On 7/9/2017 1:51 AM, Chaya Eve wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:22:11 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I'd not be driving up and own steep twisting roads on $100 tires
either.

Is that really a sound logical statement?

Here's my super simple logic.
* The tires meet all USA legal specs for the vehicle including exceeding
the load range (105S versus 102S).

You imply that a tire that meets or exceeds the specs for the car is
unsafe, just because I paid $100 for that tire (mounted & balanced).

Maybe I'm missing something critical but I can't find the logic in your
argument?


Just because a tire meats the minimum specifications does not mean it is
the best tool for the job. Some conditions require more.

My wife's car can happily exist on $100 tires. She rarely goes on the
highway, never drives in snow, rarely goes more than a few miles at a
time. OTOH, I drive some weeks 2000 miles. speeds sometimes in triple
digits, on hills in the snow, on highways in the heat. Do you think the
$100 tire is going to perform as well as a Nokian WR3G? It is about
double the price but can keep you safer in severe condition.

I don't buy on price and minimum specs, I buy on the performance that I
need.

A cheap screwdriver can drive the occasional screw, but if you do it
often you'll find the more expensive ones fit your hand better and thus
work better. Meantime, enjoy your hamburger. I'm having a steak.