Bought set of used alloys which have brand new Chinese tyres

londonTiger

you8 really need a good number of reviews to judge, there are just 3 reviews in total for winda tyres altogether. check out the other two reviews for a different winda tyre they are quite "glowing". So you need a good sample size to get a balanced view.

londonTiger

Iceweasel wrote: »

The really crazy thing is that alibaba and all those who handle the tyres (including of course the manufacturer) before the UK dealer gets his container-load are making a profit on the unit cost of $10 to $20

Makes you wonder what the tyre actually costs to produce at the factory gate.

I imagine it's a bit like a cheapy bottle of wine at under a £4.99 - by the time you take off the duty, the tax, the cost of the bottle, the cork, the label, and the transport costs plus the wholesalers' %age and the supermarkets' profit - the wine in the bottle might cost as little as 5p.

Of course some folks are perfectly happy with that type of wine - drunk it for years etc.

Me I'd prefer a bottle where the cost was £5.09 so I'd get wine which cost three times as much.

Of course what you get for £9.99 is fantastically better but many don't understand or appreciate or perhaps even be able to tell the difference.

But of course all wine is the same - it's just the name on the label which is different -isn't it?

How much do you think your bridgestone costs to make in china?

A £90 tyre sold in UK probably costs £20 to manufacture in china. Tyres a big, heavy items that take up lots of space. In addition, they are a donut with empty cavity on the inside which uses up space and cannot be used to put anything else inside the shipping container.

In addition they attract a huge amount of storage cost here in the UK. They need massive warehouses with huge rents.

Shipping, customs, distribution is a HUGE amount of the cost you pay at the high street.

You can't compare the wholesale price in china with the retail price of a western brand in the UK and make comparisons like that.

AdrianC

londonTiger wrote: »

How much do you think your bridgestone costs to make in china?

A £90 tyre sold in UK probably costs £20 to manufacture in china. Tyres a big, heavy items that take up lots of space. In addition, they are a donut with empty cavity on the inside which uses up space and cannot be used to put anything else inside the shipping container.

In addition they attract a huge amount of storage cost here in the UK. They need massive warehouses with huge rents.

Shipping, customs, distribution is a HUGE amount of the cost you pay at the high street.

You can't compare the wholesale price in china with the retail price of a western brand in the UK and make comparisons like that.

You miss Iceweasel's point so badly that you are actually agreeing with it - but don't realise.

Those costs are pretty much consistent, no matter whether the tyre is a no-name ditchfinder or a premium brand.

Let's say that the distribution costs £10 per tyre, and the retailer's margin is £10. A brand name tyre may have a £2/tyre marketing budget, too.
On a £30 tyre, remove the £20 costs, and that leaves £10 per tyre for the development and manufacturing costs and margin.
On a £50 brand name tyre, remove the £22 costs, and that leaves £28 per tyre for the development and manufacturing costs and margin.

arcon5

motorguy wrote: »

You would be surprised. Stopping distance in the wet could be quite significantly lengthened.

Also the point at which the car loses grip when cornering for example will be much lower, again particularly in the wet.

Tyres like these arent called ditch finders for nothing. :eek:

This argument is very much the same as the tyre tread depth argument.... change at 3mm, not 2mm because stopping distances are reduced, no change at 5mm, no 7mm for better stopping distances. Wait no, new set of tyres every journey so we don't crash in to a bus full of children.

But then keeping it real, none of these points make them unsafe - if they did they wouldn't be legal. May not be as effecient as more expensive tyres, but again they are still safe!!

Lots of things could be called ditch finders, bl00dy Vauxhall Corsas could well be call such if you see how many young people crash them... doesn't make the car unsafe.

arcon5

motorguy wrote: »

I disagree.

You WILL notice the grip levels difference on crap cheapie tyres.

Friend of mine - against my advice - bought a cheapie set of tyres on a set of aftermarket alloys to save himself a few pounds. Changed the tyres within a month.

Check out the braking distances between the best and worst of tyres and tell me if you'd be happy with the worst? It could be the difference between having an accident and not having an accident, or between hitting a pedestrian and not hitting a pedestrian.

So could a lot of things.. tyres; brake pads; car; how loud the radio is; blah; blah; blah

AdrianC

arcon5 wrote: »

This argument is very much the same as the tyre tread depth argument.... change at 3mm, not 2mm because stopping distances are reduced, no change at 5mm, no 7mm for better stopping distances. Wait no, new set of tyres every journey so we don't crash in to a bus full of children.

You forget* one detail - there is a SHARP drop-off in wet grip below about 2-3mm tread, as the water can't be effectively expelled through the very shallow tread grooves. Above that, it's fairly consistent.

* - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're forgetting it rather than deliberately misrepresenting it to support your chosen conclusions.

Joe_Horner

AdrianC wrote: »

You miss Iceweasel's point so badly that you are actually agreeing with it - but don't realise.

No, I'm not sure he did miss the point, but you certainly seem to be missing his.

A few examples for you from industry generally, which I have personal knowledge of. Granted, not tyres and not "OMG! SAYFTEEE!!!" but a few good examples of how brand names work:

(1) After 6th form I worked at RR in Crewe for about a year as an undergraduate apprentice. At the time they were using Bosch window motors (nothing wrong with that - perfectly well made motors). The motors happened to be the same as used on, iirc, the Ford Sierra and you could buy one from your local ford dealer at the time for around £70. They came into Crewe in Bosch boxes and the system logged them as costing bout £45 each. They were taken out of the Bosch boxes, a Rolls Royce ident sticker was placed over the Bosch one, and they were put into RR boxes. That turned them into £700+VAT motors. All because of the branding.

(2) Tissot make quartz chronographs at around the £400 mark. The movements they use (ETA G10 series) are also used by Tag Heuer in some of their £700 - £800 chronos. They're also used in cheapo no-name chronos starting at around £90. All the same movement, all off the same production line, all priced according to branding.

Now, no-one's suggesting that all tyres are the same, but the difference is far less than most of the (generally limited and unrepresentative) test figures suggest. Any real world difference is really not important for drivers who place the responsibility for avoiding accidents on themselves rather than on the technology around them.

When it was on road I could (and did) keep up perfectly well with modern traffic in my 1969 Triumph 1300 with non-servo disk / drum brakes and skinny little 155/13 tyres on motorways and leave most people behind me on A and B roads. But it never fell into a ditch or squashed any nuns / kittens / school kids despite having £32 Event rubber on each corner because, amazingly, I managed to never get into a situation where that could happen. Luck or road awareness? (hint: if it was luck, why have I never even won a tenner on the lottery?)

What some of us are suggesting is that the price premium is far less to do with the quality difference than it is to do with the name on the sidewall and the pure fear marketing of "sayftee innit". Brands and fear marketing are both very well documented and have even had TV documentaries done about them. Yet people still lap both up, as demonstrated by these threads!

AdrianC

Joe_Horner wrote: »

but a few good examples of how brand names work:

Now, no-one's suggesting that all tyres are the same

Oh, OK. So I'll ignore your irrelevant descriptions of identical products being sold under different brands for different prices, then.

dannyrst

Of course a cheaper tyre is going to worse than a more expensive tyre. Why do you think the more expensive tyre is worth more?

If it wasn't safe, it wouldn't be allowed on the road. Simple.

Yes, it may take longer to stop with these tyres, but are you aware of the last time stopping distances were updated in the highway code and how much better tyres, brakes and ABS have got since then? Aslong as you keep 2 seconds back (4 in the wet), you will be fine.

jase1

AdrianC wrote: »

Lucky you.

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2012-Autobild-50-Tyre-Braking-Test.htm

Dry braking - Best, 35m. Worst, 42m.
Wet braking - Best, 44m. Worst, 72m.

In and of itself, this means nothing.

Not all "premium" tyres will match the 44m, and not all of the "ditchfinder" tyres will be as bad as 72m.

It is bad practice to take the best of the premium, and the worst of the budget, and extrapolate that to say that all of the budget tyres are far worse than the premium rubber. Those figures are effectively cherrypicking.

There are some "ditchfinders" on that list, like the Achilles and GT Radial, that are within a few metres of the best on test.

These "Winda" tyres may well be garbage, but using blunt instruments to make a point is a bit sad, really.