Tires...

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Jan 14, 2003 | 08:21 PM

#11 (permalink)

0HP930

Guest

Joined: May 2002

Posts: 0

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally posted by "PseudoRealityX"

Quote:

Originally Posted by 400HP930

When trying to make up your mind on your choices, refer to the UTQG.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/general/utqg.htm

One thing to note is that the utqg treadwear ratings are specific to each brand. A 200 treadwear Yokohama has absolutely ZERO comparable value to a 200 treadwear Bridgestone.

Simply put, you cannot compare numbers from one manufactuer to another.

Yes, they do not exactly correlate since the gov leaves the testing to the manufacturer and their testing methods will differ.

I would not say there is no corrolation though. While it varies, the difference between 50, 150 and 300 are clear enough to allow you to guage the approximate wear characteristics and stickyness of a tire.

Jan 14, 2003 | 08:28 PM

#12 (permalink)

StreetDriven

I <3 your mom

Joined: Mar 2002

Posts: 5,269

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally posted by "flounder"

Hey Nick look on www.tirerack.com They are selling off all the Yokohama AVS Intermediates fairly cheap since they've been discontinued.

I just bought 2 more for my maxima, there alittle to low of profile but they will work--> 230 40 17's

__________________
\

Jan 15, 2003 | 12:54 PM

#13 (permalink)

PseudoRealityX

cone junkie

Joined: Jul 2002

Posts: 15

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally posted by "400HP930"

I would not say there is no corrolation though. While it varies, the difference between 50, 150 and 300 are clear enough to allow you to guage the approximate wear characteristics and stickyness of a tire.

True enough... Falken Azenis are rated at 200... Yokohama A520s were 140... That's humourous if you've driven on both.

__________________