HR vs VR Tires
Yale Kiefer
formance vehicle. Unless you can take advantage of good sub-100mph performance,
cut your cost. HR's are rated for 119 mph and VR's are rated for 149 mph.
David Bartnik
Thanks to all who responded to by broken wheel stud dilemma. Using the info
in the replies, I was able to fix it with no problems and it cost a whopping
$2.
Thanks again.
Dave
george
^^^^^^^
there must be two charts out there.. BFG says SR=112, HR=130.
Every time the subject come we see different numbers...
--
/ george jefferson
\/ * geo...@mech.seas.upenn.edu
Richard Blauvelt
These tires will be for an 84 BMW 733i with 390mm wheels (strange, huh?).
As soon as my wife gets her license, she will be using it to transport
herself and our infant son. Considering her inexperience and the cargo
she will be transporting, I want to get the best-handling tire available.
(Also, when I drive the car, I tend to push it reasonably hard).
-Richard
***
Disclaimer: Just my personal views.
richard welty
*:cut your cost. HR's are rated for 119 mph and VR's are rated for 149 mph.
* ^^^^^^^
*there must be two charts out there.. BFG says SR=112, HR=130.
*Every time the subject come we see different numbers...
the BFG chart is correct; the numbers are quite standard, too. i don't
know where the 119 number came from. the speed symbols go in 6mph/10kph
increments up to the rarely seen T rating (118mph), and then we get H, V,
and Z which don't follow the pattern.
cheers,
richard
--
richard welty we...@balltown.cma.com
518-393-7228, Infologic, 1400 Balltown Road, Niskayuna, New York
``Mario is slowing on the backstretch'' -- Tom Carnegie
Al Crosby
In a previous article, we...@thuban.crd.ge.com (richard welty) says:
>In article <143...@netnews.upenn.edu> je...@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (george) writes:
>*<Discussion on H & V speed deleted >
>*there must be two charts out there.. BFG says SR=112, HR=130.
>the BFG chart is correct; the numbers are quite standard, too. i don't
Is this how you figure out the Tire Numbering data?
P=Passenger
First numbers are the width of the tire in centimetres
S=112; T=118; V=124; H=130; V=149; Z>149 (in mph) ratings
60, 70, 80 etc is the ratio
R=Radial; X=??
Another number: Width in inches?
Traction: A=High; B=Medium; C=Low
Treadwear: 100 is base
eg. 420 would be 4.2 times normal treadwear
--
Al XB ac...@freenet.carleton.ca
Ottawa, Ont ub...@freenet.victoria.bc.ca
george
the speed symbols go in 6mph/10kph
:increments up to the rarely seen T rating (118mph), and then we get H, V,
:and Z which don't follow the pattern.
wow. A=0, B=10... S(letter #19 ) = 18*10, or 180Kph = 111.8 Mph.
I always thought it was simply "s for Speed", since s is the lowest
rating you usualllly see on passenger car tires.
I've learned something for the day..I can go home now.
quite odd, that "V" ought to be 130 according to the rule. There must
be a good story behind that.. Maybe they chose "H" because "V" would
be confused with "U", but by the time they developed 149mph tires, no
one was making "U" tires(124mph) so they used the skipped over v.
( cant use "X", because it is sometimes used as a seperator in
the designation.
I really need to get a life.
richard welty
*:increments up to the rarely seen T rating (118mph), and then we get H, V,
*:and Z which don't follow the pattern.
*wow. A=0, B=10... S(letter #19 ) = 18*10, or 180Kph = 111.8 Mph.
*I always thought it was simply "s for Speed", since s is the lowest
*rating you usualllly see on passenger car tires.
close; H is obviously missing from the sequence, since it's used for 130.
as i said, the pattern is not slavishly followed.
the lower ratings are generally seen on european truck tires, by the way.
*I really need to get a life.
so could we all.
richard welty
*In a previous article, we...@thuban.crd.ge.com (richard welty) says:
*>In article <143...@netnews.upenn.edu> je...@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (george) writes:
*>*there must be two charts out there.. BFG says SR=112, HR=130.
*>the BFG chart is correct; the numbers are quite standard, too. i don't
*><More stuff deleted>
*Is this how you figure out the Tire Numbering data?
*P=Passenger
the P is not always used; if missing, the tire is still a automotive
tire. the other designation used is LT for light truck.
*First numbers are the width of the tire in centimetres
section width, to be exact, which is almost always wider than the
tread width, and it's in millimeters
*S=112; T=118; V=124; H=130; V=149; Z>149 (in mph) ratings
^^^^^^
this is in error; there is no rating between T and H that
i'm aware of
*60, 70, 80 etc is the ratio
^aspect
*R=Radial; X=??
other designations here indicate bias ply or bias belted, not common in
passenger car tires today.
*Another number: Width in inches?
wheel diameter in inches, unless 3 digit, which is a metric diameter
*Traction: A=High; B=Medium; C=Low
true, but a very crude metric
*Treadwear: 100 is base
* eg. 420 would be 4.2 times normal treadwear
again, a very crude metric. hairsplitting over being 10 points better
with this would be about as meaningful as arguing about 10 points on an
SAT test.
Frank Ball
& *R=Radial; X=??
& other designations here indicate bias ply or bias belted, not common in
& passenger car tires today.
B=bias belted. bias ply usually has no letter.
--
Frank Ball 1UR-M fra...@sad.hp.com (707) 794-4168 work,
Hewlett Packard (707) 794-3844 fax, (707) 538-3693 home
1212 Valley House Drive IT175, XT350, Seca 750, '62 F-100, PL510
Rohnert Park CA 94928-4999 KC6WUG, LAW, AMA, Dod #7566, I'm the NRA.
Mark Walsh
> Which car model are you considering these for? I would opt for HR if not on a per-
> formance vehicle. Unless you can take advantage of good sub-100mph performance,
> cut your cost. HR's are rated for 119 mph and VR's are rated for 149 mph.
HR's are good for 130 mph. In any event, why not have a
little extra safety margin? I run ZR's on my car, and it
is nice to know that I'm less likely to suffer a heat
related failure while blasting through the desert. Of
course, performance tires are made better.
--
Mark Walsh (wa...@optilink.com) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh
Amateur Radio: KM6XU@WX3K -- AOL: BigC...@aol.com -- USCF: L10861
"What, me worry?" - William M. Gaines, 1922-1992
"I'm gonna crush you!" - Andre the Giant, 1946-1993
Roger Noe
>In article <CCCGv...@freenet.carleton.ca> ac...@Freenet.carleton.ca (Al Crosby) writes:
>*First numbers are the width of the tire in centimetres
>
>section width, to be exact, which is almost always wider than the
>tread width, and it's in millimeters
By "section width", I think Richard means nominal width of the tire's
cross-section, in mm.
>*60, 70, 80 etc is the ratio
> ^aspect
The aspect ratio is the ratio of the tire's sidewall height to the
cross-section width. It's expressed as a percent. So if you multiply
these first two numbers (the ones usually separated by a /) and then
divide by 100, you'll have the sidewall height in mm.
>*S=112; T=118; V=124; H=130; V=149; Z>149 (in mph) ratings
> ^^^^^^
> this is in error; there is no rating between T and H that
>i'm aware of
The list I have says:
Q=99, S=112, T=118, U=124, H=130, V=149, Z=149+ (mph)
The Q rating is unusual, maybe even obsolete. The V rating changed around
1992-1993. It used to stand for "130+" but was uprated to 149 mph.
>*Traction: A=High; B=Medium; C=Low
>
>true, but a very crude metric
Yes, and some include an equally crude temperature resistance metric,
A=high, C=low.
Another useful bit of info, in the U.S., is the DOT (Dept. of
Transportation) serial number. The last three digits give the week
and year of manufacture. That is, "163" would mean the 16th week of
1993.
--
Roger Noe n...@cs.uiuc.edu
Department of Computer Science 40:06:39 N. 88:13:41 W.
University of Illinois (217) 244-6173
Urbana, IL 61801 USA
"If any of our dealers sold cars the way Motorola sells computers, they'd
be out of business."--head of Greater Cleveland Auto Dealers Association
Al Crosby
In a previous article, n...@cs.uiuc.edu (Roger Noe) says:
>In article <CCE49...@crdnns.crd.ge.com> we...@thuban.crd.ge.com (richard welty) writes:
>>*First numbers are the width of the tire in centimetres
>>tread width, and it's in millimeters
>By "section width", I think Richard means nominal width of the tire's
>cross-section, in mm.
That was my mistake originally - I should have said millimetres.
>>*S=112; T=118; V=124; H=130; V=149; Z>149 (in mph) ratings
>> ^^^^^^
>> this is in error; there is no rating between T and H that
>>i'm aware of
It was on the list I have, it should have been U=124. I also had Q on the
list as well, but it was obsolete and someone wrote over it - Q <112. I
didn't post it because I wasn't sure.
>The list I have says:
> Q=99, S=112, T=118, U=124, H=130, V=149, Z=149+ (mph)
>
>Another useful bit of info, in the U.S., is the DOT (Dept. of
>Transportation) serial number. The last three digits give the week
>and year of manufacture. That is, "163" would mean the 16th week of
>1993.
Geez. More stuff. Now that I know what it means - what do I need???
Like the other guy said, time to get a life. I'm outa' here.
Dennis Henderson
H-rated Dunlop Qualifiers HR4s handle *worse* on dry pavement than
T-rated Eagle GTs on my '85 Pontiac 6000STE.
H-rated BF Goodrich Comp-TA HR4s handle *similar* on dry pavement than
T-rated for my '84 Z28. Yes..the Comp is M+S and the Eagle was not.
Thus all H-rated tires are not created equal and won't necessarily
outhandle a lesser speed rated tire.
Usually V rated push you to a lower profile tire. Tire size will most
likely make the choice for you.
....Dennis Henderson '85 Pontiac 6000STE, '84 Z28 both on Koni adjustable shocks
Bob Tufts
>
>Any ideas about HR vs VR in the same make, model, and size of tire?
>For example, the only tires in the universe which will fit on my
>wheels are Michelin TRX in a 220/55-390 size (metric wheel).
>Michelin offers the tire in both an HR and a VR version.
>
>Does the VR have stiffer sidewalls? I don't expect to drive over
>100 mph. My concern is with handling at legal speeds.
>
>-Richard
One thing to consider is that VR tires tend to be segment molded (as
opposed to "clamshell" molded). This gives a more precision to the
dimensions of the tire and better inherent dynamic balance. (less
chance of needing "huge" balance weights and better balance at all
speeds) If you've ever suffered with a tough balancing situation,
you can really appreciate this. It doesn't say that there aren't
good HR tires, just that you stand a better chance with VR on
balancing.
-Bob T.
Richard Blauvelt
>Be wary of simple statement such as "higher speed rating means a better handling tire".
>
>
>Usually V rated push you to a lower profile tire. Tire size will most
>likely make the choice for you.
Any ideas about HR vs VR in the same make, model, and size of tire?
For example, the only tires in the universe which will fit on my
wheels are Michelin TRX in a 220/55-390 size (metric wheel).
Michelin offers the tire in both an HR and a VR version.
Does the VR have stiffer sidewalls? I don't expect to drive over
100 mph. My concern is with handling at legal speeds.
-Richard
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard E. Blauvelt | Internet: rbla...@world.nad.northrop.com
Northrop Corp. Aircraft Div. | "In this message, I speak only for
Hawthorne, California, USA | myself and not for any organization"
Frank Ball
& Any ideas about HR vs VR in the same make, model, and size of tire?
& For example, the only tires in the universe which will fit on my
& wheels are Michelin TRX in a 220/55-390 size (metric wheel).
& Michelin offers the tire in both an HR and a VR version.
In the case of a Metzeler tire that is available in H or V ratings
the difference is the tread thickness. The higher speed tire has
thinner thread to reduce heat buildup.