Would it be possible to talk to the manufacture and get some vital statistics? This could allow a valid comparison to other tire manufacturers rather than SOTP feel.
Secret Tire Revealed!
- Thread starter Jett
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
Now here is an idea with merit! I am very receptive to any data or reviews from actual Nexen N3000 owners.
Tire manufacturers typically make a range of tires for different applications. So it occurs to me that maybe Nexen's top-of-the-line might actually be a great tire. It also occurs to me that if Nexen were to charge say, $399 each for the tires, a few (very few) people might buy them and have a great experience with them. Then the buzz would be, well, they cost more than the other brands but they perform great and last twice as long. But since they cost less, they automatically suck, right? If it costs more then it has to be better, right? And it isn't about objective data or actual experience, it is about how you feel, right?
Note to NSXT - I apologize for calling attention to you by calling you a rational person. You will probably get a lot of hate mail now.
Tire manufacturers typically make a range of tires for different applications. So it occurs to me that maybe Nexen's top-of-the-line might actually be a great tire. It also occurs to me that if Nexen were to charge say, $399 each for the tires, a few (very few) people might buy them and have a great experience with them. Then the buzz would be, well, they cost more than the other brands but they perform great and last twice as long. But since they cost less, they automatically suck, right? If it costs more then it has to be better, right? And it isn't about objective data or actual experience, it is about how you feel, right?
Note to NSXT - I apologize for calling attention to you by calling you a rational person. You will probably get a lot of hate mail now.
Last edited:
"opinions which are presented as fact" is a common problem in these tire discussions, along with the misconception that, by definition, a cheaper tire offers less performance than a more expensive tire. It also amuses me to no end that we appear to have a large number of drivers who absolutely know the limits of the car, drive its limits on the streets, and are so presumptuous as to believe they know what is best for everyone else.
'Performance' is a relative term.
If performance is defined as ultimate grip, feel and braking in warm dry conditions, then the Avon TechR and Toyo RA-1 easily outperform many substantially more expensive tires. So what if the TechR/RA-1 last only 300 miles? Sacrificing performance for longevity is unacceptable.
What about winter performance? The Blizzak will vastly outperform many more expensive tires. Want to end up in a ditch? Drive in snow on pricey summer tire instead of a cheap winter tire. If you never drive in adverse weather, then you are not using the NSX to is potential, as even the NSX is fundamentally a car which is meant to be driven.
By now you should conclude that, unless your demands and driving conditions are similar, then you don't know what is best for another owner. There is nothing sad nor wrong with an NSX owner enjoying his car in the way he sees fit. What is sad is that we have a never ending supply of other NSX owners who are so arrogant as to berate a fellow owner about his driving choices.
'Performance' is a relative term.
If performance is defined as ultimate grip, feel and braking in warm dry conditions, then the Avon TechR and Toyo RA-1 easily outperform many substantially more expensive tires. So what if the TechR/RA-1 last only 300 miles? Sacrificing performance for longevity is unacceptable.
What about winter performance? The Blizzak will vastly outperform many more expensive tires. Want to end up in a ditch? Drive in snow on pricey summer tire instead of a cheap winter tire. If you never drive in adverse weather, then you are not using the NSX to is potential, as even the NSX is fundamentally a car which is meant to be driven.
By now you should conclude that, unless your demands and driving conditions are similar, then you don't know what is best for another owner. There is nothing sad nor wrong with an NSX owner enjoying his car in the way he sees fit. What is sad is that we have a never ending supply of other NSX owners who are so arrogant as to berate a fellow owner about his driving choices.
I've read this all and got to say...easy guys....easy...
i drive my NSX every day...it's my only car... it's been 1,5 years and 40000kms (25000miles)...
i just bought RE050A for the rear and RE040 for the front...yes...it's a mix, but i keep the OEM 16/17 sizes and it is difficult to find sizes to the front..so i wanted them to be as close to eachother as i could..
my previous tires were Michelin Pilot Sport and they were in the car when i bought it from my friend....and they were in the car when he bought it, and they weren't new ones...in our hands they did 50000kms (31250miles), and we don't now how much they had on them...
i drive my NSX all year, in all kind of weather (minus snow, i don't have any here)....heavy rain in winter...very high temps in summer... it costs a lot to fed tires to a car...especially good ones, but i don't want to compromise...
so... if you want a tire that lasts long..... choose one of the top end tires that do it...
i drive my NSX every day...it's my only car... it's been 1,5 years and 40000kms (25000miles)...
i just bought RE050A for the rear and RE040 for the front...yes...it's a mix, but i keep the OEM 16/17 sizes and it is difficult to find sizes to the front..so i wanted them to be as close to eachother as i could..
my previous tires were Michelin Pilot Sport and they were in the car when i bought it from my friend....and they were in the car when he bought it, and they weren't new ones...in our hands they did 50000kms (31250miles), and we don't now how much they had on them...
i drive my NSX all year, in all kind of weather (minus snow, i don't have any here)....heavy rain in winter...very high temps in summer... it costs a lot to fed tires to a car...especially good ones, but i don't want to compromise...
so... if you want a tire that lasts long..... choose one of the top end tires that do it...
Jett man your last sentance in your first post said " Let the flames begin" so I would have thought you were prepared for the "cheap gripless tire" onslought.Plus Ken (who responds the same way to anyone wanting to put low performance tires on the nsx) btw,said the tires were crap.You responded as if he said you were crap for using them,,which just is'nt true from reading the posts.So bottom line let us know how these nexens treat you.
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
I appreciate those who are posting balanced comments instead of the usual hysteria. And the lack of new insults is so refreshing! Especially appreciated are those comments which attempt to throw water on the fire, instead of gasoline.
DocJohn, I think you mean well by trying to stake out neutral territory here, but I have to differ with a couple of the implications contained in your comment. Just because NSXtasy responds to everyone with his opinions presented as fact, does that then make them factual? Just because someone really, truly believes what they are saying does that make it true? Clearly it doesn't. (I might also point out that his tire advice has changed over time, but I digress.) I also disagree with your assertion that just because he said that the tires were crap, that he said I was "crap". Because I pointed out that his statement had no basis in fact, he responded with how "ignorant" I am, plus other slurs. In this context, "crap" and "ignorant" sure seem synonymous to to me. I don't try and ram my opinions down everyone elses throat.
I do intend to follow up on this topic and post some honest comments and reviews, but I now think my original idea was misguided. I think I had this strange notion that NSX drivers were more rational people and would welcome rational data or reviews as opposed to passionately held opinions. I naively thought that if someone were to post honest, thoughtful long-term reviews that it would be "helpful" in distinguishing opinion from reality. Now I see that the review of the FM901s wasn't well-received at all. Kind of a nerdy, science club idea, I guess. Actually announcing, testing, and reporting on an experiment, as opposed to just staking out an opinion and proclaiming how correct it was, and defending it without data. The reviews are intended to be like that: Here is an experiment, I am testing it, here is how it turned out. I really thought actual experience would be better than an unsupported opinion. Now I am not sure that anyone really cares about long-term, actual-experience reviews. It just appears a lot easier for some to maintain their own prejudices. Actual data doesn't seem to make any difference. I guess I didn't fully appreciate how hysterical some are about this topic.
DocJohn, I think you mean well by trying to stake out neutral territory here, but I have to differ with a couple of the implications contained in your comment. Just because NSXtasy responds to everyone with his opinions presented as fact, does that then make them factual? Just because someone really, truly believes what they are saying does that make it true? Clearly it doesn't. (I might also point out that his tire advice has changed over time, but I digress.) I also disagree with your assertion that just because he said that the tires were crap, that he said I was "crap". Because I pointed out that his statement had no basis in fact, he responded with how "ignorant" I am, plus other slurs. In this context, "crap" and "ignorant" sure seem synonymous to to me. I don't try and ram my opinions down everyone elses throat.
I do intend to follow up on this topic and post some honest comments and reviews, but I now think my original idea was misguided. I think I had this strange notion that NSX drivers were more rational people and would welcome rational data or reviews as opposed to passionately held opinions. I naively thought that if someone were to post honest, thoughtful long-term reviews that it would be "helpful" in distinguishing opinion from reality. Now I see that the review of the FM901s wasn't well-received at all. Kind of a nerdy, science club idea, I guess. Actually announcing, testing, and reporting on an experiment, as opposed to just staking out an opinion and proclaiming how correct it was, and defending it without data. The reviews are intended to be like that: Here is an experiment, I am testing it, here is how it turned out. I really thought actual experience would be better than an unsupported opinion. Now I am not sure that anyone really cares about long-term, actual-experience reviews. It just appears a lot easier for some to maintain their own prejudices. Actual data doesn't seem to make any difference. I guess I didn't fully appreciate how hysterical some are about this topic.
Last edited:
On 16"/17" wheels, there are sizes you can use to keep your tires matched. Not many tires come in the OEM 16" size but - let's say you want to use the Goodyear F1 GS-D3 (a popular top-of-the-line tire) or Kumho SPT (a popular budget performance tire), you can go down to 205/45-16 in front and use it with the same tire in 245/40-17 in the rear. Or, if you prefer a supersticky (but fast-wearing) tire, you can get the Falken Azenis RT-615 in 215/45-16 for the front, and go slightly wider to 255/40-17 in the rear.
They are my opinions based on personal experience driving the tires I'm talking about. I sometimes also support them by noting test results in which the tires were blind tested side by side using professional drivers.
My tire advice has changed only because tire offerings have changed. For example, I used to recommend the Bridgestone S-03 for those with 17"/18" sizes, and not the Goodyear F1 GS-D3, before the Goodyear was introduced and the S-03 was discontinued.
Nonsense. You can disagree all you want, but anyone can see that is not what I said, just like docjohn stated. So stop making things up.
Everything I posted in this topic was about the TIRES until YOU started personal insults by attacking ME, in post #7 above, by stating "You have demonstrated that you are unqualified to render an opinion here." Yes, you edited the post since then to remove the statement, but that's what you posted there. YOU started the insults. I haven't posted to this topic in five days, but you're STILL attacking me. Stop trying to blame others and start accepting your responsibility for starting the flame war and for perpetuating it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
See what I mean, Unhuz? NSXtasy is telling you what you should have done, since you don't know any better. (He isn't butting in, or offering an unsolicited opinion, he is trying to HELP you.)
I am trying really hard to stay on topic here, but it becomes increasingly difficult.
"They are my opinions based on personal experience driving the tires I'm talking about." Not in my case. If you look back you will see that I have never given you heat about something you actually had a reasonable claim to know anything about. But you have never owned or driven on the FM901s. You have never owned or driven on the N3000s. (N2000s maybe, although I doubt it, not the N3000s. Why would a rent-a-car company install W-rated tires on a cheap compact rental car? Plus, I can't believe you drove a cheap compact car with, gulp, Nexen tires. You could end up dead in a ditch! Does your family know what a risk-taker you are? Is your life insurance paid up?) Kumhos? You lay a weak claim to some track time on them with someone elses car. If I borrowed my buddy's car for a day, I wouldn't hold myself forth as an expert on a BMW. So you have pitifully little actual experience with the Kumhos you are now recommending, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this.
"I sometimes also support them by noting test results in which the tires were blind tested side by side using professional drivers." For the Goodyears yes, but not for any of the tires I have discussed, which hasn't stopped you from offering your uninformed opinion anyway.
"My tire advice has changed only because tire offerings have changed." False. Might be technically true if you only recommend the Goodyears now, but you don't. You used to run on about how you only would run oem Yokohamas or oem Bridgestones, because they were "designed for the car" and anything else would "degrade the car's performance." Then somewhere along the way, you changed to a multi-tiered recommendation. Suddenly tires that formerly would have "degraded the car's performance" (Kumhos) were now recommended. Using the Kumhos as an example, the tires didn't change here, so what changed? Wait a minute, you say you ACTUALLY DROVE on the Kumhos. Eureka! Now we have a breakthrough! Because now you have ACTUALLY DRIVEN on them, they went from being unaceptable to recommended. You see how this "actual experience" thing works? You make up your mind AFTER you actually try something, instead of before. Let's see, the tires didn't change, your opinion changed. Yet you hold yourself as an expert on the topic? Okay, which of your expert opinions is correct? The former? The latter? Both?
Being called ignorant is crappy. I stand by my allegation.
After careful review, you are right about the editing. I tried to go back and make it more clear, but I never denied saying that you were unqualified (see post 13, line 4, word 1). I reinserted the part about your being unqualified to restore that post to it's original splendor.
NSXtasy, I really don't appreciate being repeatedly called ignorant, particularly by a troll such as you. You will also note that I don't bother you unless you offer some unqualified opinion that you assert is fact, so it's not like I go out of my way to agitate you. I generally ignore your bloviating on other topics, and only respond when you show up ill-informed on one of my threads. I went easy on you this time, and limited my criticism to the narrow topic of what you don't know about tires. Next time the gloves come off and we are going to have a farther-ranging discussion. I will indulge in as much invective as you have subjected me to this time around. I suggest you drop it now.
I am trying really hard to stay on topic here, but it becomes increasingly difficult.
"They are my opinions based on personal experience driving the tires I'm talking about." Not in my case. If you look back you will see that I have never given you heat about something you actually had a reasonable claim to know anything about. But you have never owned or driven on the FM901s. You have never owned or driven on the N3000s. (N2000s maybe, although I doubt it, not the N3000s. Why would a rent-a-car company install W-rated tires on a cheap compact rental car? Plus, I can't believe you drove a cheap compact car with, gulp, Nexen tires. You could end up dead in a ditch! Does your family know what a risk-taker you are? Is your life insurance paid up?) Kumhos? You lay a weak claim to some track time on them with someone elses car. If I borrowed my buddy's car for a day, I wouldn't hold myself forth as an expert on a BMW. So you have pitifully little actual experience with the Kumhos you are now recommending, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this.
"I sometimes also support them by noting test results in which the tires were blind tested side by side using professional drivers." For the Goodyears yes, but not for any of the tires I have discussed, which hasn't stopped you from offering your uninformed opinion anyway.
"My tire advice has changed only because tire offerings have changed." False. Might be technically true if you only recommend the Goodyears now, but you don't. You used to run on about how you only would run oem Yokohamas or oem Bridgestones, because they were "designed for the car" and anything else would "degrade the car's performance." Then somewhere along the way, you changed to a multi-tiered recommendation. Suddenly tires that formerly would have "degraded the car's performance" (Kumhos) were now recommended. Using the Kumhos as an example, the tires didn't change here, so what changed? Wait a minute, you say you ACTUALLY DROVE on the Kumhos. Eureka! Now we have a breakthrough! Because now you have ACTUALLY DRIVEN on them, they went from being unaceptable to recommended. You see how this "actual experience" thing works? You make up your mind AFTER you actually try something, instead of before. Let's see, the tires didn't change, your opinion changed. Yet you hold yourself as an expert on the topic? Okay, which of your expert opinions is correct? The former? The latter? Both?
Being called ignorant is crappy. I stand by my allegation.
After careful review, you are right about the editing. I tried to go back and make it more clear, but I never denied saying that you were unqualified (see post 13, line 4, word 1). I reinserted the part about your being unqualified to restore that post to it's original splendor.
NSXtasy, I really don't appreciate being repeatedly called ignorant, particularly by a troll such as you. You will also note that I don't bother you unless you offer some unqualified opinion that you assert is fact, so it's not like I go out of my way to agitate you. I generally ignore your bloviating on other topics, and only respond when you show up ill-informed on one of my threads. I went easy on you this time, and limited my criticism to the narrow topic of what you don't know about tires. Next time the gloves come off and we are going to have a farther-ranging discussion. I will indulge in as much invective as you have subjected me to this time around. I suggest you drop it now.
Last edited:
Please go back and reread all my response, Did I call you out specifically or you just felt guilty. I will state for the record, The tires you have been using are lower quality tires compare to others that are recommended. I have never owned them, but as a technician who road test thousands of cars yearly. I seen too many off-brand tires perform poorly in even wear, ride quality, and vehicle response. To degrade your vehicle is your choice. I do not care. nor do I feel any better/worse with whatever your tire choice may be. But please don't tell others the NEXUS are great choice for NSX. They are poor choice for any vehicle. They are budget tires designed for financially challenged. :wink:
i don't feel very confortable downsizing the width of the front tires...i pretty much have a daily high driving rythm (not high revv, but fast cornering) and somehow i'm not fond of that idea... but yes...because of that front hard-to-find size, we got to enlarge the tire size range a bit so we have more options..
i'll soon change my rims to CE28N, still deciding on 17/17 or 17/18...but either way, i'll try to keep the widths to 215/255.
Jett, Ken is not trying to tell me what i must do.. he is trying to help me, just because i want/need his/everyone's help... if not, i wouldn't come here....
this all mess is, i think, because you are looking to advises, but you see orders... i think it's a matter of interpretation.... nothing else...
so... my ADVICE for you and all is... think twice, read again so you won't shot yourself in the feet with your post.
here on prime, from the short experience i have, i understand that everyone has the helping spirit... try to let know their own experiences... here there is a sharing will that i don't see almost nowhere else... that's why i love to come here everyday....
PS - sorry my bad english, i try to express the best i can
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
Okay, I reread all of them.
"It's your car, If you want the lower quality tires with lower purchase price. Go ahead and do it. Don't worry about what others think. It's your money and car." I did that already. "OTOH. I would only put the best tires on my cars. I like the best things in life. period." I am happy for you. "But they last long long time!" This is a bad thing? "Fwiw, I have never owned a YUGO, but I have been told they are junk." Same here.
"A lot of NSX's are owned by poseurs who do not utilize the full performance of the vehicle. They may buy it so they look good in, some even have a lot of $$$ in mods and never take it to the track (The most obvious is the selection of their tires. Usually low grade) A lot of NSX's has all sorts of Type R mods to impress their neighbors,friends, and some will even buy an automatic for this reason. Nothing wrong with it, it is just different strokes for different folks. Hey, I bought my Ducati 999 for the same reason." This is that poser thing that I am not entirely getting. Please elaborate by telling me what I am posing as.
"Please go back and reread all my response," okay Did I call you out specifically or you just felt guilty." Yes, you "called me out" (ridiculed me) specifically. "I will state for the record," Specify your evidence. "The tires you have been using are lower quality tires compare to others that are recommended. Again, specify your evidence. Merely stating that it is do doesn't make it so. "I have never owned them, but as a technician who road test thousands of cars yearly. I seen too many off-brand tires perform poorly in even wear, ride quality, and vehicle response.Okay, Mr. Road Test Technician, show me the data. As a self-proclaimed professional, surely you have, or have access to, empirical data rating the tires in question. A professional would never make blanket statements on a topic that he doesn't know anything about, right? As a professional, you wouldn't lump all brands of tires that you don't really know anything about but just don't like together, would you? Hey, wait a minute. You have never owned the tires in question, nor do you mention ever having tested them. Are you some sort of poser? It appears that YOU DON'T KNOW ANY MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE. "To degrade your vehicle is your choice." There's that "degrade the performance of the car" saw again. How would you know if I am degrading the performance of the car? YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE TIRES IN QUESTION. For all you know, I may be IMPROVING the performance of the car. "I do not care. nor do I feel any better/worse with whatever your tire choice may be." I can live with that. "But please don't tell others the NEXUS are great choice for NSX." Did you actually read the initial post? (If you had called them NEXEN tires I would have more confidence that you had actually read it.) I never told anyone that the tires are a great choice for any car. I merely said that I intended to buy and try them, and that I would review my experience after I gained some. "They are poor choice for any vehicle." There's that assertion not supported by data or experience again. "They are budget tires designed for financially challenged." ...and it ends with a smirk and insult.
By your own admission you have never owned the tires in question, and don't mention ever testing them despite road testing "thousands of cars yearly". Really? Thousands? Assuming 52 weeks a year, working five days a week, and allowing only two weeks off a year and no sick days and even lowballing "thousands" as being 2000, that would have to be EIGHT CARS PER DAY! You wouldn't be exaggerating your credentials as a "Road Test Technician" would you? Or is this one of those drive the car from the assembly line to the parking lot kind of jobs?
"It's your car, If you want the lower quality tires with lower purchase price. Go ahead and do it. Don't worry about what others think. It's your money and car." I did that already. "OTOH. I would only put the best tires on my cars. I like the best things in life. period." I am happy for you. "But they last long long time!" This is a bad thing? "Fwiw, I have never owned a YUGO, but I have been told they are junk." Same here.
"A lot of NSX's are owned by poseurs who do not utilize the full performance of the vehicle. They may buy it so they look good in, some even have a lot of $$$ in mods and never take it to the track (The most obvious is the selection of their tires. Usually low grade) A lot of NSX's has all sorts of Type R mods to impress their neighbors,friends, and some will even buy an automatic for this reason. Nothing wrong with it, it is just different strokes for different folks. Hey, I bought my Ducati 999 for the same reason." This is that poser thing that I am not entirely getting. Please elaborate by telling me what I am posing as.
"Please go back and reread all my response," okay Did I call you out specifically or you just felt guilty." Yes, you "called me out" (ridiculed me) specifically. "I will state for the record," Specify your evidence. "The tires you have been using are lower quality tires compare to others that are recommended. Again, specify your evidence. Merely stating that it is do doesn't make it so. "I have never owned them, but as a technician who road test thousands of cars yearly. I seen too many off-brand tires perform poorly in even wear, ride quality, and vehicle response.Okay, Mr. Road Test Technician, show me the data. As a self-proclaimed professional, surely you have, or have access to, empirical data rating the tires in question. A professional would never make blanket statements on a topic that he doesn't know anything about, right? As a professional, you wouldn't lump all brands of tires that you don't really know anything about but just don't like together, would you? Hey, wait a minute. You have never owned the tires in question, nor do you mention ever having tested them. Are you some sort of poser? It appears that YOU DON'T KNOW ANY MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE. "To degrade your vehicle is your choice." There's that "degrade the performance of the car" saw again. How would you know if I am degrading the performance of the car? YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE TIRES IN QUESTION. For all you know, I may be IMPROVING the performance of the car. "I do not care. nor do I feel any better/worse with whatever your tire choice may be." I can live with that. "But please don't tell others the NEXUS are great choice for NSX." Did you actually read the initial post? (If you had called them NEXEN tires I would have more confidence that you had actually read it.) I never told anyone that the tires are a great choice for any car. I merely said that I intended to buy and try them, and that I would review my experience after I gained some. "They are poor choice for any vehicle." There's that assertion not supported by data or experience again. "They are budget tires designed for financially challenged." ...and it ends with a smirk and insult.
By your own admission you have never owned the tires in question, and don't mention ever testing them despite road testing "thousands of cars yearly". Really? Thousands? Assuming 52 weeks a year, working five days a week, and allowing only two weeks off a year and no sick days and even lowballing "thousands" as being 2000, that would have to be EIGHT CARS PER DAY! You wouldn't be exaggerating your credentials as a "Road Test Technician" would you? Or is this one of those drive the car from the assembly line to the parking lot kind of jobs?
Last edited:
I think the stock setup with oem yokahama tires is pretty good.Many people have done wheel and tire upgrades and diminished the car's handling.Is there any better tire to use with stock 94 rims which will result in better handling than the oem yokahamas and provide better wear characteristics.If so this is the true "secret tire".
Getting a little emotional are we? As the owner of repair shop, I do road test every car comes thourgh my shop. except oil changes. My actual repair orders for 2006 is around 2200. As an ASE certified master technician with 15 yrs of experience. I probably did road test more cars than you. and definitely has road test more NSX with different tires than you. I also have more people trust my OPINION regards cars than you. I love being Road Test Technician, it allows me to buy the best tires for my NSX. :biggrin:
Why are you starting the thread for? Buyers remorse?
Why do you want others to voice their opinion if you have no intention of hearing their sound advice? perhaps a TROLL?
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
davidg, I agree with you. I agree so much that I am testing another tire brand to see if they meet the stated criteria of better handling and longer wearing to hopefully reveal the "secret tire".
My original idea here was to do something like what you are suggesting. Just research a tire brand, try it, and report on how it turned out. Not even to recommend it to anyone else. Just to try it and see how it turned out. What a nerdy, misguided notion. People apparently don't want to read dry data or peruse comparison charts or even hear about unbiased, objective, actual experience, either good or bad. They just want to hold onto their beliefs, right or wrong. So far I have been told many times how ignorant I am and been ridiculed by numerous people who have no knowledge of the topic whatsoever. I guess it is just more fun to pick your favorite tire then tell anyone who runs anything different how much they suck.
My original idea here was to do something like what you are suggesting. Just research a tire brand, try it, and report on how it turned out. Not even to recommend it to anyone else. Just to try it and see how it turned out. What a nerdy, misguided notion. People apparently don't want to read dry data or peruse comparison charts or even hear about unbiased, objective, actual experience, either good or bad. They just want to hold onto their beliefs, right or wrong. So far I have been told many times how ignorant I am and been ridiculed by numerous people who have no knowledge of the topic whatsoever. I guess it is just more fun to pick your favorite tire then tell anyone who runs anything different how much they suck.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
"Getting a little emotional are we?"
No, I am one of the rational ones. I am not insisting that something is true just because I BELIEVE that it is true. I like to see the supporting evidence behind an assertion.
"I do road test every car comes thourgh my shop. except oil changes."
After they are fixed, you drive them down the road and back to see if they run okay? And of course you make note of each tire on each car you road test so you can offer informed advice, correct? I was right, you were exaggerating your credentials.
You still haven't revealed any expertise on the topic, other than your "opinion" that they are "poor choice for any vehicle". Wow, that is a pretty extreme statement. With your credentials as a "road test technician", and your opinion held as fact that they are a poor choice for any vehicle, I think you may have the moral imperative to contact NHTSA to get them removed from the U.S. market, because as we all know it isn't actual facts that count, it is what you believe that matters!
"Why do you want others to voice their opinion if you have no intention of hearing their sound advice?"
If someone wanted to extol the virtues of, say, the Goodyear F1 GS-D3 on another thread, and post testing data and cite car magazines and comparison charts and tirerack reviews, I wouldn't have any problem with that. Because that would be offering objective information as well as subjective reviews to support their claim, either good or bad. This particular thread isn't about those tires, however. This particular thread is about Nexen N3000s (and about how ignorant I am). So if they were to post testing data (either good or bad), cite car magazines (Yugo Lovers Monthly?), comparison charts (which tire sucks the worst), and reviews (either good or bad), I wouldn't have any problem with that. What I do have a problem with is just saying something is crap, without any information or experience whatsoever to back it up. To just say something is crap doesn't even rise to the level of an opinion in my book, as (call me crazy) I have this crazy notion that even an opinion would be somewhat informed, and have an underlying basis of fact or experience. So to just say that something is crap doesn't even rise to the level of an opinion. It is more of an expletive designed to be critical for the sake of being critical.
No, I am one of the rational ones. I am not insisting that something is true just because I BELIEVE that it is true. I like to see the supporting evidence behind an assertion.
"I do road test every car comes thourgh my shop. except oil changes."
After they are fixed, you drive them down the road and back to see if they run okay? And of course you make note of each tire on each car you road test so you can offer informed advice, correct? I was right, you were exaggerating your credentials.
You still haven't revealed any expertise on the topic, other than your "opinion" that they are "poor choice for any vehicle". Wow, that is a pretty extreme statement. With your credentials as a "road test technician", and your opinion held as fact that they are a poor choice for any vehicle, I think you may have the moral imperative to contact NHTSA to get them removed from the U.S. market, because as we all know it isn't actual facts that count, it is what you believe that matters!
"Why do you want others to voice their opinion if you have no intention of hearing their sound advice?"
If someone wanted to extol the virtues of, say, the Goodyear F1 GS-D3 on another thread, and post testing data and cite car magazines and comparison charts and tirerack reviews, I wouldn't have any problem with that. Because that would be offering objective information as well as subjective reviews to support their claim, either good or bad. This particular thread isn't about those tires, however. This particular thread is about Nexen N3000s (and about how ignorant I am). So if they were to post testing data (either good or bad), cite car magazines (Yugo Lovers Monthly?), comparison charts (which tire sucks the worst), and reviews (either good or bad), I wouldn't have any problem with that. What I do have a problem with is just saying something is crap, without any information or experience whatsoever to back it up. To just say something is crap doesn't even rise to the level of an opinion in my book, as (call me crazy) I have this crazy notion that even an opinion would be somewhat informed, and have an underlying basis of fact or experience. So to just say that something is crap doesn't even rise to the level of an opinion. It is more of an expletive designed to be critical for the sake of being critical.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 15 May 2004
- Messages
- 6,898
nsxtasy, shall I join in? Do we have another rude guy here like nsxsupra? This just reminds me of the BS-talking nsxsupra a month ago.
- Joined
- 27 June 2003
- Messages
- 1,197
I would personally NOT put Nexen tires on my NSX, or any of the cars I own for that matter. Although they might be just ok for an average driving applyance, these are not tires for an NSX, period. Back in the 90s Honda had 4 tires developped specifically for the NSX: one for each corner. If they could have gotten away with cheap generic tires, they would have done so.
I cannot elaboate on why I would not recommend these tires as this kind of information is proprietary. FYI, I test several thousands tires a year for a living.
I cannot elaboate on why I would not recommend these tires as this kind of information is proprietary. FYI, I test several thousands tires a year for a living.
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
"I cannot elaboate on why I would not recommend these tires as this kind of information is proprietary. FYI, I test several thousands tires a year for a living."
I really don't know what to make of this one. Someone with expertise who might actually have data to provide, but it is secret. (This thread gets stranger and stranger.) Eiffel may be right, he and apapada should team up and approach NHTSA together. Is there some sort of coverup going on that could cost american drivers their lives? I am totally serious about this. If there is some sort of coverup, and you have knowledge about it, you have a moral obligation to speak up before lives are lost. If something is being hidden here, it should be divulged. Maybe you could contact your congressman and seek immunity from prosecution in exchange for your testimony? Is there some way you could divulge the secret without revealing your identity?
I really don't know what to make of this one. Someone with expertise who might actually have data to provide, but it is secret. (This thread gets stranger and stranger.) Eiffel may be right, he and apapada should team up and approach NHTSA together. Is there some sort of coverup going on that could cost american drivers their lives? I am totally serious about this. If there is some sort of coverup, and you have knowledge about it, you have a moral obligation to speak up before lives are lost. If something is being hidden here, it should be divulged. Maybe you could contact your congressman and seek immunity from prosecution in exchange for your testimony? Is there some way you could divulge the secret without revealing your identity?
Last edited:
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
"nsxtasy, shall I join in? Do we have another rude guy here like nsxsupra? This just reminds me of the BS-talking nsxsupra a month ago."
You really should have used the private message function for this one. You are going to help your buddy because someone pointed how uninformed and clueless he was on this topic? If you have something to add that pertains to the topic, be my guest. If you are just here to gang up on me, you really should go away, but if you choose to stay, don't say that I didn't warn you. Before you start, however, I request that you show me what I said to NSXtasy that is incorrect.
You really should have used the private message function for this one. You are going to help your buddy because someone pointed how uninformed and clueless he was on this topic? If you have something to add that pertains to the topic, be my guest. If you are just here to gang up on me, you really should go away, but if you choose to stay, don't say that I didn't warn you. Before you start, however, I request that you show me what I said to NSXtasy that is incorrect.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 27 June 2003
- Messages
- 1,197
There is no secret nor any cover up whatsoever. The reason is simple: The data and information collected during testing belong to someone who is paying lots of $$$ and is considered proprietary.
All I did was express my opinion, which is that I would not put these tires on any of the vehicles I own. Seems like you have a lot of imagination.
- Joined
- 27 June 2003
- Messages
- 1,197
I reckon you asked more than you can chew on... your last sentence on the first post when you started this thread is "Let the flames begin!". Well, the flames are here...
- Joined
- 10 November 2002
- Messages
- 1,124
"There is no secret nor any cover up whatsoever. The reason is simple: The data and information collected during testing belong to someone who is paying lots of $$$ and is considered proprietary. All I did was express my opinion, which is that I would not put these tires on any of the vehicles I own. Seems like you have a lot of imagination."
It seems like you are backpedaling a little. In the first post, you imply that information exists which would indicate that the tires are unsafe. If you do indeed have expert knowledge on the topic, then yours is an expert opinion. But in your second post, you say that all you did was express your opinion. (I don't know nothin', your honor. All I did was express my opinion.) If your company has data to indicate that the tires are inherently unsafe, and you are not divulging that information, then it is being covered up. Your company has not just a moral but a LEGAL obligation to divulge that information. Just because your company paid a lot for research doesn't absolve it of legal responsibility. On the one hand, you say that that they would be okay for the "average driving applyance (sic)", yet you go on to imply that information exists which suggests that something more sinister is being withheld. So which is it, do you have expert knowledge and are expressing an expert opinion on the subject matter, or are you just expressing your personal opinion and don't really know any more than anyone else?
I have not installed the tires yet. If I am involved in a tire-related accident after I install the tires, I will be seeking to name your company co-defendant in any post-accident-related litigation and make said data part of discovery. What company did you say you work for?
I would recommend that you seek the advice of counsel before replying.
It seems like you are backpedaling a little. In the first post, you imply that information exists which would indicate that the tires are unsafe. If you do indeed have expert knowledge on the topic, then yours is an expert opinion. But in your second post, you say that all you did was express your opinion. (I don't know nothin', your honor. All I did was express my opinion.) If your company has data to indicate that the tires are inherently unsafe, and you are not divulging that information, then it is being covered up. Your company has not just a moral but a LEGAL obligation to divulge that information. Just because your company paid a lot for research doesn't absolve it of legal responsibility. On the one hand, you say that that they would be okay for the "average driving applyance (sic)", yet you go on to imply that information exists which suggests that something more sinister is being withheld. So which is it, do you have expert knowledge and are expressing an expert opinion on the subject matter, or are you just expressing your personal opinion and don't really know any more than anyone else?
I have not installed the tires yet. If I am involved in a tire-related accident after I install the tires, I will be seeking to name your company co-defendant in any post-accident-related litigation and make said data part of discovery. What company did you say you work for?
I would recommend that you seek the advice of counsel before replying.
Last edited:
- Status
