Tyres

[W116-M117]

carl888, as told, depending from use... there are not general rules for everybody, therefore an "average" should be defined.

First, I believe that the most important item is the y'ly mileage: by 1-2 thousands km per year, a Michelin XWX - or similar in preformances - is a waste, because you should scrap it after 3-4 years with almost 80-90% of the tread. Or you think that safety is only the performance of the tyre, and not the age? In that case, I can ensure that it is better to have a new tyre with less performances than an old tyre with top performances.

I believe that everyone needs to take into account that we're talking about cars which use is not an intensive one in the most cases: may be someone drives 15-20 thousands km per year, but a very large percentage of users drive his historical car for less than 10 thousands km per year. This is the average, at least in Europe (most of the W116 are in Europe, in particular in Germany).

Now, if Michelin defines his XWX tyre as "historical" brand, the target is clear: it is the driver of a classic car of more/less 40 years, he drives in precentage few thousands km per year, he do not use that car as daily commuter, but as a classic historical car. This is the "average" that I have identified, but I think all we can identify: of course, particular cases exist (a friend of mine used his 350SE for years driving for 30 thousands km per year and the car was 20-25 years old), but there are not the most.



Second: I drove my 450SE with XWX and I drove with Wredetsein. The difference exists, I agree. But I drove a 450SE specimen with 15" rims and 205/65 tyres, Yokohama brand. This last specimen was really giving more performances than the previous two: a significative difference getting the difference between the previous two a negligible one. Just a detail: Mercedes-Benz allows the mounting of the 15" on the W116, because they were introduced in the latest 500SLC. Not only: Mercedes-Benz supply an official document that authorize to mount it, and I believe that it can be accepted by any National Authority.

So, a question rise: if someone would ensure to himself a safety and performance driving, why not change the rims? If his target is the safety and performances, he should prefer that option, leaving to the historical people, fond of classic cars as they were, the use of the 14" rims with a not high performance tyre... I have never seen a Cadillac of the 50-ties or 60-ties with radial tyres: I always saw them (in Italy there are some of that cars) with old tyres. And a Cadillac could reach a speed > 200 kph.

As a conclusion: it is clear that the Michelin policy is to get a privilege to the Ferrari's owner (just a comment: most of the car newspaper criticized Ferrari at that time because he was still using a /70 tyres instead of a /60 tyres, already intorduced in the market... and it was a common critical comment on the 70-ties!). But give a privilege to the Ferrari's owner does not mean to give satisfaction to the "average" that I have defined.

[carl888]

Sorry, I am not quite sure what you are trying to say, is it that you like the XWX but don't see why it has to cost so much?

The comment about Michelin giving a privilege to the Ferrari owner is simply untrue.  1. The 205/70-14 XWX is one of the cheapest XWXs you can buy.  2. If they made them in an "H" rating at say half the price, you would be happy, but by law, you could still not fit them to your car!  Nor could any Ferrari owner.  You can't expect Michelin to make a tyre that is not legal for the European market?  This doesn't make any sense.

As I said earlier, can you not use a "V" rated Pirelli instead?

I agree that most people who use the XWX probably do around 1,000 to 2,000 kms per year.  In fact, in my W116, I do 2,000 kms per year and I use the XWX on that car.

My annual costs are as follows at 2,000 kms per year:

Fuel and maintenance:
$1,300
(I am ignoring the massive re-commissioning job performed in 2007/8 which took 200 hours)

Registration and insurance
$869

So my annual expenses are $2,169 for 2,000 kms.  In 7 years I will have done 14,000 kms, the car has cost me about $15,183 all up.  My XWXs will be only 30% worn but at this time however I will have to replace them due to age.  They will cost me less than they did 7 years ago, now $1,760.  The cost of the tyres is $251 per year.  The tyres cost me 11.6% of the annual running costs of the car. 

Or if I put it another way, even if someone gives me tyres for free, I am only saving $251 per year, or $21 per month.

I must be missing something because I just can't see at 2,000 kms per year how the price of tyres can be significant.  You do not need to replace them after 3-4 years unless they are worn or have been left in the sun.  Can you let me know how much you spend per year on running expenses (Not including the purchase price of the car) because something is not adding up and I can't work out what it is?

Perhaps the best solution would be, as you say, to purchase the 15" X 7" wheels and fit the 205/65-15, such as a Michelin or Continental at under half the price of the XWX.  If you did not need to paint the rims, after two changes, you would have then managed to get the rims for free, the third tyre change you would be ahead assuming you could buy the rims for 500-700 Euro.  I have myself thought about such a solution.  Maybe I will explore this option at a later stage.

[carl888]

Since you are in Torino, a beautiful mecca for car enthusiasts and art lovers, I think you are very lucky!  Whilst I am always in awe of the history behind such beautiful cities, I am surprised at the European Union and it's "Hard Line" against classic car ownership, particularly in France.  I hope that you are able resolve your tyre issues and enjoy your 450.

[W116-M117]

My opinion is looking at the post start: oversize got a question and I full agree with him.

I tried to explain - again my opinion - that the cause of that is the position of the largest tyre maker, who "discovered" that most of cars using the tyres 205/70-14 are Ferrari. Now, because it is well known that owners of such a kind of cars have a lot of money and considering that the value of those sport cars increases year per year (that is the most important parameter: we don't forget that the value of our W116 is very low and more or less fixed!), they put in place a strategy of cost increase of that tyres.

This last part is not only my opinion, but it is supported by fact. I owned my 450SE since 2000, I bought the first 4 XWX tyres just after its pusrchasing: cost of them was around 1M Italian £ (more or less, 500 Euro, entered just one year later), I do not remeber exactly. Now, today an XWX tyre cost 350-400 Euro (each), therefore a complete tyre change costs 1400-1600 Euro... this is unbelievable, considering the trend of any other tyre cost in the last 13 years, either Michelin or other brands, classic tyre or not.

From 2000 to 2009-2010, good alternative was Vredestein and other brands, which proposals where cheaper (about un third the XWX price), but in the last years a "trust" was born... Vredestein sometimes are not available.

As a conclusion, just an example to get another light on the matter. I'm also the owner of a BMW 528i E28, 1982 model, since 1996: its tyres are the notorious Michelin TRX (metric dedicated wheels). Michelin got the same policy, or better, started the first time the described policy on the TRX: in the 90-ties they were defined by the French tyre-maker like a "historical tyre", increasing in an enormous percentage (+300%) the cost. It is singular that a TRX tyre now costs like an XWX, but in that case there's a jusitfied apporach. TRX was born like a sport tyre, it was dedicated to the most of the sport car of the 70-ties and 80-ties... But people owning a car with TRX can have an alternative, because TRX was - in the 95% of cases - an optional. Just at the beginning of the year, I was able to find standard BMW E28 rims, 14", mounting a normal 195/70-14 instead of the TRX 200/60-390. My specimen is still in an original condition (14" rims are original BMW and I paid them - used but restored - 120 Euro), and each 195/70-14 tyre had a cost of 90 Euro, Fulda Carat Assuro (medium parameters). Just a note: because the speed of the powerful 528i (185 CV DIN), tyres have "V" code.

Just this last example should hoghlight the "strange" policy: a Michelin 195/70-14, "V" code, does not cost very much, it's less than 30-40% of the XWX price... strange. Very strange. It's a "V" code, therefore I should expect that Michelin would ensure the good quality on that becaus eperformances. It's now what Michelin itself defines as a classic or historical tyre, because the characteristics of the market (today 14" rims are not yet mounted, neither middle class car nor small, especially in a so large dimension)... so, as a conclusion, which could be the difference between a 195/70-14 "V" code and a 205/70-14 "V" code? Taking into account all the parameters, I see only a difference, that is the Ferrari presence in the second one tyre class...

Yes, I'm lucky from that point of view, Turin has still an amount of experts of car history and able to put the hand in an old car (me too, even if I do not consider myself as a real expert: I'm only an amateur); a certain advantage for me is my job (I work in the automotive, airbag engineering), nevertheless you are right when you say that this heritage sometimes in Europe is going to be at risk. Not only France, also Italy: for example, Turin county has decided that car without kat can't be driven during the week. Not only in the cities (I could agree on that), but also in the country! For me it's not a problem: I go to the office (less than 2 km from my home) walking or using a bike, and in any case I use my historical car only in the weekend... nevertheless, despite my "untouched" situation, I do not approve such a policy: historical cars are in a very low number and their pollution can't be consider as a significative one. In my opinion, responsibility is due to the large diffusion of diesel cars (in Italy, 60%), in addition to the trucks: PM10 (most significative pollution parameter, particles which diameter is less than 10 micron, that allow cancer) is a typical diesel combustion product, very very low in the gasoline combustion. OK I stop year because I'm going out of topic... if you have the opportunity to travel to Turin, please advise, carl888, we would have the possibility to meet and it will be a pleasure to discuss again  

[carl888]

Ok, I see.  I do understand your point about the excessive price of the XWX over other "V" rated tyres.  But surely in the overall costs of running the car the tyre cost is not the major expense?  In Italy for example, is there an annual road tax and registration for example, and if so, what is the cost?  It also seems that the Michelin XWX is very expensive in Italy.  For example, the XWX here works out about 250 Euro per tyre which is less than my friend pays in Germany, very odd.

But I still don't understand the Ferrari connection because lets say the XWX was made in an "H" rating at half the price, according to Italian rules, you would still not be able to fit an "H" tyre to your 450?

In Australia, we have a choice of tyres from about 60 Euro (Like a Maxxis), to a well known brand like the Dunlop I mentioned at about 100 Euro then to the Vredstein and XWX at about 250 Euro.  But the difference is we can use legally an "H" rated tyre.  I am sure that Dunlop at 100 Euro would be a very good tyre (I have not tried it) but you can't use it legally in Italy.  So isn't the problem the motor regulations and not the tyre price?  In Australia, we have no other choice for a "V" rated 14" tyre, we can buy the XWX or Vredstein (Both similar price) and nothing else.

But really, the pricing comes from the fact that the XWX is a very low production tyre and it also has a low tread wear index of 100, this is not a usual specification for such a tyre so I can understand (But like you, I don't believe justified) price.  By the way, the XWX is actually not "V" rated, it's really a "W" rating, 270 km/h.  Michelin just kept the "V" on the sidewall to keep it looking original but after the size stamping you can see the "W" speed rating after this.  So even no Ferrari or Lamborghini that takes this tyre is capable of 270 km/h. (Maybe early LP 400 Countach front tyre, just)

I also have an E28 528iM.  Australia received a special model in "M" version, with 5 speed transmission, LSD, recaro seats and lower suspension.  My car being this model came standard with the BBS 14 X 6 1/2" rims whilst the normal 528i came with the TRX for the Australian market.  This TRX tyre costs 50% more than the 205/70-14 XWX!  I am happy with the Yokohama products for this car.  The original fitment was 195/70- VR14 Michelin TDX.




You also say that Ferrari people have a lot of money.  I also have a 1976 308 GTB Vetroresina and I don't have a lot of money!  I did used to use the XWX on this car:





However, I do prefer the way the car drives on the 16" wheels and I use the Pirelli P-Zero 205/55-16 and 225/50-16.  So not every Ferrari is responsible for the excess price of XWX tyres 



I think oversize has the problem with tyres for his 6.9, that is a real issue being a 215/70-14 and in Australia, that size is almost impossible to get in the correct load rating.  The 205/70-14 at least we have that Dunlop LM703 which should be good.

By law, the tyre must meet or exceed the manufacturers load rating however the speed rating as oversize quoted, does not need to be "V" for our cars.

I would love to visit Italy again and I will let you know if I come over your way to your beautiful country.  I believe the EU directive regarding non-kat cars to be totally stupid.  With the percentage of these cars at very, very low levels and all automobiles providing about 12% of all pollutants (the rest is industry, road freight transport and aviation) it cannot be of any significance.  Lets hope that sanity prevails and classic car culture in Europe is preserved.