Mud/Snow tyres

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 26, 2003

• #1

As we're coming into winter (my the nights are fair drawing in, eh?) my
mind has turned to the subject of tyres. I found last spring that the
current set of General AT boots is bloody useless in mud.

So is there such a thing as a mud tyre that can tolerate motorway speeds
for 10 hours a day? Or am into having to carry a set of spare wheels
with me and changing the wheels when I get to the end of the journey and
have to drive off-road?

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

T

treemendos

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #2

have you tried looking at the post directly before yours at the set of M/S
if there good enoughto fit as standard to a 90 by landrover
?

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #3

treemendos <[email protected]> wrote:

> have you tried looking at the post directly before yours at the set of M/S
> if there good enoughto fit as standard to a 90 by landrover
> ?

The post just before mine in my newsreader is:

Subject: MOTOR & DIESEL ENGINEERING anybody using their product?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

This post mentions cross ply tyres but was posted back at the end of
July and it's difficult to see how this one could have been directly
before mine:

Subject: for sale
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

I had those on my Landie, they are *very* slippery on wet tarmac and not
really suitable for 85-90 mph.

Other than that I can't see any post about tyres that looks relevant.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

C

Charles Holder

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #4

"Steve Firth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1g0d2im.9qpbql1ot1vb5N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
> treemendos <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > have you tried looking at the post directly before yours at the set of
M/S
> > if there good enoughto fit as standard to a 90 by landrover
> > ?
>
> The post just before mine in my newsreader is:
>
> Subject: MOTOR & DIESEL ENGINEERING anybody using their product?
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
> This post mentions cross ply tyres but was posted back at the end of
> July and it's difficult to see how this one could have been directly
> before mine:
>
> Subject: for sale
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
> I had those on my Landie, they are *very* slippery on wet tarmac and not
> really suitable for 85-90 mph.
>
> Other than that I can't see any post about tyres that looks relevant.
>
> --
> Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

Probably refering to "tyres and wheels for sale" a posing 7 above yours ))

 

T

treemendos

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #5

this is the link i have placed the tyres and wheels on
http://mytoys.mysite.freeserve.com/
i would not recommend any idiot to drive in the wet at 85 to 90 miles an
hour especially in a landy of any desription on any make of tyre it's bad
enough in the dry
these are my own opions having just recently suffered a motoring accident in
a range rover travelling at 55mph in the dry when a stupid lorry driver
pulled out onto a main road and hit me in the side because he didn't see me

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #6

Charles Holder <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Other than that I can't see any post about tyres that looks relevant.
> >
> Probably refering to "tyres and wheels for sale" a posing 7 above yours ))

Err that thread is 30 below mine (alphabetically by Subject) and appears
to be "treemendous" desperate to sell something. I can't see how that's
relevant either, I don't want to buy some secondhand tyres for a vehicle
I don't own I was looking for advice on mud tyres capable of motorway
journeys (1,300 miles over two days).

Oh well thanks for trying Charles.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #7

treemendos <[email protected]> wrote:

> i would not recommend any idiot to drive in the wet at 85 to 90 miles an
> hour especially in a landy of any desription on any make of tyre it's bad
> enough in the dry

I didn't advocate driving at 85 to 90 in the wet, I said that the
Turkish cross-plies were slippy in the wet. I also said that they were
not really suitable for 85-90 mph. I also don't own a Land Rover
although I used to and I had the Turkish cross-plies on it. It was then
IMO unsafe at any speed in the wet. I managed a 360 in it crossing an
airport runway at 25mph on those tires. It wasn't capable of more than
65 on the motorway, let alone 90.

My current 4x4 can cruise all day on the motorway at over 100mph. I
drive from here to the south of Italy in it on a regular basis. The
terrain at the other end of the trip is bad enough to need MTs. I don't
want your secondhand tyres. They won't fit my 4x4.

You can stop trying to sell them to me now.

> these are my own opions having just recently suffered a motoring accident in
> a range rover travelling at 55mph in the dry when a stupid lorry driver
> pulled out onto a main road and hit me in the side because he didn't see me

My opinion is you should learn to read before you call others idiots.
But hey we can't all have our wishes fulfilled.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

T

treemendos

Guest

• Aug 27, 2003

• #8

I had those on my Landie, they are *very* slippery on wet tarmac and not
> really suitable for 85-90 mph.
these were your words stateing that you obviously drive far to fast in the
wet even if it was on a runway unless you were trying to take off like your
last post
i am not in desperate need to sell second hand tyres and if you bothered to
read my web page you would have found out they were new tyres and radial
tyres to boot
again only my opions which i have fought for in the past to uphold every
mans right to
regards geoff

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #9

treemendos <[email protected]> wrote:

> I had those on my Landie, they are *very* slippery on wet tarmac and not
> > really suitable for 85-90 mph.
> these were your words stateing that you obviously drive far to fast in the
> wet even if it was on a runway unless you were trying to take off like your
> last post

Learn to read knobhead. It does not say that they are slippery on wet
tarmac *at* 85-90mph.

It says

1) they are slippery on wet tarmac and
2) not really suitable for 85-90mph.

I also said (and you snipped from your reply)

I managed a 360 in it crossing an airport runway at 25mph on those
tires.

Note, * at 25 mph *.

> i am not in desperate need to sell second hand tyres and if you bothered to
> read my web page you would have found out they were new tyres and radial
> tyres to boot

So you're desperate to sell a set of radial tyres. I still don't want
them.

> again only my opions which i have fought for in the past to uphold every
> mans right to

Yeh yeh, the right to free speech expressed as the need to force your
goods for sale onto someone who's not interested.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

S

Simon Barr

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #10

In article <1g0ebwn.1v0ic8hg8bn62N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth wrote:
>
> Learn to read knobhead. It does not say that they are slippery on wet
> tarmac *at* 85-90mph.
>

Jeez, why do you always end up arguing and name calling? Most times I see
your name pop up in usenet it ends in an argument, most recently in
u.c.o.l

Take a chill pill.

--
simon at sbarr dot demon dot co dot uk
Simon Barr.
1.7i Lada Niva Cossack.

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #11

Simon Barr <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jeez, why do you always end up arguing and name calling? Most times I see
> your name pop up in usenet it ends in an argument,

What's it to you?

> most recently in u.c.o.l

Ah yes, the thread where Hennessy started to abuse and name call, I
remember it well. Your point being what?

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

S

Simon Barr

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #12

In article <1g0efum.slnmyeblqj2mN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth wrote:
> Simon Barr <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jeez, why do you always end up arguing and name calling? Most times I see
>> your name pop up in usenet it ends in an argument,
>
> What's it to you?
>

Just an observation.

>> most recently in u.c.o.l
>
> Ah yes, the thread where Hennessy started to abuse and name call, I
> remember it well. Your point being what?
>

My point being that it can't be much fun being you if you go around
losing your rag all the time.

--
simon at sbarr dot demon dot co dot uk
Simon Barr.
1.7i Lada Niva Cossack.

 

S

Steve Hunt

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #13

treemendos wrote:
> I had those on my Landie, they are *very* slippery on wet tarmac and
> not
>> really suitable for 85-90 mph.
> these were your words stateing that you obviously drive far to fast
> in the wet

Treemendos:

He said they were very slippery on wet tarmac. And that they
were not really suitable for 85-90mph. IMO you are misreading
him and assuming he meant "they are not safe at 85-90mph
on wet tarmac".

Steve:

To try and give you one useful data point, I drive on
General MTs all the time. In theory I have a set of
road tyres too but haven't used them for a while. But
my idea of a long journey is 250 miles; I can well
imagine that driving to Italy on them would be tiring
and sufficiently slower to outweigh the 40 minutes or
so it takes to swap over four wheels.

For sure the MTs are very skittish in the wet. I doubt
there is a single tyre that would give a comfy and
quiet cruise and serious mud traction. Then again
taking the mud tyres with you probably means a
trailer (I know the Explorer has a big boot, but four
tyres would make that a small boot!) Could you leave
a second set of wheels with MTs somewhere near your
destination?

-- Steve

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #14

Simon Barr <[email protected]> wrote:

> My point being that it can't be much fun being you if you go around
> losing your rag all the time.

But I don't.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.

 

S

Steve Firth

Guest

• Aug 28, 2003

• #15

Steve Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:

> For sure the MTs are very skittish in the wet. I doubt
> there is a single tyre that would give a comfy and
> quiet cruise and serious mud traction. Then again
> taking the mud tyres with you probably means a
> trailer (I know the Explorer has a big boot, but four
> tyres would make that a small boot!) Could you leave
> a second set of wheels with MTs somewhere near your
> destination?

Yes I think that's what I'm going to have to do. A boot full of tyres
wouldn't have much room for anything else and the reason for having the
Ford was for load-lugging. The proiblem being of course that the only
place to leave the wheels is in the house, at the end of the incredibly
muddy farm track <sigh>.

I didn't think that it would be much of a problem, the Ford's been
coping perfectly well on ATs but last visit a neighbour asked us to
drive over and we found the track over that way far too slippery to
drive. has a camber of about 30 degrees to the left and the clay is even
slippier than wet Hampshire chalk. I was able to get some grip by
whacking the 4WD selector to High 4WD and using the 2nd setting on the
autobox which locks the gear box into third gear (no I don't understand
it either). However decided to not continue shredding our neighbours
track, drove home and walked it.

The only way he can use the track is to get out the caterpillar tractor.

I'm fairly convinced that since I could drive the track (with some
concerns about the potential for taking out olive saplings) that it's
just a case of tyres not quite up to the job. I also thought MTs may be
a better choice for winter when the Alps and the Apennines are covered
in snow. Then I may settle for driving much more slowly and stopping
more often in Hotels.

--
Mathematicians, please don't drink and derive.