Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight
03-27-2009, 04:31
Post: #22
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight
I agree with you Steve.

R.E. (Ron) Marabito, Dallas, TX 92WB40

--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, Steve Pfiffner wrote:
>
> I know from experience that Michelins are great tires. However in my long
> career owning and operating medium and heavy duty trucks I found Yokohama
> truck tires were the price/performance champs. One more opinion!
>
> Steve
> Wannabee
>
>
> On 3/26/09, birdshill123 wrote:
> >
> > Ron Marabito:
> >
> > Talking tires is like talking politics. Every one has an opinion. I dont
> > think an RV'r would install Michelins for read wear. AS you stated we will
> > never wear them out. I just installed 6 Michelin XZE's on our 88FC35. I went
> > for Michelin because they are the best. Better handling for one. You have to
> > be very carefull when buying truck tires for an RV. Some are steer axle
> > only. Some are drive axle only. I look at what the buses in Mexico run and
> > it is Michelin by a long shot. There are cheaper options and I happen to
> > think there is a reason why they spend the extra money. It is one thing to
> > buy a cheap battery. If it fails you get another. Tires are the only thing
> > between you and the road. If it fails..................!
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> > 1988 FC35
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 14:04
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 16:25
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-24-2009, 16:47
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-24-2009, 17:41
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 18:33
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 04:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - davisgr - 03-25-2009, 05:59
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 06:58
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-25-2009, 13:49
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-25-2009, 14:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 14:38
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - sfedeli3 - 03-26-2009, 01:17
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-26-2009, 13:20
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-26-2009, 13:26
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - birdshill123 - 03-26-2009, 14:29
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Steve Pfiffner - 03-26-2009, 14:48
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Pete Masterson - 03-26-2009, 15:19
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-26-2009, 15:40
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - rogerwwebb@... - 03-26-2009, 20:16
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - birdshill123 - 03-27-2009, 04:07
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 04:29
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009 04:31
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 04:37
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 05:21
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-27-2009, 06:09
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 07:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Wayne Kotila - 03-27-2009, 07:20
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Pete Masterson - 03-27-2009, 08:33
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Kurt Horvath - 03-27-2009, 11:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-27-2009, 12:17
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-27-2009, 12:27
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - David Brady - 03-27-2009, 14:44
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - David Brady - 03-27-2009, 14:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 14:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-28-2009, 05:11
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Jim Riordan - 04-01-2009, 14:23
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 04-03-2009, 02:50
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 04-03-2009, 07:43



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)