Long Haul or Regional Tires

[BSMEATON]

I have a 2013 Itasca pusher with tag.  I'm due for tires and I'm getting dizzy   There seem to be a distinct difference between a line haul tire that has decoupling grooves on the outer tread, and and regional tire that does not have the decoupling grooves.  My factory Michelins has the grooves, but the Goodyear G670 RV tire does not.  One Dealer says a regional tire is more appropriate for protection on curbs and general city or local traffic and short trips, other Dealers say the regional tires are great until I hit the road for a continuous 5 or 6 hour drive and then they will start to shed tread pretty fast from heat.  I drive all of it - isn't there a happy medium?  My biggest criteria is the quietest, best ride in can get.

[sstgermain]

I just put 8 tires on mine and got rid of the 8 year old Michelins. I went with Dayton tires which are actually Bridgestone. They were done at a Loves service center and was out the door mounted and balanced for $3600. 

Also I would not do regional tires on any RV. I put the D510S long hauls on mine. I have so far put 2000 miles on them and can't tell the difference between them and the Michelins other than I have more cash in the pocket to play with.  Michelin must have "gold" belts in them.

[richard5933]

1 hour ago, BSMEATON said:

I have a 2013 Itasca pusher with tag.  I'm due for tires and I'm getting dizzy   There seem to be a distinct difference between a line haul tire that has decoupling grooves on the outer tread, and and regional tire that does not have the decoupling grooves.  My factory Michelins has the grooves, but the Goodyear G670 RV tire does not.  One Dealer says a regional tire is more appropriate for protection on curbs and general city or local traffic and short trips, other Dealers say the regional tires are great until I hit the road for a continuous 5 or 6 hour drive and then they will start to shed tread pretty fast from heat.  I drive all of it - isn't there a happy medium?  My biggest criteria is the quietest, best ride in can get.

I believe that you'll find tires with and without the decoupling groove in both long haul and regional tires. Here's a page with a brief description of the various types of tires: https://www.bfgoodrichtrucktires.com/tires/tires-101/tire-selection-tips/application/

[huffypuff]

Please don't use regional tires as you will put yourself and others in danger.  Please read the link about many of Goodyear tires accidents and lawsuit.   https://jalopnik.com/goodyear-knew-of-dangerous-rv-tire-failures-for-over-20-1824997252

[bm02tj]

That is one tire not all tires 

[manholt]

bm02tj.

That is correct...I often wonder why, out of all tire manufacturers available, every new DP comes with Michelin Tires!  Both RV industry and Commercial...got to be a reason!  In the secondary market, folk go out and get every brand in the book, mostly to save money, on a toy/hobby, that cost more, than most houses & it's a rolling earthquake!!!  

[kaypsmith]

From what I read, regional tires are designed for short distance delivery, not long distance trucking, hence they are not rated at the higher speeds encountered while driving on long distance hauls.

[richard5933]

According to the link regional tires are designed for 30,000 - 80,000 miles per year, highways with some secondary routes. Seems like many tires are sold as 'cross-over' tires for both regional and long-haul use. Regional vs long haul tire has nothing to do with max speed rating. Tires in both categories are easy to find with a 75-mph max speed rating.

My understanding is that it is more to do with tread life and ability to withstand scrubbing and abrasion and scuffing. Long haul tires are often designed to maximize fuel economy and longevity - designed to go more than 100,000 in a year. They have lower rolling resistance, light weight constructions, and a rubber compound to survive high miles. Regional tires will be built to withstand operation in tight quarters, curb scrubbing, life on rough and gravel roads, etc.

Tire design is really a compromise, balancing the various aspects. Harder rubber compounds to increase mileage - ride suffers. Thicker sidewalls to protect against curbs - heavier tire. Etc. Etc. Whether a tire is regional or long-haul is somewhat subjective, and to me more important is getting a tire with the proper load limit and speed rating.

Best advice I can suggest is talk to a good commercial tire dealer and get their advice. If the dealer you're talking to is telling you that any tire he sells will start to shed tread after 5-6 hours on the highway then I think it's time to find another tire dealer.

[tireman9]

On 2/21/2019 at 4:34 AM, manholt said:

bm02tj.

That is correct...I often wonder why, out of all tire manufacturers available, every new DP comes with Michelin Tires!  Both RV industry and Commercial...got to be a reason!  In the secondary market, folk go out and get every brand in the book, mostly to save money, on a toy/hobby, that cost more, than most houses & it's a rolling earthquake!!!  

Many times this can be a marketing position as many owners will stay with the same tire as what came originally. This is also seen in the passenger car market

[tireman9]

On 2/20/2019 at 10:52 PM, huffypuff said:

Please don't use regional tires as you will put yourself and others in danger.  Please read the link about many of Goodyear tires accidents and lawsuit.   https://jalopnik.com/goodyear-knew-of-dangerous-rv-tire-failures-for-over-20-1824997252

Sorry but I don't see a sound technical review in your link. All too often the actual reason, if there is one, is not an actual "defect" that can be identified.  Have to wonder why people use a single data point to "convict" all other possible tires. Does the improper application (speed rating) of one item mean every tire with the same name molded on the sidewall have similar problems?

[tireman9]

On 2/21/2019 at 7:36 AM, richard5933 said:

According to the link regional tires are designed for 30,000 - 80,000 miles per year, highways with some secondary routes. Seems like many tires are sold as 'cross-over' tires for both regional and long-haul use. Regional vs long haul tire has nothing to do with max speed rating. Tires in both categories are easy to find with a 75-mph max speed rating.

My understanding is that it is more to do with tread life and ability to withstand scrubbing and abrasion and scuffing. Long haul tires are often designed to maximize fuel economy and longevity - designed to go more than 100,000 in a year. They have lower rolling resistance, light weight constructions, and a rubber compound to survive high miles. Regional tires will be built to withstand operation in tight quarters, curb scrubbing, life on rough and gravel roads, etc.

Tire design is really a compromise, balancing the various aspects. Harder rubber compounds to increase mileage - ride suffers. Thicker sidewalls to protect against curbs - heavier tire. Etc. Etc. Whether a tire is regional or long-haul is somewhat subjective, and to me more important is getting a tire with the proper load limit and speed rating.

Best advice I can suggest is talk to a good commercial tire dealer and get their advice. If the dealer you're talking to is telling you that any tire he sells will start to shed tread after 5-6 hours on the highway then I think it's time to find another tire dealer.

I agree with your analysis of the dealer. The statement seems to imply that there is some magic point in the tire life that results in failure at 5 - 6 hours. If so why don't the tires fail after a couple of 3 - 4 hour runs?  Tires do not repair themselves if you just park the RV for a few hours.

[pennzo]

5 hours ago, tireman9 said:

/I agree with your analysis of the dealer. The statement seems to imply that there is some magic point in the tire life that results in failure at 5 - 6 hours. If so why don't the tires fail after a couple of 3 - 4 hour runs?  Tires do not repair themselves if you just park the RV for a few hours.

tireman9,

Now I'm starting to regret my decision...according to the FMCA site, a 'regional tire', Hankook, AH-37, 295/75R/22.5, #3002152, is available for purchase....and I thought I researched until I'm now dizzy over it..but I am now reading if I decide to stay in it (a regional tire, for example) for more than 5-6 hours down the road, this thing might come apart?  I apologize for my fatalist side...first realizing my coach needs larger tires, then attempting to validate Load, Rating, etc..and also going with something else besides a Michelin....and I thought this was going to be a relatively smooth experience.  😛

[wildebill308]

1 hour ago, pennzo said:

tireman9,

Now I'm starting to regret my decision...according to the FMCA site, a 'regional tire', Hankook, AH-37, 295/75R/22.5, #3002152, is available for purchase....and I thought I researched until I'm now dizzy over it..but I am now reading if I decide to stay in it (a regional tire, for example) for more than 5-6 hours down the road, this thing might come apart?  I apologize for my fatalist side...first realizing my coach needs larger tires, then attempting to validate Load, Rating, etc..and also going with something else besides a Michelin....and I thought this was going to be a relatively smooth experience.  😛

I have to agree This shouldn't be that hard.

Bill

[huffypuff]

8 hours ago, tireman9 said:

Sorry but I don't see a sound technical review in your link. All too often the actual reason, if there is one, is not an actual "defect" that can be identified.  Have to wonder why people use a single data point to "convict" all other possible tires. Does the improper application (speed rating) of one item mean every tire with the same name molded on the sidewall have similar problems?

I see your point but I was pointing out my experience that similar to others running G159 that Goodyear later upgraded design to G670 RV.  I brought a 2006 class A with only 17,000 miles on it and already the factory installed improved Goodyear G670 RV design showed fatigue.   I kept the right pressure in them and about 30,000 miles the tires were so fatigued I had to replace them.  All the tires were worn out especially the outside edges.  You would think the tires were run low on air but that wasn't the case.  I think the tires was not made heavy enough for the weight it had to carry.  The G670 had a ply rating of H and and the same size tire in Michelin ply rating of J.   That made the difference as since I replaced the tires I drove 40,000 miles and has at about 60% of the threads left with the wear being even.  I also noticed the rv industry  standard now leans to Michelin tires and I believe there is a reason for it.  After all the rv manufactures handles the complaints if the tires are not as expected.  I stand by what works for me.

[richard5933]

The complexity of choosing tires can be simplified if you find a reliable and qualified tire dealer. Knowing that I'll be replacing tires on our coach this spring, I visited a couple of local commercial tire dealers with good reputations over the winter. I went to the places that were known to treat customers well, not but necessarily the least expensive shops. I talked with the manager of the sales end to get a feel for what they recommend after explaining my concerns.

After about 20 minutes in each shop it was clear to me that one shop was going to push me towards what they want to sell, and the other towards what would serve my needs best. The manager at that shop also took time to look into the specs for the tires, show me the inflation charts, and run through the details with me.

With so many variables in tires (size, weight rating, comfort vs. durability, regional vs. long haul, etc) I'm in the camp where I would rather pay a few more dollars for the tires in order to get the confidence of working with a tire dealer that will stick with me and help me get the best tires for my needs.

[erniee]

how much do you value your life?  get the best.

[jleamont]

Line haul, regional tires are no different. Being in the trucking industry now I can say when a tire goes onto a tractor in our shops vs what that units delivery schedule means absolutely nothing to the tech installing them nor does he or she even have any idea.

We run sleepers into NYC for store deliveries one week, the following that same unit might be headed into Tennessee bumping docks right off of an interstate. 

We are also on a mounted tire program where the wheels are refurbished and the tires are match mounted.

The only differences are drive axle tires, steer axle tires and trailer tires. The only reason drive axle and steer axle tires are different is the drive axles are recaps and a more aggressive tread (we are in the rust/snow belt). To sum this up it’s for winter traction and the recaps are to keep tire costs lower. 

I use the Michelin truck tire website to look at tire options/differences due to this particular website being very simple to navigate. You can see they recommend the same tire for either application.

https://www.michelintruck.com/

For the little amount of time an RV is off road, I wouldn’t recommend a tire suited for that application nor would I recommend a transit bus tire which is designed for low speeds and has a reinforced side wall for bumping curbs.

[manholt]

My biggest concern is "Peace of mind", not how much can I save!  Me and my love rides in this coach, our safety depends on many factors when it comes to tires and not knowing how much weight you carry on each corner or at the very least, each axle, is playing Russian Roulette...with your safety and others!  Monaco is a heavy coach to begin with, then load it up and it needs tires tires that will go the distance with safety in mind.  

Don't go with your friend's advice...he dose not own your coach!  Does he even have a Monaco?  Does he have a vested interest in your and your family's life?  

I'll get off the box now!!!

[tireman9]

On 3/1/2019 at 11:00 PM, huffypuff said:

I see your point but I was pointing out my experience that similar to others running G159 that Goodyear later upgraded design to G670 RV.  I brought a 2006 class A with only 17,000 miles on it and already the factory installed improved Goodyear G670 RV design showed fatigue.   I kept the right pressure in them and about 30,000 miles the tires were so fatigued I had to replace them.  All the tires were worn out especially the outside edges.  You would think the tires were run low on air but that wasn't the case.  I think the tires was not made heavy enough for the weight it had to carry.  The G670 had a ply rating of H and and the same size tire in Michelin ply rating of J.   That made the difference as since I replaced the tires I drove 40,000 miles and has at about 60% of the threads left with the wear being even.  I also noticed the rv industry  standard now leans to Michelin tires and I believe there is a reason for it.  After all the rv manufactures handles the complaints if the tires are not as expected.  I stand by what works for me.

It is the air pressure that carries the load no the tire construction. What are you comparing when you look at a LR-H  vs LR-J ?  Inflation and load capacity are very different unless you change tire size.

The speed rating of the G159 was 65 while the rating for the G670 is 75.  So again you are comparing two different products but seem to be wanting identical performance results. I don't know what the owners of the G159 were told about load, inflation, and speed but I bet that not all limited their speed to 65 or less.

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs faster than the stated tire limit?

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs heavier than the stated tire limit?

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs lower inflation than the stated tire spec?

I have no data or information on what the claimed"Defect" is. Maybe there was some defect.  Was it in all tires made or just some? Where can someone point to a picture or stated chemical analysis of the claimed "defect"?  All I have seen looks more like "ambulance chasing" to me, at least till someone provides some physical evidence that supports the claims.

 

If you or anyone else here, doesn't understand my position stop in at my Tire Seminars in Perry and I would be happy to explain the concepts.

[huffypuff]

1 hour ago, tireman9 said:

It is the air pressure that carries the load no the tire construction. What are you comparing when you look at a LR-H  vs LR-J ?  Inflation and load capacity are very different unless you change tire size.

The speed rating of the G159 was 65 while the rating for the G670 is 75.  So again you are comparing two different products but seem to be wanting identical performance results. I don't know what the owners of the G159 were told about load, inflation, and speed but I bet that not all limited their speed to 65 or less.

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs faster than the stated tire limit?

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs heavier than the stated tire limit?

Is a tire "defective" if the operator runs lower inflation than the stated tire spec?

I have no data or information on what the claimed"Defect" is. Maybe there was some defect.  Was it in all tires made or just some? Where can someone point to a picture or stated chemical analysis of the claimed "defect"?  All I have seen looks more like "ambulance chasing" to me, at least till someone provides some physical evidence that supports the claims.

 

If you or anyone else here, doesn't understand my position stop in at my Tire Seminars in Perry and I would be happy to explain the concepts.

We are making many assumption here and as a concern consumer I have a few question to your question.

If a tire is rated at 65 mph, how can it be consider an highway tire as most of us drive slightly above 60 mph?  Is that tire  (G159) is being driving near it's limit.  

The tires were original equipment and many blew on the highway on a rv not necessary overloaded but weight at 4 corners as I done.  Is it possible the tires met minimum spec for the weight it carries nearing it's limit? 

I found that running slightly higher tire pressure than the manufacture label recommended pressure made no difference of  all 6 tires wearing out on the outside edges at 30K.  I don't have that problem with the replacement tires with the manufacturer's recommended pressure that is lower.  Could it be that the original wasn't built as strong as the replacement tires? 

I didn't say the tires were defected but will say  that I don't believe that they are designed for the service that a motor coach demands and that is the root of the complaint.  

      

[manholt]

I really don't see where any of this part of the post, is helping the OP any...or any other Newbie for that matter! 

[huffypuff]

6 hours ago, manholt said:

I really don't see where any of this part of the post, is helping the OP any...or any other Newbie for that matter! 

Yes this is adding to the confusion, I just don't wanna steer anyone to inferior tires.  I bought a new trailer in 2007 that had Chinese made tires on them.  They were egg shape and shook so bad that the vibration can be felt in the tow vehicle.  They were bad right out the gate and took me two weeks to get the manufacture to replace.  They swapped the tires with another new trailer so someone else will get stuck with them.  I  took the replacement off and kept them for spares.  Not worth running inferior tires.  

[richard5933]

The OP's original question has been answered a couple of times. Long-haul or regional monikers are not as important as getting a tire with the proper speed rating, proper load rating, and proper size. And, all of these will be meaningless unless the tires are properly inflated for the load actually being carried.

To answer the question again, here's a link to the information from the Michelin website detailing the differences between the various categories of tires:

https://www.michelintruck.com/tires-and-retreads/tires/tires-101/tire-selection-tips/application/

According to the chart, both long-haul and regional tires would be appropriate for an RV, but the choice would depend on how they are used and on what the priorities are for the owner (high mileage vs. comfort vs. ability to withstand rough roads, vs. etc.)