On Sun, 2 Apr 2017 22:10:18 -0600, rbowman > wrote:

> Okay, I get it. Every magazine writer is a complete asshole bought off
> by the local friendly sales guy.

I went in with an open mind, but I have read car magazines before,
especially when I was a kid, and they are fantastic for entertainment.

Why do you think Cooper marketing brought in Unser driving a Corvette on
the Cooper tires anyway with the author riding shotgun? It's all
entertainment. It wasn't supposed to be a tire test.

If it was a tire test, they would have measured *something* (anything!)
But they reported absolutely ZERO measurements. Zero!
What kind of tire test is that?

A thousand words of some author praising the Cooper marketing guys.
It's great entertainment; but it wasn't even close to a "tire test".

Even if it was a tire test, it only "tested" three tires, none of which are
the size and brand of mine nor the size and brands I was looking at nor
anyone else - so - it was useless as a tire test. Great for entertainment;
but useless as a tire test.

What's sad is that you apparently *thought* it was a tire test.
That's a very scary thing.

Do you realize what that "test" really was?
Or, do you still think it was actually a tire test?

Please, dear God ... don't tell me you still think it was really a tire
test. Please ... renew my faith in the innate intelligence of humans.
Please Dear God.

> Every civilian reviewer that laid out
> $600 thinks whatever he bought is the greatest thing since sex. Nobody
> publishes reliable data.

This statement is where we disagree.
To my knowledge, only two entities publish "reliable data".
1. Consumers Union (aka Consumer Reports), and,
2. The sidewall of every passenger tire sold in the United States

Unfortunately, when I look at CR reports, they don't have every tire I'm
looking at, but the good news is that every sidewall of every tire has the
"reliable data" that you say doesn't exist.

Does the sidewall have reliable data on overall tire construction? Yes.
Does the sidewall have reliable data on wet straight traction? Yes.
Does the sidewall have reliable data on average dry traction? Sort of.
Does the sidewall have reliable data on treadwear life? Sort of.
----------
Does the sidwall have reliable data on anything else? No.
----------

> The consumer is screwed.

No they are not.

Every tire has reasonably reliable data on construction, traction, and
tread life.

Would I like more data printed on the sidewall? Sure.
But that's good enough to pick tires by.

Certainly it's *far* better than that "tire review".

> I'll go you one
> better. A major chain in the western US, Les Schwab's, which I've bought
> tires from, tends to sell tires with their own house models and brands.
> I've bought tires from them, never had problems, and their service is
> great, but good luck trying to find out anything about a 'Road Control
> Touring A/S'.

That's my entire point, which I said earlier, which is that the sidewall of
*every* tire gives you reasonably reliable data about the construction,
traction, and treadwear of that exact tire.

That's printed on *every* passenger tire.

Now, some people will tell me they get "factory analysis" and "factory
tests" and "factory data" for their (racing?) tires - which is fantastic if
they can get that information - because - Lord Knows - the factory knows
all of that.

But good luck on getting factory datasheets on all the tires you're
considering.

Even CR, which is an OK magazine (they are just ok though), doesn't rate
all the tires.

All you have that is reliable for all tires, is what's printed on the
sidewall. To ignore that information would be foolish.