[privin]

Originally Posted by gemithomas

I would also like to know "what" exactly passes the "manufacturing Defect" Criteria for these brands? I thought budges and cracks were outcomes of some kind of defect in manufacturing / designing. If you guys say this is not considered as a defect then "what exactly is?" Hope its not something like the tyre would have to blast causing damage/death to driver/passenger/car and then you would have to prove that you you were at less than a particular speed, and that your speedo is accurate, and that the person/car is really dead/damaged and that there were no stones on the roads and that the tyres were "taken care of" and that the guy did not haveany intentions to burst the tyre and that...well seeing some comments here i wont be surprised if i am right!!!

Well put.

As our highways become better, one only expects high (80-100kms/hr) speeds have become the norm. And you really want to trust your tyres. When you identify a bulge after a long highway ride, you literally get shudders in spine.

Like you design buildings to take care of earthquakes of varying magnitudes, you design tyres to take care of varying impacts. The car designs have also followed similar trends. Why not tyres?


Also, the company would have done all sort of analysis before releasing these tyres in India. They can surely publish impact tolerance values and help us make educated choices.

I am hoping I am in position to use legal means to force Michelin to look into this in scientific way. But at the same time, I am not a tyre expert, and looking for some kind of consensus on whether this is right thinking, and right approach.

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by Nikhilb2008

Sniper ---- The dealer DOES not call the shots. Michelin Primacy is NOT out of stock. You are grossly misinformed. If you were not keen to pursue it, it doesnt mean Michelin is not transparent.

@Nikhil: Tire out of stock, I said I was told so by the dealer and that is why I was not certain. I agree i was misinformed.

I did not pursue, meaning I did not want to drag the dealer or the company for a faulty tire, even though it could have been a highspeed blowup and critical. However, I mean that the dealer was clearly not transparent and Michelin guys only wanted the dealer to call and lodge a complain and explanation before they played ball. So that makes Michs non-transparent.

I have loved the ride and comfort, but I paid for 5 tires while I got 4 that is the only thing I have against Michs.

Cheers!

[Nikhilb2008]

Privin --- I read in the other thread that you are planning a consumer court adventure.

If my advice is worth anything, here it is. Dont waste your time, effort and money. If you REALLY want to sue someone, sue the person/organisation in charge of roads in your city. My family has been in the tyre retailing business for more than 60 years(I'm the third generation) and trust me on this, nothing good is going to come of it.

If by some miracle it does, then it will be nothing less than a revolution!! .

Just forget it. If you have such an anti-Michelin feeling, then never buy Michelin. That is the cheapest(for you) and easiest way for you to hit the company where it hurts.

[supercars]

Originally Posted by Sn1p3r

I have loved the ride and comfort, but I paid for 5 tires while I got 4 that is the only thing I have against Michs.

Cheers!

How can you get 4 tyres when you paid for five ?

I was thinking that the LC was a Good Tyre. Thanks for the advice. One of the main reasons I do not like Bridgestone is because they have Soft Tyres.

I currently have MXV8 on my car and they are great. I got a Bulge on the tyre when I hit a Bump at Very High Speed.

[Sn1p3r]

@supercars Bro, I meant I had to replace a tire because one of them went bust with a bulge on the side wall. Bought another to replace the same.

[iTNerd]

This seems to be a scary experience! I had 5 Primacy LCs on my car (2 months, 2700 kms).. and so far, no issues at all.. But reading this thread, I will be extra careful when driving over patholes/connering... but I love the ride and comfort of the Michelin, so hoping it won't let me down in times to come..

[greenhorn]

I think we're being a bit too soft and fanboyish about michelin. When skoda launched a car here which was otherwise fabulous, but needed 93+ octane fuel or would leave you stranded, we weren't too happy about that.
Yet when michelin ( I'm not singling them out. Yoko etc are just as guilty) launches a tyre with fabulous grip, but falls to pieces at the first pothole, The workaround/explaination we just need to be careful, and drive slowly/avoid potholes is IMO unacceptable.

If I had to drive like that , i wouldn't need fancy tyres :P

To blame the corporation or NHAI for potholes is futile. It would be like Mercedes Benz blaming indian traffic for the short lived horn on GTO's Benz . But despite that, they stand behind their product. I think its on its third horn now Even our favorite whipping boy, skoda is changing their DSG trannies for free, and not blaming the Indian traffic.


In the case of the civic with the low GC, its immediately obvious. With the BMW's and the RFT's , there were customers who weren't happy. On the other hand, These tyres are being sold as comprehensively better than other tyres, when in fact , they do have caveats. When someone upgrades from OE tyres to something more expensive, there is an unstated requirement that they are not worse than what they are replacing. If I upgraded from my indica, to some premium hatch, and found out that it was a totally awesome car except that it ran on 97 octane, and I had to drive it carefully in city traffic for fear of wearing out the clutch, had insufficient cooling due to a not sufficiently indianized AC and had its engine need an engine overhaul and belt replacement in 50K kms, and would not be covered in warranty, I would be upset, wouldn't I ? Shouldnt the same yardstick be applied to tyres?

Forget car analogies. When viewsonic came to india first, their monitors kept dying out since they hadn't been adapted to indian humidity and dust. So while Viewsonic would always place the blame officially on component malfunction/environment, The problem was that the product simply wasnt suited. But Viewsonic did not keep on misleading and ripping off indian customers, they actually got down and made some monitors that worked fine in india, and both the monitors I'm using now are viewsonic!

Even michelin had the problem with tyre wear in the XM1's , so they introduced the XM1+'s . is it so hard to make a tyre that can offer a good ride, and yet withstand abuse ?

Maybe they should come with warning labels like cigarette boxes Statutory Warning: not suitable for indian roads - use at your own risk

[privin]

Originally Posted by Nikhilb2008

Privin --- I read in the other thread that you are planning a consumer court adventure.

If my advice is worth anything, here it is. Dont waste your time, effort and money. If you REALLY want to sue someone, sue the person/organisation in charge of roads in your city. My family has been in the tyre retailing business for more than 60 years(I'm the third generation) and trust me on this, nothing good is going to come of it.

If you knowingly sell a tyre that you know has weak characteristics, and it could lead to major accidents and even death, you would surely be hit by conscience. Then we all do what best we can do given the situation.

There could be any number of hardcore capitalists who only look at profits without ethics. We need to take stand and do what is best given the amount of time and resources at our disposal.

[rishi_kapoor]

Michelin is clearly on decline in India. Sometimes success gets to your head and this is clearly seen here in case of Michelin.

[Cesc]

Holy Cow!!!! I was 100% ready to choose the LCs as the next replacement on my Octy (current set of Bridgestone Turanza ER60s are on their last few hundreds).

I frequently travel on village roads (which is what Gur'gaon' roads are). Last night I hit a speedbreaker (which the Gurgaon Nagar Nigam engineers had secretely constructed during the day - without any highlight white paint as well) hard at around 70kmph. The speedbreaker was quite steep (another engineering marvel) and in my last 10 years of driving that was my hardest impact with a speedbreaker. The Bridgestones had absolutely no issues with the impact - even when they are down to their bare bones after 45k kms of driving.

Now I am not advocating BS over Michs here. Like I said, I was very close to buying the Michs but I now feel a review is on order.

Originally Posted by privin

If you knowingly sell a tyre that you know has weak characteristics, and it could lead to major accidents and even death, you would surely be hit by conscience. Then we all do what best we can do given the situation.

There could be any number of hardcore capitalists who only look at profits without ethics. We need to take stand and do what is best given the amount of time and resources at our disposal.

Very well said privin. Very well indeed.

Tyres are that kind of an equipment in an automobile that can make a difference between life and death. Companies should be 100% transparent in providing product or fault diagnostic information on them.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

I think we're being a bit too soft and fanboyish about michelin.

+1 to that. Such bulging is unacceptable! You sell your products here, just make the hell sure that they are able to perform in our conditions too. Michelin's tyres are premium priced. The least that they can do is stand by their product, and offer free replacements to the thread starter.

[e1t1bet]

Michelins are cr&p.
I bought 4 last year in October. One developed a side wall cut within 4 months, without me hitting anything. I replaced that tyre.
2 months back I hit a kerb while parallel parking at <5kmph. Another tyre had to be replaced.
Michelins are just TOO soft, and people are very soft on them as well.
My friend got 4 Turanzas around the same time. He drives substantially rasher than I do, and I use his car for longer drives as well. Not a single damage on his tyres so far.
I know that anecdotal evidence cannot be treated as evidence, but Michelins have a very high rate of failure; at least on this forum.

[Jaggu]

I too have the same stream of thought like GTO, i can understand if its one off case, where people hit a bad pot hole or rock and then tyre goes kapput! If its happening to many, even if its less that 5% of sales, manufacturer should take notice and introduce better products for the prevailing road conditions.

Yes they do offer better ride and grip, though it is not an exceptional difference also, that a common joe would even notice. And comm'on where do we have the roads to experience such high speeds in the first place! So there is not justification for mass selling these ultra fragile model/makes and that too at a high price point.

[vasudeva]

I was planning to replace my Corolla bridgestone tyres (3/2007) with michelin lc sometime in June 2010. So far Bridgestone have been excellent with more than 44K and look good for a lot more. The replacement was scheduled to be before end of life of existing tyres. However, this problem with Michelin and their attitude is definitely worth a rethink.

I have Michelin XM1+ on Corsa and so far they have run for 2 years but only 4K.

[nirmaljusdoit]

This is really sad, after all Indian roads are full of potholes, speed breakers, etc and at the very least a car Tyre would be going through a couple hundred such impacts during its lifetime.

I can vouch with my experience of BS Potenza G3's that ive been running for the previous 3 years (40K kms) without any such issues.

Ive taken a couple of potholes at high speeds and have driven my car over many terrible non existent stretches too. The only damages that are visible are to the sidewalls with a few small cuts & abrasions. No ugly bulges or deformation either, no alignment or pulling issues either.

Michelin should stand up to its reputation & replace the tyres without question !!!