Dunlop Sportmaxx Tyres

[Smoothcall]

recent tests put Dunlops 4th overall in performance testing,

Which test was that?  The highly biased (biased against Michelin, by NOT using 'extra load' tyres, which we all know the GTI must have, by law) Evo test?

Are you sure about this?

I’ve just checked my 17” OEM CS2s and they are the same 91 load rating as the PS2s they tested. Are they illegal too?

The PS2 does not come with a higher load rating in the 17” wheel size for 225/45. Given that is the size they were testing it is hardly bias is it? They used the best Michelin available.

BTW the F1 Asyms only come in a 94 load rating in that size, so they hardly had a choice there either.

[Saint Steve]

recent tests put Dunlops 4th overall in performance testing,

Which test was that?  The highly biased (biased against Michelin, by NOT using 'extra load' tyres, which we all know the GTI must have, by law) Evo test?

Are you sure about this?

yes very ,  perfomance tests with all leading brands of tyres was carried out and i posted a link to it a while back on this very site as this has as you can imagine been covered a few times.

Perhaps try the Search tab for "Best tyres for mk5 GTi" or something along those lines and im sure your find my link to these results.

Vw ARE NOT going to fit sub standard tyres to their own product!!.Order a new GTi from the factory, and you have 1 in 3 chance of getting one with them fitted!.

They are fit for purpose and are not as good as others but are fit for using on the GTi.

[Saint Steve]

 

[Smoothcall]

recent tests put Dunlops 4th overall in performance testing,

Which test was that?  The highly biased (biased against Michelin, by NOT using 'extra load' tyres, which we all know the GTI must have, by law) Evo test?

Are you sure about this?

I’ve just checked my 17” OEM CS2s and they are the same 91 load rating as the PS2s they tested. Are they illegal too?

The PS2 does not come with a higher load rating in the 17” wheel size for 225/45. Given that is the size they were testing it is hardly bias is it? They used the best Michelin available.

BTW the F1 Asyms only come in a 94 load rating in that size, so they hardly had a choice there either.

yes very ,  perfomance tests with all leading brands of tyres was carried out and i posted a link to it a while back on this very site as this has as you can imagine been covered a few times.

Perhaps try the Search tab for "Best tyres for mk5 GTi" or something along those lines and im sure your find my link to these results.

Vw ARE NOT going to fit sub standard tyres to their own product!!.Order a new GTi from the factory, and you have 1 in 3 chance of getting one with them fitted!.

They are fit for purpose and are not as good as others but are fit for using on the GTi.

Sorry may not have been clear.

I was questioning why someone would say the test was biased against Michelin.

If anything it was biased towards Bridgestone as it was done at their own testing facility.....

[Teutonic_Tamer]

recent tests put Dunlops 4th overall in performance testing,

Which test was that?  The highly biased (biased against Michelin, by NOT using 'extra load' tyres, which we all know the GTI must have, by law) Evo test?

Are you sure about this?

Yup.  The load carrying capacity of the car (the 'plated' axle weights and gross vehicle weights) are categorically defined by the load carrying capacity of the tyres.  This 'plated' load then forms the 'Type Approval' for that particular model of car, and the Type Approval, together with the ex-works regulatory tests will generate a 'European Certificate of Conformity'.  All this means that a car must have tyres equal to or higher than the specfied load index

I’ve just checked my 17” OEM CS2s and they are the same 91 load rating as the PS2s they tested. Are they illegal too?

Are you sure they are OEM?      Maybe the 17" tyres have a 'standard' load index which is good enough.  Now I am confused! 

The PS2 does not come with a higher load rating in the 17” wheel size for 225/45.

Are you sure?  I have looked on the Michelin site, but they are known to have a few errors regarding tyre sizes on their interweb site.  For a while, they completely took off all tyre sizes, because they got so messed up.

Given that is the size they were testing it is hardly bias is it? They used the best Michelin available.

But it IS a bias.  They chose to use some tyres with standard load and others with extra load ratings.  This one differance can make a crucial effect in how a tyre performs, particularly under 'stress' related tests, such as heavy braking, and hard cornering.

They should only have used all standard load tyres, OR all extra load tyres, not a mish mash of both.  And where they couldn't, then they should have completely excluded those tyres from the results, or alternatively, clearly highlighted this crucial difference, and clearly indicated what effect non-XL tyres would have.  But instead, Evo being the typical journos they are (and NOT vehicle dynamics engineers) chose to ignore the facts, and didn't want to let inaccuracies mar a good money grabbing headline.

BTW the F1 Asyms only come in a 94 load rating in that size, so they hardly had a choice there either.

But they did have a choice.  If it is so difficult in getting consistent load rated tyres in the 17" rim, WTF did they not use the 18"s - which are without doubt the most popular on the Mk5 GTI.  Evo did have pleanty of choice, but chose not to bother - probably because the test was actually orgainsed by the corrupt Italians! 

[Teutonic_Tamer]

Sorry may not have been clear.

I was questioning why someone would say the test was biased against Michelin.

The facts are simple.  The Michelin tyres they used had a lower load carrying capacity - that is a point of fact!

Evidence for the prosecution, m'lud:
(Image copyright Evo mag)

If anything it was biased towards Bridgestone as it was done at their own testing facility.....

Erm, Bridgestone did not organise or arrange the test.  They just recieved a big fat pay cheque whilst a bunch of muppet journos had a thrash around, whilst their Iti workers turned on an off a few garden sprinklers.  But the actual day-2-day managers at the site probably couldn't give a toss which tyre came tops, maybe apart from the Italian Pirelli. 

[Smoothcall]

recent tests put Dunlops 4th overall in performance testing,

Which test was that?  The highly biased (biased against Michelin, by NOT using 'extra load' tyres, which we all know the GTI must have, by law) Evo test?

Are you sure about this?

Yup.  The load carrying capacity of the car (the 'plated' axle weights and gross vehicle weights) are categorically defined by the load carrying capacity of the tyres.  This 'plated' load then forms the 'Type Approval' for that particular model of car, and the Type Approval, together with the ex-works regulatory tests will generate a 'European Certificate of Conformity'.  All this means that a car must have tyres equal to or higher than the specfied load index

I’ve just checked my 17” OEM CS2s and they are the same 91 load rating as the PS2s they tested. Are they illegal too?

Are you sure they are OEM?      Maybe the 17" tyres have a 'standard' load index which is good enough.  Now I am confused! 

The PS2 does not come with a higher load rating in the 17” wheel size for 225/45.

Are you sure?  I have looked on the Michelin site, but they are known to have a few errors regarding tyre sizes on their interweb site.  For a while, they completely took off all tyre sizes, because they got so messed up.

Given that is the size they were testing it is hardly bias is it? They used the best Michelin available.

But it IS a bias.  They chose to use some tyres with standard load and others with extra load ratings.  This one differance can make a crucial effect in how a tyre performs, particularly under 'stress' related tests, such as heavy braking, and hard cornering.

They should only have used all standard load tyres, OR all extra load tyres, not a mish mash of both.  And where they couldn't, then they should have completely excluded those tyres from the results, or alternatively, clearly highlighted this crucial difference, and clearly indicated what effect non-XL tyres would have.  But instead, Evo being the typical journos they are (and NOT vehicle dynamics engineers) chose to ignore the facts, and didn't want to let inaccuracies mar a good money grabbing headline.

BTW the F1 Asyms only come in a 94 load rating in that size, so they hardly had a choice there either.

But they did have a choice.  If it is so difficult in getting consistent load rated tyres in the 17" rim, WTF did they not use the 18"s - which are without doubt the most popular on the Mk5 GTI.  Evo did have pleanty of choice, but chose not to bother - probably because the test was actually orgainsed by the corrupt Italians! 

I think we the consumer would have been worse off if they had limited the test to one of the load ratings.
As I have pointed out, some are only available in the high rating and some only in the low rating.
If it does make such a difference then good on the companies for supplying we the consumer with that product.

They chose the 17"s because of their general popularity - remember this is not a test just for GTI owners. We're just lucky they chose to do it with our car. I dare say the next one they do in a few years time will be on 18"s

[Smoothcall]

Sorry may not have been clear.

I was questioning why someone would say the test was biased against Michelin.

The facts are simple.  The Michelin tyres they used had a lower load carrying capacity - that is a point of fact!

Evidence for the prosecution, m'lud:
(Image copyright Evo mag)

If anything it was biased towards Bridgestone as it was done at their own testing facility.....

Erm, Bridgestone did not organise or arrange the test.  They just recieved a big fat pay cheque whilst a bunch of muppet journos had a thrash around, whilst their Iti workers turned on an off a few garden sprinklers.  But the actual day-2-day managers at the site probably couldn't give a toss which tyre came tops, maybe apart from the Italian Pirelli. 

It's reasonable to expect that a tyre will perform better at the testing facility it was designed on.
I'm not familiar with the Bridgestone development methodology so I don't know how much impact the new facility had in the development. It may or may not have affected the results. Given they mags are always going to have to use someone else's facilities then there's probably not much we can do there.

Does remind me of the time Car magazine ran an article on the quality of Rovers. They compared a model (might have been a 416??) to its competitors and were happy to report that quality wasn’t as bad as the public perceived it to be. They funny thing was that they used Rover’s own QA methodology to measure quality, so it was hardly surprising the Rover did ok as they were being build to pass that particular standard.

[Teutonic_Tamer]

snippage

I think we the consumer would have been worse off if they had limited the test to one of the load ratings.

Sorry, but I strongly disagree.  I bet 99.9 % of car owners would NOT have the foggiest about the load index rating on tyres.  So how can you expect the average consumer to deciper this highly crucial fact regarding load indexes.  My Mrs is an ethusiastic driver, and has a fundamental basic mechanical knowledge (she can check all the fluids, tyre pressues, and tyre wear patterns, and can change a wheel) - yet she would openly admit to knowing fcuk all about load indexes.  Many, MANY of my collegues in the trade also know fcuk all (yes, they all know you should have the same load index - but they don't actually know what the load index stands for).  And many tyre depots, such as ATS, Thik-Fit, STS - and the national chains like Halfrauds, Nationwide Autocentres, etc rarely know about tyre load indexes.

So I just can not see how you think that mixing load indexes on a 'tyre test' in a magazine is going to honestly help the consumer with crucial facts.  The average consumer will just see which came top of the list, and pick that one.  End of.

As I have pointed out, some are only available in the high rating and some only in the low rating.

We have already agreed on that point.  But just because some specific types are not supplied - that somehow makes it alright! 

You certainly wouldn't expect your Doctor to prescribe sommat - "which is sort of correct, but not really correct, but you aint getting the really correct one, because I don't like that particular drug company, but this other drug company looks after me with free samples" ? ? ? ?  Because that is the sort of ethos you are trying to impart with your own logic on this point!

If it does make such a difference then good on the companies for supplying we the consumer with that product.

What ARE you talking about?  The tyre companies, BY LAW, have to provide tyres which comply with EITHER the standard load index for that particular size, OR the extra load, OR both load indexes.  These tyre companies are NOT somehow doing us 'a favour' !!!!

They chose the 17"s because of their general popularity - remember this is not a test just for GTI owners. We're just lucky they chose to do it with our car.

I am not really questioning the reasons why they chose the 17"s (although I do strongly dispute that 17" are the most popular in the ultra high performance tyre sector - as proven by audited sales figures published in a trade only magazine).

However, the crux of my complaint on this particular issue is that they DID use a GTI.  And ONLY a GTI (and not a mixed fleet of similar cars, such as a Megan R36, Focus ST, Astra VXR, BMW 1-series, Civic Type-R).  Furthermore, in the article, they repeatedly referred specifically to the capabilites of the GTI.  So in all honesty, whilst the article is simply listed as a 'tyre test', I can be absolutely certain that any GTI owner who reads that article WILL consider that Evo tyre test as the DEFINATIVE tyre test specifically for the GTI.  But, like I said, most GTIs (and ALL Pirellis/Ed30s and all R32s) had 18" rimmage - yet again, there is a clear inconsistency between the actual cars on the road, and the way they conducted their test.

I dare say the next one they do in a few years time will be on 18"s

But will they still get it correct?  And won't 19"s be the then standard on the GTI?

[Teutonic_Tamer]

If anything it was biased towards Bridgestone as it was done at their own testing facility.....

Erm, Bridgestone did not organise or arrange the test.  They just recieved a big fat pay cheque whilst a bunch of muppet journos had a thrash around, whilst their Iti workers turned on an off a few garden sprinklers.  But the actual day-2-day managers at the site probably couldn't give a toss which tyre came tops, maybe apart from the Italian Pirelli. 

It's reasonable to expect that a tyre will perform better at the testing facility it was designed on.

Rubbish.  That Bridgestone testing ground in Italy is brand new.  The actual testing of those particular Bridgestones will have been done somwhere in Japan! 

Given they mags are always going to have to use someone else's facilities then there's probably not much we can do there.

With that point, I agree with you entirely.

But it is still a shame that a UK magazine can not use a UK testing facility.  Millbrook also have such similar facilites, and their ambient environmental conditions would have been perfect for the UK motorist. 

Does remind me of the time Car magazine ran an article on the quality of Rovers. They compared a model (might have been a 416??) to its competitors and were happy to report that quality wasn’t as bad as the public perceived it to be. They funny thing was that they used Rover’s own QA methodology to measure quality, so it was hardly surprising the Rover did ok as they were being build to pass that particular standard.

And to be fair, most car manufacturers will work like that.  The Euro NCAP crash tests are a classic example - all the manufacturers now build their cars so that they stand the best chance of getting five stars - yet many of them still omit vital safety aids such as ESP - with Ford being the worst offenders.

Anyway, getting a little off-topic for a tyre thread.