tires, but many of them have very soft sidewalls, which is fine unless you place high importance on steering response/feel. I had the DWS's on my old e36 and other than the soft sidewalls, they were great tires.

[jgold47]

Originally Posted by JCL

There are two schools of thought on premier brands utilizing second tier brands to build volume and market share.

Theory A states that the top brand pulls up the second tier brand by its bootstraps, pushing its technology and processes down to the lower brand. The lower brand rises, and is a price competitive option, essentially the top brand product at a discount price.

Theory B states that the top brand keeps its second brand one step behind, permanently, so as not to undermine its top brand position.

Choose A or B.

I go with B. Think how good that tire could be if Michelin was prepared to put its own premium label on it.

I think the problem with your argument is that youre assuming the other 98% of the population who doesnt know shit about cars or tires knows they are getting a less standard product.

For example, if a tire costs $1 to make, and it could be sold for $20 as a Bridgestone, or $40 as a firestone, the standard line of thinking in this industry is that people will aspire to buy the more expensive tire as americans have a teribble problem conflating price with quality. for everyone else they still make a profit.

Howevever, in example 2, due to the costs associated with different tire formulations, now the tire costs $3 to make for Firestone, and $4 for bridgestone, despite the sale prices being the same. Now the corporate bean counters say this is stupid, by downgrading the tire, you make it cost more.

Its almost like cost basis...

If firestone sells 100 tires at 40 per and bridgestone sells 200 tires at 20 per, and fuzion sells 300 tires at 15 per, A) their unit sales stay high, B) they attract new customers to the brand c) they net out to a reasonalbe profit.

This was the logic behind badge engineering for years, it was never about the per badge sales, it was about the net platform sales using the higher end to balance the lower, but creating a loyal and aspirational following

Chevy->Pontiac->Buick->Cadillac
Ford ->Mercury ->Lincoln

3->5-<X5->7 series

etc..

People just havent written entire college programs about the tire business, but look who started it.....

[Quicksilver]

How many tires are made in America? The Michelin I looked at yesterday says made in the USA.
Would that have a bearing on the buying habits of consumers?
I wondered because so many products are made in China.