BAD Tires/Service from manufacture

[SnoKing]

I have written about trailer tires a lot. I will copy and paste some of it here for those that want to read it.

***First Item:***
Let me start by saying that a RIB style tread is the best for a trailer application. Highly siped all-season tires are not recommended as they tend to squirm rolling down the road causing unnecessary drag. Good trailer tires will have a closed outer rib tread pattern.

For 5200 and 6000 axles. There are two sizes LT235/85R16E and LT245/75R16E. The 235's sometimes cause clearance issues if axles are not at lease 33" center to center. So the shorter and slightly wider 245's work in most of the time in these cases.

Best - Steel ply carcass tires.
1. Michelin XPS RIB
2. Bridgestone Duravis R250*
3. Bridgestone Duravis R895
4. Goodyear G949 RSA Max Armor(little known)
5. Goodyear G947 RSS Max Armor(little known)

Good - Poly ply carcass tires.
1. Bridgestone Duravis R500
2. BFG Commercial TA*
3. Firestone Transforce HT*
Or any other high quality LT tire manufactured in a country noted for quality control. Western Europe, Japan, US and Canada.

Note: Some lightly loaded or derated 5200 axles can get by with LT215/85R16E or LT225/75R16E rated to 2680 pounds each.

7K axles or 7K axles derated to 6750 on the placard for 16" tires.
1. Goodyear G614
2. None

For 17.5" tires.
17.5" 215/75R17.5 tires when mounted are just slightly less in diameter verses the G614 Goodyear 16"
1. Sumitomo ST727*
2. Goodyear G114
3. Michelin XTA (Speed restricted to 62MPH)
4. Cooper RM160
Or any other high quality tire in this size manufactured in a country noted for quality control. Western Europe, Japan, US and Canada.

***Second item:***
I wrote this on RV.net back in Sept of 2009:

As we banter about regarding tire types and loading, I believe that we are finally starting to understand a few important things.

I have asked many times for someone to explain how a ST tire can be rated to carry more weight than a LT tire in a similar size, without a good answer.

The answer lies in what is called reserve capacity. To quote from Trailer Parts Superstore and this same statement exist on just about every tire site:

HEAVY DUTY 'LT' TRUCK / TRAILER TIRES
'LT' signifies the tire is a "Light Truck/Trailer" series that can be used on trailers that are capable of carrying heavy cargo such as equipment trailers.

If a tire size begins with 'LT' it signifies the tire is a "Light Truck-metric" size that was designed to be used on trailers that are capable of carrying heavy cargo or tow vehicles. Tires branded with the "LT" designation are designed to provide substantial reserve capacity to accept the additional stresses of carrying heavy cargo.

So what is reserve capacity? It is capacity beyond the rating of the tire, capacity that is held in reserve. This reserve capacity comes from the heavy-duty sidewall of the LT type tires. LT's rank at the top of the list when we look at P, ST and LT tires.

Now I finally have an answer to how a ST tire can be rated to carry more weight than a LT tire of similar size.

The ratings of ST tires infringe into the reserve capacity of the tire. This is double bad, because the design of the ST gives us a tire with less reserve capacity to start with as it has a lighter sidewall to start with as most ST tires are much lighter than their LT counterparts.

To quote one tire site:
"Put a different way, the load carrying capacity of an ST tire is 20% greater than an LT tire. Since durability is strictly a long term issue - and the results of a tire failure on a trailer are much less life threatening than on a truck - the folks that set up these load / inflation pressure relationships allow a greater......ah......let's call it load intensity."

There it is in print to be read. They make a calculated decision to give the ST tire a higher load rating because a failure is less life threatening.

I have on a number of occasions pointed out the weight difference between the different tires and have been told that does not matter. Well it does matter. The rubber in the average tire only makes up around 40 some percent of its weight, the rest is in the steel belts, gum strips, steel beads, and the carcass plies. The remaining 60 or so percent of the stuff in a tire is what builds in the reserve capacity.

So to review again, here are some weights:
1. Michelin XPS RIB LT235/85R16 LRE (rated to 3042lbs) Weight 55.41
2. Goodyear G614 LT235/85R16 LRG (rated to 3750lbs) Weight 57.5
3. Bridgestone Duravis R250 LT235/85R16 LRE(rated to 3042lbs) Weight 60
4. BFG Commercial TA LT235/85R16 LRE(rated to 3042lbs) Weight 44.44
5. Uniroyal Laredo HD/H LT235/85R16 LRE(rated to 3042lbs) Weight 44.44
6. GY Marathon ST235/80R16 LRE(rated to 3420lbs) Weight 35.4

So which tires on the list have the most reserve capacity? Well that is not a completely simple answer, as one of the tires is a G rate 110 lb tire and the rest are LRE at 80lb inflation. So if we disregard the G614, then the Michelin XPS RIB and the Bridgestone Duravis R250 due to their all-steel ply construction will have the most reserve capacity inherent in their construction. The twin Commercial TA and Laredo will be next and the Marathon would have little or no reserve capacity available because it was used up in its higher load rating, AND because of it's much lighter construction it had much less inherent reserve capacity to start with.

So what have we learn from this?

I think that the first thing that we learned was that a LT tire can be used at or near it max rated loading without having issues, as they built with "substantial reserve capacity to accept the additional stresses of carrying heavy cargo".

The second thing we may have learned is why ST tires are failing on mid to larger 5th wheels, in that they do not have inherent reserve capacity beyond that rated max loading. Again this is because they have less reserve capacity to start with and their greater "load intensity" used up any reserve capacity that might have been available.

Now, here is an interesting bit of information. I just called Maxxis Tech Line and asked the weights for two tires.

ST235/80R16 LRD 3000 lb rating at 65 lbs of air weights 38.58
ST235/80R16 LRE 3420 lb rating at 80 lbs of air weights 43.43

What??? The Maxxis load range E tire weights almost the same as the Commercial TA?? This is a ST tire that has heavier construction than the GY Marathon at 35.4 lbs. So it has more inherent reserve capacity due to its heavier construction.

Those that claimed its virtues maybe did not know why it was a better ST tire than some of the others, but there it is! It is a heavier built tire with more reserve capacity.

So as one chooses a replacement tire or is asking for an upgrade on a new trailer please get educated on where the reserve capacity exist. Is it inherent in the tire you choose or do you have to factor it into the weight rating of the tire you choose.

Those with heavy trailers that are switching to 17.5 rims and tires rated to 4805 lbs and getting a double injection of reserve capacity, in that they are using a tire with lots of inherent reserve capacity and the tire has much more capacity than the application. It is all starting to make sense.

I have learn a bit this week, hopefully others have also.

 

[SnoKing]

This is quoted from SeniorGNC from RV.net also in Sept of 2009, titled

"U.S. Federal Testing Standards for ST and LT Tires


This post is an open letter to the RV.net community whom have been following the ongoing tire discussions.

I have been following these discussions, but until lately I have been staying on the sidelines until the topic took a turn to a more factual basis. I have personally experienced multiple failures with my 5th wheel and ST tires, both D and E load range and would like to understand why this appears to happen more often with ST (special trailer) vs. LT (light truck) tires. (Based on this forum it must be considered anecdotal and not conclusive evidence.)

To resolve this matter I have investigated the current Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) testing standards that ST and LT tires must meet to be certified to be sold in the United States.

First I have some folks that I would like to thank for providing me the desire to delve into this issue:
“Chris” for moving the topic in a more factual direction.
“Tireman9” for helping me find the federal standards.
“FastEagle” for his willingness to challenge group thought and to encourage me to understand the perceived performance discrepancies between these types of tires.
Thanks guys!

For those of you who just wish to get the big picture facts, I have started with a summary section. This hits all the high points and you my quit after reading this. (No need to read all the details if you don’t want to!)

If you wish to understand my research in greater depth (and verify my findings and conclusions), after the summary I have provided the following sections: references, notes, and testing of (1) bead unseating resistance, (2) strength, (3) endurance, and (4) high speed performance.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS

I found the testing requirements for both the ST and LT tires at the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) webpage.

The testing for each tire is comprised of (1) bead unseating resistance, (2) strength, (3) endurance, and (4) high speed performance.

The testing for (1) bead unseating resistance and (2) strength were identical for tires representative of moderate to heavy 5th wheels and thus no advantage is given to either tire type.

The testing for (3) endurance was found to be significantly different between the ST and LT tires.

Both the ST and LT are put through the same initial pressure, time and load profile. The total profile lasts 34 hours of continuous run time starting at 85% of rated load and ending at 100% of rated load. To further stress the tires, a load range E tire (nominal 80 psi rating) is tested at a reduced pressure of 60 psi to induce additional load on the tire during testing. (This is reasonable that testing should be conservative.)

But now the endurance testing diverges significantly.

The ST tire is tested at this pressure, time and load profile at 50 mph. After that, the ST test is over.

The LT tire is tested at this pressure, time and load profile at 75 mph. This is a 50% increase over the ST and will induce significant additional load and heating on the tire during testing. After that, the LT test is not complete. Next a “Low Inflation Pressure Performance” test is performed for the LT tire only. The tire pressure is decreased to 46 psi and the tire is immediately run for an additional 2 hours at 75 mph and 100% of rated load.

Thus, the LT tire endurance test is drastically more intense than the ST endurance test.

The testing for (4) high speed performance.

The difference in high speed performance testing between a ST and LT tire is significant. Both tires are tested through a 90 minute speed/time profile.

The ST tire is tested 88% of rated load while the LT tire is tested at 85% of rated load. Thus, the loading is 3% higher based on rated load and this slight advantage goes to the ST tire.

However, the LT tire is tested at significantly higher velocities when compared to a ST tire (99 vs. 85 mph maximum speed). This is a 16% advantage to the LT tire.

Thus, again the overall test for the LT is more rigorous than the ST test.

Conclusion:

It is reasonable to conclude that these test requirements force the tire manufacturer to construct an LT tire more substantially than an ST tire. This is also a reasonable explanation for the same size LT tire is rated at a slightly lower maximum load than a ST tire.

And now, for those of you who need to know all the details, read on!

REFERENCES

The references for my evaluation may be found at the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) webpage:
ST tire standard may be found at FMCSA Part 571, subsection 109.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulati ... 348008f295
LT tire standard may be found at FMCSA Part 571, subsection 139.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulati ... 348008f2a9
Part 571, subsection 139 references Part 571 subsection 119 which can be found at:
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulati ... 348008f29d

QUICK NOTES

Each standard for the ST and LT tires has definitions, significant constraints on labeling, etc. that I will not address. There are also tire conditioning (temperature), tire break in, etc. that are the same or similar for ST and LT that I will not address. The details are in the references.

The (3) endurance, and (4) high speed performance tests must not result in tire failure. Tire failure includes visual evidence of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, inner liner, or bead separation, chunking, broken cords, cracking, or open splices, not just a blowout.

TESTING - BEAD UNSEATING RESISTANCE

ST Tire: (reference paragraph S5.2.2)

The tire is mounted horizontally and a vertical load is applied to the tire’s outer sidewall at a rate of 50 mm (2 inches) per minute.

Increase the load until the bead unseats or a specified value is reached.

Repeat the test at least four places equally spaced around the tire circumference.

LT Tire:

Paragraph “S6.6 Tubeless tire bead unseating resistance” references the ST tire procedure noted above.

Conclusion:

The testing for bead unseating resistance is identical for a ST and LT tire.

TESTING - STRENGTH

ST Tire: (reference paragraph S5.3.2.1)

Force a 19 mm (3?4 inch) diameter cylindrical steel plunger with a hemispherical end perpendicularly into the tread rib as near to the centerline as possible, avoiding penetration into the tread groove, at the rate of 50 mm (2 inches) per minute.

Compute the breaking energy for each test point by means of a provided formula.

LT Tire: (reference paragraph S6.5.2)

Each tire shall comply with the requirements of S7.3 of 571.119, which is tires for vehicles weighing 10,000 lb or more. Per S7.3 of 571.119 for our example tire, the testing is the same as the ST tire procedure noted above.

Conclusion:

The testing for strength is identical for a ST and LT tire.

TESTING - ENDURANCE

The following is for a ST or LT tire of less than nominal cross section less than or equal to 295 mm (11.5 inches) which is typical of a 5th wheel application.

ST tire: (reference paragraph S5.4.2)

There are specifications for the contact of the tire mounted on a test axle and steel test wheel after the test that I will not address because they are similar for the ST and LT.

Inflate a load range E to 60 psi. (410 kPa)

Conduct the test at 80 kilometers per hour (km/h)(50 miles per hour) in accordance with the following schedule without pressure adjustment or other interruptions:

The loads for the following periods are the specified percentage of the maximum load rating marked on the tire sidewall:
Time and Percent of rated load
4 hours, 85%
6 hours, 90%
24 hours, 100%

LT Tire: (reference paragraph S6.3.1.2)

“Conduct the test, without interruptions, at the test speed of not less than 120 km/h…” (75 mph)

Inflate a load range E to 60 psi. (410 kPa)

This test uses the same profile as the ST tire.

Immediately following the above sequence perform a Low Inflation Pressure Performance test (reference paragraph S6.4):
This test uses the same tire/wheel as the previous sequence at a reduced pressure.

For a load range E tire the pressure is reduced to 46 psi. (320 kPa)

The same tire/wheel is run an additional 2 hours at the reduced pressure at a speed of 75 mph and 100% of rated load.

Conclusion:

The difference in endurance testing between a ST and LT tire is significant. Both tires are tested through a equivalent loading/time profile. However, the LT tire is tested at this profile at a higher speed (75 vs. 50 mph) and must still endure an additional 2 hour low pressure test without failure. Thus the overall test for the LT is far more rigorous than the ST test.

TESTING - HIGH SPEED PERFORMANCE

ST tire: (reference paragraph S5.5.4)

Load the tire to 88 percent of the tire’s maximum load rating as marked on the tire sidewall. Inflate to 72 psi (500 kPa). Run the test sequentially without interruption at:
75 mph (121 km/h) for 30 minutes
80 mph (129 km/h) for 30 minutes
85 mph (137 km/h) for 30 minutes

LT Tire: (reference paragraph S6.2.1.2.7)

Load the tire to 85 percent of the tire’s maximum load rating as marked on the tire sidewall. Inflate to 72 psi (500 kPa). Run the test sequentially without interruption at:
87 mph (140 km/h) for 30 minutes
93 mph (150 km/h) for 30 minutes
99 mph (160 km/h) for 30 minutes

Conclusion:

The difference in high speed performance testing between a ST and LT tire is significant. Both tires are tested through a speed/time profile. The ST tire is tested 88% of rated load while the LT tire is tested at 85% of rated load. Thus, the loading is 3% higher based on rated load and this slight advantage goes to the ST tire. However, the LT tire is tested at significantly higher velocities (nearly 100 mph!) when compared to a ST tire. This is a 16% advantage to the LT tire. Thus, again the overall test for the LT is more rigorous than the ST test."

 

[SnoKing]

Another quote from RV.net by Capriracer. Capriracer is Barry Smith a tire engineer that writes a lot on tires and has his own tire blog.
Visit his web site: http://www.BarrysTireTech.com

"Wow!! It’s only been 24 hours and this thread is up to 5 pages! Based on the response, I guess you guys are interested in the topic. OK, I get that.

I also get that I am going to have to proceed in much smaller chunks than I first thought. Already there are about 3 posts that I would normally comment on, but I will forgo that until we get further into the discussion.

A couple of housekeeping items: I am not Roger Marble (tireguy9). I am not a Poe or a sockpuppet or a troll. I don’t spend hours in front of the computer (although my wife would argue the point). I visit a lot of web sites every day – usually in the morning, before I go to work – where folks have discussion threads that I can contribute to – CarTalk, Bob Is the Oil Guy, and the like. Don't expect me to post more than once a day - I do have other interests.

I also have a job to do and my work computer will not allow me to post on this web site. I don't know why, as it allows me to post on others.

I am not an RV'er. My interest is to try to correct some of the mis-information about tires as best I can. I don't claim to know every thing about tires.

And I do have limitations – and I try to stay within them. My expertise is in the engineering of tires and I have quite a bit of experience in both design and analyzing tire failures.

If you are expecting me to tell you about differences in brands and recommend one – sorry, not my area of expertise. But if you want some help in sorting out what is going on so you can make your own decisions – glad to help.

So, here is the first tidbit:

The load carrying capacity of tires is based on a formula that was derived decades ago, with tweaks along the way. Basically the formula calculates the amount of deflection for a given tire size and the chart that is derived from the formula delineates a load carrying capacity vs inflation pressure relationship for a given tire size. The difference in load carrying capacity between tires of the same physical dimensions, but of different types, is caused by the amount of deflection that is allowed for each type of tire. There is a factor (K factor) that is used in the formula to account for those differences.

K factors are based on the service conditions. High speeds = lower K factors (and lower loads for a given inflation pressure). Rougher road surface = smaller K factors (and lower loads). And many others.

So let’s take the difference between a P metric and an LT metric tire of the same “size” – like a P245/75R16 vs an LT245/75R16. In P metric tires, the amount of deflection allowed is larger than for LT metric tires.
Why? An educated guess (this has been in place a long, long time) is that LT tires, like their bigger brothers Medium Truck Tires, have what I call a “high unit load” – that is, for essentially the same amount of material, the tire is required to carrying more load – albeit with increased inflation pressure. To do this, the rubber has to be more highly loaded with carbon black – and increased carbon black loading makes the rubber more prone to cracking when flexed. To prevent that, the amount of deflection is restricted - ergo– less load for the same inflation pressure.

So how does this impact the ST vs LT thing?

Well, ST tires and LT tires use the same dimensions, so except for the K factor, the formulae are the same. Put another way, the K factor is the key to understanding the differences between the loads listed in the load tables.
Notice that for the same tire size, the Load Ranges have the same inflation pressure maximum for both ST and LT tires – it’s the maximum loads that are different.

OK. End of first tid bit. Next up: The speed restriction of ST tires and how that affects things. "

Part two.

"2nd installment:

I am sure most people here are aware that ST tires are speed restricted to 65 mph. There are lots of people who only discover that after a tire failure. LT tires are also speed restricted to 65 mph unless a speed rating is indicated. – which nowadays is the norm.

If one were to back calculate from the common Q speed rating in sizes that common in both types (There is barely an overlap), to a 65 mph speed rating (BTW, that’s a K speed rating), you’d find that the loading is essentially the same.

Editorial Comment: I am very unhappy that this speed restriction thing isn’t plain and obvious – but it isn’t. This but one of many things I think need to be fixed – both in the tire end of things as well as the vehicle end of things.

So why are ST type tires allowed a larger amount of deflection? Partially because the speed, but there is a difference in the usage – an ST is on a towed vehicle so it is not considered as hazardous if there is a tire failure – compared to a motor vehicle.

So what would tire engineers do when designing tires for these 2 types? The fundamental formulae for calculating the strength needed is based on the inflation pressure and the inside perimeter length of the cross section of the tire - and since it would be the same for both types (of the same size), the tires would basically have the same construction.

Next installment: If the tires are essentially the same, why are there differences?"

 

[brods]

Actually I know that and agreed with your post...I merely stated facts that the junk tires have a higher weight carrying capacity....which will decline approx. 8% each year they are in use. I never stated I was comparing apples to apples, I stated the junky Chinese tires are "rated" to carry more weight, which doesn't impress me either...You made one statement that wasn't entirely correct, we agree on everything else. You're really not telling me anything I didn't already know.

My company not only builds ABS, brake calipers, brake by wire, park sense and EPB calipers, but also manufactures tires, so I was merely stating facts that I know. I wouldn't waste my money on a chinese tire, I know their Quality policy....they have none....Sailun does, other than that, I know of no other in China...You're preaching to the choir, I'm as anti chinese made ST tires as one can be, (visit rv.net and check on some of my post). I know testing that LT tires, tires in the US, UK, Germany and several other nations go through. We don't enforce squat with China because I guess our government is afraid they'll make the commies mad...who knows...I can't believe the junk is allowed on the RV's...I'd use a Carlisle on my riding lawn mower, but that's about it.

You are confusing me with Simplysmn. He made the post you sort of agreed with. Just as you claim, I was merely stating fact that comparing ST weight ratings to Lt weight ratings are apples to oranges, not agreeing or disagreeing with your other comments nor questioning your knowledge or experience.

 

[NC Hauler]

Please read the quote in my post #16 - I was specifically responding to another poster who stated that all manufacturers use the cheapest tire they can get away with, did he not?

My previous Mobile Suites came with the Goodyear G614s as well - suffice it to say that my luck with them wasn't as good as yours has been. 2 total tread separations, $2500 in damages to the 5th wheel with the 2nd one. I replaced them with 17.5" Michelin XTAs that were absolutely trouble-free.

Rusty

Sorry about that...yeah, the GY G614's made between 06 to 08' had a reputation...only good thing was that GY would cover replacement of tires and fix any damage...not my idea of a good time, but at least they stepup and fix every thing...I've had zero issues with mine, all towing in the mountains...

I will look at the Sailun tires when I get ready to replace mine...Stay with same tire size and again, the ONLY Chinese tire manufacturer that has achieved ISO14001 and TS16949 certifications,

 

[NC Hauler]

You are confusing me with Simplysmn. He made the post you sort of agreed with. Just as you claim, I was merely stating fact that comparing ST weight ratings to Lt weight ratings are apples to oranges, not agreeing or disagreeing with your other comments nor questioning your knowledge or experience.

sorry, bottom line we pretty much agree...

 

[Cummins12V98]

SNOKING

Where do you store all this information???

 

[SnoKing]

SNOKING

Where do you store all this information???

In the cloud? Snoking

 

[Simplysmn]

Well I am getting my info from a 30 + year mechanic that deal's with tires all the time . he had a tire guy show him the difference between the 2 a ST and a LT Most of what he has seen is the ST may have more tread but it will have a softer side wall and when you compare the 2 tires the LT is a better bet because they will Last longer then alot of the Junk ST tires out there .

IT's All GOOD NCHauler I got ya .

 

[SnoKing]

Your 30+ year tire guy needs to go back to tire school on tread depth. ST tires start out with less 32nds of tread verses LT tires. 10-12 vs 14-16.

 

[Simplysmn]

Either way I will try n run LT's over st's any day just haven't had good luck with ST's

 

[RVTRKN]

SNOKING, you need to change your user name to TIREKING. :-laf Thanks for the tire info, that was a good read, and makes it easier to defend LT tires. Can't remember who told me, but I was told ST tires are better for tandem axles because when you turn at very slow speeds the tire can handle the tweaking effect better than a LT and recommended the ST tire, BTW I didn't agree with that. A good example of what he was talking about, is to back up your trailer, almost jackknifing your trailer, then stop and get out and look at the tires that are being forced in the opisite directions.

 

[SnoKing]

SNOKING, you need to change your user name to TIREKING. :-laf Thanks for the tire info, that was a good read, and makes it easier to defend LT tires. Can't remember who told me, but I was told ST tires are better for tandem axles because when you turn at very slow speeds the tire can handle the tweaking effect better than a LT and recommended the ST tire, BTW I didn't agree with that. A good example of what he was talking about, is to back up your trailer, almost jackknifing your trailer, then stop and get out and look at the tires that are being forced in the opisite directions.

ST tire seem to loose their caps a lot, think maybe what you just said about turning has anything to do with it???? The typical ST has a tread pattern like an All Season tire, which is wrong for trailer use. They are dinosaurs! I ran Michelin XPS RIBs on my trailer for 6.5 years and 40K+ miles and sold the four for 200 bucks on CL. I now have Bridgestone Duravis R250's based on the lower cost and they are just as good or better than the Ribs! I would not run anything on my trailer that is not a steel ply carcass!

For those the have to back into tight spots at home for storage, wet the pavement or sprinkle some sand to allow the tires to slide easier.

SNOKING

#ad

 

[Darmeisner]

SNOKING

Excellent writeup with facts plus common sense. I do have a question for you; In researching both RIBS and RS 250's, both mfg's state these are summer tires only and not to be used in cold weather, on snow or ice. Being a fellow Pacific Northwester, do you ever go across the passes with snow on them? Maybe that might explain the occasional failure of each tire.

 

[SnoKing]

SNOKING

Excellent writeup with facts plus common sense. I do have a question for you; In researching both RIBS and RS 250's, both mfg's state these are summer tires only and not to be used in cold weather, on snow or ice. Being a fellow Pacific Northwester, do you ever go across the passes with snow on them? Maybe that might explain the occasional failure of each tire.

Summer only refers to the tread compounds and relates to traction. I have no intension to tow in snow. If the Siskiyou's have snow I go to the coast and bypass them. I have never seen a creditable report on the failure of a Rib or R250 on a trailer.

I am running Duravis R500HD on the truck which is also not an A/S. So that is another reason to avoid snow. Snoking

 

[TimBrunett]

Good thread - thanks to all.

I was going to buy a good set of STs (if thats possible) for my 5th wheel but after reading this I shopped around and found a set of Duravis R250 LT235/85R16E. And as a bonus the price was almost the same as I was going to pay for STs made by K*****.
It is truly incredible what an online or over the counter tire sales person will tell you and NOT tell you about the tires they want to sell you!!!!

SNOKING - Thanks for the info. It helped me avoid a tire buying mistake and no doubt a lot of headache down the road.

Tim B

 

[Cummins12V98]

They make more profit per set of Chinapops then good quality LT tires.

You will be happy with your decision.

 

[RUSSELL5000]

carl073,

This is a great thread and contains lots of useful background information. I learned a great deal on this subject here in the forum - I knew nothing when I started and am glad I asked.

I would like to add that tires are only one component of the travel trailer suspension system. I suggest you understand the entire system. I note you have a travel trailer and so you may find my thread (and the observations of others) helpful:

https://www.turbodieselregister.com/threads/242461-Travel-Trailer-Suspension-Adequacy-(or-Inadequacy)/page4

This is a great forum - anything you need to know folks here will point you in the right direction.