Conference terri::cars_uk

    Minimum tread depth up from 1 to 1.6 mm.
    
    Rich
    

    wow........
    
    	That makes a real big difference......
    
    
    Thanks

    ...it will to your profits if you own a tyre company!
    
    -Roy

	I can't remember the exact figures but a goverment minister
	tripped up when he said that this would make no difference
	and was only being done to please European legislation.

	However, it was pointed out to him that there is, at 30mph in
	the WET, a ~25% reduction in the stopping distance for tyres
	with 1.6mm of tread vs those with 1.0mm.

	Graham

    The new 1.6 mm tread depth must cover the central 3/4 of the tread
    width.
    
    This information is in the Insurance VTX offering on Car Fleet VTX.
    
    Doug

Re: .4


>	However, it was pointed out to him that there is, at 30mph in
>	the WET, a ~25% reduction in the stopping distance for tyres
>	with 1.6mm of tread vs those with 1.0mm.

	There was an interesting article in December's Performance Car
	(i think), regarding this well publicised test.

	From memory ...

	Two identical cars, one with BRAND NEW tyres and the other with
	tyres at 1mm were tested on a WET track. Both cars were fitted
	with ABS (like 99% of road cars - i don't think).

	At 30mph the stopping distances were a couple of feet apart (the
	well shod car stopping faster, obviously) and at 70mph they were
	a cars length or so apart.

	Far enough to mean the difference between life and death for a child
	i hear you say, but there are many other factors involved such as
	driver alertness, suspension and shock absorber condition. non-ABS
	cars, and the fact that the 1mm car part of the track was given an
	extra sprinkle of water before the test! Oh, and the reduction in
	stopping distance was nowhere near 25%!!!

	Yeh, sure, more depth of tread means you are less likely to aqua-
	plane, but 5mm of water will cause just about ANY car with ANY
	normal tyre tread depth to go and play boats. I do wish that these
	(government?) quoted statistics had some more realistic background
	information, rather than the scare-mongering tactics normally used.


	Sensible drivers change their tyres well before the legal limits are
	reached. Sensible drivers also try to keep the distance between
	themselves and the car in front sufficient to stop in (depending on
	road, weather and car conditions).

	Bung the other variables into the equation and see what happens!

	mb

    Perhaps a better comparison would have been to compare the bably worn
    tyres with new tyres that have been scrubbed in properly - rather than
    "brand new".  There should be a significant difference.
    
    Rob                       

    Extracted from Fleet VTX.
    
    
    
TYRE REPLACEMENT POLICY
	                Car Fleet Administration 

    
From 1st January 1992, the laws concerning minimum tyre tread will change.
The tyre tread limit will increase from 1mm to 1.6mm and this must cover
at least 3/4 of the central tyre.

Each driver is responsible for ensuring the tyres on his/her lease vehicle
are maintained to a legal standard.  Tyres that need replacing through wear
and tear are paid for by the leasing company and the car should be taken to
a tyre specialist from the PHH/Hertz handbook and the Fleetcard/Primecard
presented.

The leasing company will NOT pay for damaged tyres - these should be paid
for by the individual and claimed back on expenses through the Insurance Dept
as they do not form part of the lease.
    
    
N.B. Tyre wear and tear cut-off point is 16,000 miles for all cars - tyres
     replaced as a result of being worn below this allowance will have to be
     paid for by the employee and the matter then taken up with their Cost
     Centre Manager.  This is a matter of driver abuse and is NOT covered
     under the terms of the lease.

>>N.B. Tyre wear and tear cut-off point is 16,000 miles for all cars - tyres
>>     replaced as a result of being worn below this allowance will have to be
>>     paid for by the employee and the matter then taken up with their Cost
    
    So if you have a reasonably powerful front-driver, and tend to use it,
    you might have to pay for your own tyres !
    
    It looks like rotating tyres front-to-rear may be more important
    if you want to avoid this extra cost, since I bet you won't get
    an allowance for the rear tyres lasting longer than this period...
    
    J.R.

> N.B. Tyre wear and tear cut-off point is 16,000 miles for all cars - tyres
>     replaced as a result of being worn below this allowance will have to be
>     paid for by the employee and the matter then taken up with their Cost
>     Centre Manager.  This is a matter of driver abuse and is NOT covered
>     under the terms of the lease.

This is getting out of hand.

Anyone want to take on an Astra 16V 1 year old, low milage, needs 2 front tyres.

Yes I am serious, this car scheme is really starting to suck.

Ian.

... and what about the MR2 and similar cars, with uni-directional tyres and
different sizes front and rear - how the hell are we supposed to rotate?

Maybe i could include the space-saving spare tyre, but that has a designed
life of 3000 miles!!!

mb (another sub-16000 mile tyre man)

    I drive my Escort hard and fast, but very rarely spin the wheels or
    squeal round corners. I never get 16000 miles from the front tyres,
    and I use Michelin XZXs.
    
    Laurie.

Re: .12

>    I drive my Escort hard and fast, but very rarely spin the wheels or
>    squeal round corners. I never get 16000 miles from the front tyres,
>    and I use Michelin XZXs.
    
"Hard and fast" are the biggest causes of tyre wear yet invented.

If you are getting high wear on your tyres either there is something
wrong with the vehicle or your driving style is causing it.

jb

    
    re .13
�"Hard and fast" are the biggest causes of tyre wear yet invented.
  
    Uh? I'd have thought it would have been something like...
      
    Spinning the wheels away from a standing start
    Cornering with the tyres over their adhesive limit
    Braking so hard that the wheels lock and the car skids
        
    Or were those black marks on the road just friction burns :-)        

    Richard.
    
    ps. Ian, you need to do something about those tyres... the 'walz'
    last Monday proves it!
    

    
    I don't know, but I reckon that most sporty cars these days run on 
    fairly soft compound tyres. I reckon most people would be hard pressed
    to make some of these tyres last as long as 25k miles. No doubt the
    upshot of this will be that you'll get hard tyres fitted next time 
    and loose grip.
    
    I found that the Michelins on the front of the Renault lasted about
    18,000 miles, which I felt was reasonable. I never felt they lacked
    grip either.
    
    Mark

Yup,

the rubber on "performance tyres" is normally going to be softer that normal
tyres, and also being wider they experience more scrub especially on the
front (steering) tyres. You also find that they are even more sensitive to
tyre pressure, so overall don't expect them to last as long.

Part of the lease cost calculation is how fast tyres are worn and how much
they cost, so to implement a 16,000 mile limit (without informing drivers)
does seem a little unfair.

Also, this limit should be decreased by a couple of thousand to ensure that
drivers comply with the new regulations next year!!!!

mb

p.s.

Any bikers out there want to comment on how long their tyres last?

    When renewing tyres in the past, the lease companies seemed to have set
    "reasonable" milages expected for most cars.  Performance cars,
    especially front drive turbos were expected to last around 12,000
    miles.  (Turbo = extra torque coming in with a bit of a rush = tyre
    wear).
    
    Large, less powerful cars were expected to achieve 18,000 to 25,000. 
    Surely performance cars have extra tyre wear factored into their lease
    cost.  I believe this latest trick is yet another way of our paying for 
    the leasing companies poor financial performance.
    
    It's always been up to the cost centre to pay for unreasonable wear,
    but the limits were just about reasonable.

Recently replaced two front tyres after 16500 miles on my Cavalier CDi, this
car is rarely driven hard.

/Dave.

    
    
    RE.16
    
    >>  Any bikers out there want to comment on how long their tyres last.
    
      Front tyre 4,000 miles.
    
      Rear tyre  1,000 - 1,500 miles ( all depends if I go drag racing).
    
    The tyres cost about 100 pounds a time. That is why mine is in the
    garage for the winter.
    
    Lee.

The Fleet "Tyre Replacement Policy" had me worried yesterday, because my
tyres are around 2mm and ready for replacement and i have only done 12,000
miles.

The car was in for a service today, and i asked the garage what i should
expect out of MR2 tyres, and the service manager said that they typically
lasted 9,000 miles.

Thus i am running well above average, but still 25% below the "policy".

Another case of rules being changed, and in this case without even notifying
us - it relies on the sharp-eyed car-buffs keeping a regular look at VTX.

Car lease costs TAKE INTO ACCOUNT the differing running costs of the vehicle
concerned. If Digital wants to make sweeping generalisations about how long
a particular wearable item must last then it should not offer cars that cannot
meet those criteria.

As Clive said, the new car scheme sucks!

mb

    What I think is especially bad about this, is that it sounds like
    this new rule appears to have been added to the terms and conditions
    of the Deccie lease package, even if you already have the car.
    
    Perhaps they might go a bit further and change a few other terms,
    so that you pay for your own servicing, road tax, replacement
    light bulbs, what-have-you     ;-)
    
    IMO, Digital shouldn't be offering employees a company car anyway,
    since *most* of the people who have them need to think up rather
    'creative' trips to account for minimum business mileage !
    
    Take the money, get your own car - then when you leave, you still have one.
    
    J.R.

    RE: .21
    
>>    IMO, Digital shouldn't be offering employees a company car anyway,
>>    since *most* of the people who have them need to think up rather
>>    'creative' trips to account for minimum business mileage !
    
    I presume you are referring to people (like yourself ??) who are
    primarily office based and not the hundreds and hundreds of engineers and
    specialists for whom a company car is an essential tool of their job
    and not (just) a perk ???
    
    Other than that I agree with what you said, I will be interested to see
    what happens when the tyres on my MR2 need replacing next year.
    
    .Stevie.
    

>>    I presume you are referring to people (like yourself ??) who are
>>    primarily office based and not the hundreds and hundreds of engineers and
>>    specialists for whom a company car is an essential tool of their job
>>    and not (just) a perk ???
    
    Well, yes, I am primarily office based.  Although as a contractor, the
    definition of where my 'office' is debatable.
    
    It's just that from my opinion, I can look at a DEC car park and see a
    lot of cars that are being subsidised by the company (although they are
    now passing more of that cost on to the drivers), even though I feel
    sure that the majority do not *need* a company car for their job.
    
    Anyone got a figure as to how many cars are leased by Digital ?
    And then how many are engineers/salespersons who actually need them ?
    
    J.R.

re.23:

Subsidised? Are you trying to wind us up?

/Dave :-(

    
    I don't see why that should wind you up, Dave.
    
    All Digital are doing is eroding the subsidy, the cars are still
    (quite heavily) subsidised.
    
    Mark

�Subsidised? Are you trying to wind us up?
    
    Well, if the cost of these cars is not subsidised to some amount by
    Digital, then why do so many people opt for them ?
    
    If there is no subsidy, why not buy your own cars ?
    
    J.R.

    Wow
    
    I wish I could look at a car park and work out how many cars are leased
    etc.
    
    :^)

    Well, you can get a reasonable idea by looking for cars less than 2/3yrs
    old!

    I thought thats how you determined how may contractors are at a given
    site. Now lets see MX-5, 911, GTA Turbo, Honda Civic :-)

           <<< Note 1614.23 by CURRNT::PACE::RUTTER "Rut The Nut" >>>
>    It's just that from my opinion, I can look at a DEC car park and see a
>    lot of cars that are being subsidised by the company (although they are
>    now passing more of that cost on to the drivers), even though I feel
>    sure that the majority do not *need* a company car for their job.
    
    At the risk of going further down this rathole ;-)
    
    Surely people who have company cars do so on the basis that the company
    car is part of the total benefits package and any erosion of that
    package is a serious point. I mean a company car is not some sort of
    bonus on top of my wages, its *PART* of my wages.
    
    I'm sorry I said anything in the first place, this note is getting like 
    the one on the New Car Scheme.
    
    .Stevie.

�    package is a serious point. I mean a company car is not some sort of
�    bonus on top of my wages, its *PART* of my wages.
    
    I sort of agree with you here.  The car is viewed as part of your wages,
    so for Digital/the Lease company to make this cost you more seems to be
    more than a bit unfair.
    
    I think that Digital shouldn't have provided them to so many staff in the
    first place, and perhaps paid a higher salary.  Those that need cars for
    their job should have them provided, separate to the salary.
    
    Of course, Deccies have the option of taking some form of payment
    instead of a company car (once eligible).  It goes to show that many
    of the staff feel that the company 'subsidy' is better than having
    to pay for a car themselves, even given the extra dosh.
    
    From what I've seen of the way this scheme works, if I were given the
    choice I would take the money.  But that's my opinion.
    
    So, it is a rathole, but at least there is *some life* in Notes now !
    
    
    Re. superman eyes
    
    I'd guess that the vast majority of the late model GTE/SRi cars in
    this car park are Deccie lease jobs.
    
    The others would seem to be the Fiasco Turdo's that are targeted so
    often for 'not so petty' crime in Reading !
    
    J.R.

    
    So lets see if I have this right.....
    As an Engineer I HAVE to drive an estate or hatchback type of vehicle
    with a boot space of atleast 12.5 Cubic feet. I have very little choice
    as to what car I can have. 
      I cover 30,000+ miles per year, over 6 hours per day in the car, I get 
    taxed for having it, I pay towards it, I have to keep it clean, It's
    full of Dec kit (so I can only use 2 of the 4 seats), PHH want me to
    pay for the tyres (extra weight of spares = faster wear), dec charge me
    to insure it and your now saying that it's a perk.
      Next Time I will attempt to get a car that I can afford and it
    will probably will probably be no larger than a Mini and DEC can take
    the cost of transporting the spares that I may use. If those that don't
    cover 18000* business miles per year lost their car would the company be
    a worse place ??, "but they'd all leave" I hear you say, but then the
    car scheme would be easier to manage, saving on man(sorry person)hours
    and overheads, and we wouldn't have to have early retirement/redundancy
    schemes to slim the work force down, making a saving on "outta here"
    packages.
    * the government seem to be under the impression that this figure is
    the divider between needing or not needing a company car.
    I'm not really bitter, but I do object to being told that I must have a 
    car and it must be like this and you have to do this , and then have 
    to pay for the 'priviledge'. Atleast when we had to have vans the cost
    centre picked up the cost.
    
      Alan
    ps. I don't make a tax saving due to my high mileage, I still have to
    pay tax, just less than those who do less miles.
    pps. If the cars part of my wages are the tool kit, oscilloscope,
    manuals, test equipment etc also part of my wages ????.....could
    explain my annual salary.
     
         

    
Re .31
    
�    I think that Digital shouldn't have provided them to so many staff in the
�    first place, and perhaps paid a higher salary.  Those that need cars for
�    their job should have them provided, separate to the salary.
 
    I agree with the sentiment expressed, but this isn't just a DEC
    problem. Giving 'company cars' as part of a benefits package is
    a national malaise. IMO neither a Labour nor Tory government would
    have the political will to put an end to the 'company car' as a
    perk. 

    I accept that .32 *needs* a car for work and doesn't fall into the 
    perk category and that even if there was the political will a solution
    would be needed to accomodate both cases.
    
    Richard.
    

    
    Of course a car's a perk if you are able to use it for personal use.
    
    Years ago I worked for a small company. If we had to visit a customer
    site (which we often did) we used to take a car from the pool and 
    return it when we returned. This wasn't a perk as the car WAS used
    SOLELY for company business. I wonder how many company car users these
    days would agree to such a scheme?
    
    Mark

I could not give a #%!! what mileage the government thinks company cars are
justified at. When my business mileage went from < 2000 miles a year to > 8000
the cash alternative no longer covered the depreciation on my private car.

/Dave.

    Getting back to the original topic....
    
    I've noticed over the years that low profile tyres not only seem to
    have softer rubber (most, not all makes), but they seem to only start
    life with 7 to 8 mm of tread.  Tyres with aspect ratios of 70 or greater 
    seem to have an extra mm or two.  Pretty significant in terms of time to
    wear out a tyre (wear out to me means 2.5 to 3 mm, even on my wife's
    car where I pay for the tyres). 

>>>Deep tread tyres will wear faster, i.e the last 2mm wears longer than the 
>>>1st 2mm.
    
    Point taken.  In this case though the tyre worth more tread to start
    with will last longer (although wear / mm is greater).

    
    re.32
    	Couldn't have said it better myself.
    
    And as for tyres, i do approx 38000 miles a year in my Escort RST
    which is shod with Goodyear NCTs, and it eats them, the last front 
    pair lasted 10000 miles and they will be due for renewal again soon,
    and there's no effing way i'm paying for them!.
    
    Nick
    
    ps. the car scheme sucks.

    
    When your tyres need replacing...
    
    	1. Leave car in DEC Park car park.
    
    	2. Leave car unlocked.
    
    	3. Get new tyres on the insurance when it gets nicked and wrecked.
    
    Simple :-)

    
    Just received from Car Fleet.
    
    
    � Interoffice memo : 123553 �
    
    Forthwith any employee loosing or having stolen their vehicle will
    be responsible for the recovery and, where appropriate, repair of 
    said vehicle. 
    
    Such costs may be borne by the Cost Centre at the CC manager's
    discretion.
    
    Mark

    
    Re .41 - Pretty close to the truth I reckon.

    Further to the Car policy....
    
    Apparently this is NOT a new policy... this is the basis that all PHH
    cars are supplied to us, and has been in effect for a number of years.
    
    All that has happened is that the policy has now been stated.
    
    (Notice I said PHH cars!! - Apparently Hertz have the same policy, but
    they use a break point of 10,000 miles, and not 16,000!!).
    
    
    
    As for we paying for the cost of recovery etc after a stolen car... 
    I thought that was why we had to pay insurance to cover these items.
    Instead it seems that we have to pay for insurance AND pay for the
    recovery.....
    
    Unless this is another of those "But that is the way it has always
    been", and it is just written down now.

    What is the procedure for punctures these days ?
    
    Last year when I had a puncture I went to ATS, they fitted a new tyre
    and charged Hertz on the Fleetcard.
    
    As punctures are not wear and tear does this now mean we pay for it and
    claim on expenses ?
    
    Roy

    Re: 1614.40  Simon, I'll look forward to your claim !!
    
    Re 1614.41 +  The Insurance Dept. uses Digital's money to pay for all
    accident/theft related claims.  This also includes the recovery costs
    where necessary.
    
    It's times like these, when we are all trying to save costs, when a
    little common sense wouldn't go amiss.  Please don't leave your cars
    unlocked !!!
    
      

    
    OI!!!!!!
    
    .41 About you paying for your car's recovery was A JOKE!!!!!!!!
    
    I thought you lot would know better than to take me seriously! :^|
    
    Mark

    Question from a CC manager:
    
    Can a CC Manager refuse to pay these costs? If so, what does the
    employeee do?
    
    If the CC Manager can't refuse, why involve them at all?
    
    JK

    
    The only answer to getting the tyres changed is: (probably)
    
    leave the car at the place where the new tyres are to be fitted.
    Contact the lease company that refused to pay for the tyres, and advise
    them that the car is not legally road worthy, therefore you cannot
    drive it, and as you/DEC are paying them to supply a road worthy
    vehicle they are infact in breach of contract and you will cease to
    fund the vehicle immediately. Tell them where they can collect the
    vehicle from. Then advise Fleet of your actions and reasons and then
    advise salaries to cease deducting the amount from your salary.
    When the lease company find that it is difficult to get the premium
    amount for a 'defective' car at resale they may reconsider....or face a
    hefty loss, and who needs a financial loss in this economic climate??
    
    Al..
    

This is a little off topic, but can i just say how impressed i am that
Car Fleet (and indeed Insurance) are taking an active part in this
conference, and have modified the entry in VTX to describe more fully
the "tyre replacement policy", presumably prompted by discussions and
feedback in this note.

There are always going to be "us and them" situations, and things that we
moan about or disagree with; but at least CARS_UK is helping make things
more "us and us". Even if we can't "fix" the things that we don't like, at
least we know why they are done that way.

Well done to everybody.


Martin


p.s. Phew, it is lucky i drive a Hertz vehicle!!!!!

    
    Re .45
    
    It's not clear from your note whether you realise .40 was NOT SERIOUS.
    
    It was indeed a joke.
    
    Hence the :-)

    Re.50
    
    OK !   I'm laughing !

    
    
>    Re. superman eyes
>    
>    I'd guess that the vast majority of the late model GTE/SRi cars in
>    this car park are Deccie lease jobs.
    
 
	As someone with a 2-year old 2 litre GTI, which is NOT leased, I
	wonder how you come to your assumptions.


	Heather - who can afford new cars - but not on the lease scheme!

�	As someone with a 2-year old 2 litre GTI, which is NOT leased, I
�	wonder how you come to your assumptions.
    
    I make my assumptions on the cars I see in the SBP car park...
    
�	Heather - who can afford new cars - but not on the lease scheme!
    
    Obviously not in the majority, as far as Deccies seem to go.
    
    
    IMO, many of the staff could afford their own new[ish] cars
    if they were to 'take the money'.  It does depend upon what you
    want, what you need, and what else you might want to buy with
    the dosh...  There is, of course, a certain element of 'security'
    (but not in the anti-theft sense) in having a company car.
    
    J.R.

    
>    I make my assumptions on the cars I see in the SBP car park...
 
	But I still don't understand how you can tell alease car just by 
	looking   

	Heather

    
    It'll say Hertz or Avis on it somewhere.
    
    Mark

>	But I still don't understand how you can tell alease car just by 
>	looking   

Oh for goodness sake , if one looks out into the SBP carpark, one cansee a load
of typical lease cars - I would have thought that the majoirty of the cars in
the staff carpark less than two years old will be lease cars. Mine is. Of the
row under my window there are 7 cars less than two years old. I KNOW that 5 are
lease cars.

I know this by looking.

    < -.1
    
    Hark at him! He's only boasting 'cos he's got a window.
    
    Dougie (in a cube somewhere in the middle of Welwyn)
    

    
    Did Thatcher reintroduce the window tax as part of her return to
    'Victorian values'? :^)
    
    Mark

   
>    Did Thatcher reintroduce the window tax as part of her return to
>    'Victorian values'? :^)

Maybe the Poll Tax will be replaced by a Car Window Tax?

Jon

I've just read the blurb on VTX about tyres, and I don't believe it!

How can lease companies have different guidelines for tyre replacements?
As we have *no* choice over which lease company is used, how can this
be fair?

I've had a lease car for five years now, and have *never* been informed 
of this mileage limit.

Obviously, Hertz lease cars are designed to accept more "driver abuse"
than PHH.

Interesting situation, though: if you buy the tyres, and your boss doesn't
pay for them, does that make the tyres your own property, and so you can
remove them at any time to suit you?  Also, if you use your corporate
AMEX card, you are probably breaking their rules by buying personal stuff
with it...

Peter.

    Its interesting that vtx mentions that this is not a new policy.
    
    After discussing the mileage limits on tyres with some guys with lease
    cars, these limits appear to be quite flexible. 
    
    It seems that many people with performance cars get through the front
    set before 10000 miles and have never met with objection from the lease
    companies when getting them replaced.
    
    So the question is has anyone been refused yet ?
    
    Roy

re.60

You can use your corporate AMEX for personal purchases if you are prepared to
take the tax hit.

/Dave.

>>	But I still don't understand how you can tell alease car just by 
>>	looking   
>
>Oh for goodness sake , if one looks out into the SBP carpark, one cansee a load
>of typical lease cars - I would have thought that the majoirty of the cars in
>the staff carpark less than two years old will be lease cars. Mine is. Of the
>row under my window there are 7 cars less than two years old. I KNOW that 5 are
>lease cars.
>
>I know this by looking.

	So, a G reg., 2 litre, GTI you would assume to be a lease by looking.

	Considering the fact that mine isn't leased, how do you tell just by
	looking?

	Heather

your car hardly merits a "majority" of the cars in the car park, but since
you're so worried about this, then lets just assume it's magic.

Well PHH refused to replaced my tyres cos of 'driver abuse'. They have done
12000 miles (continentals).

Phoned PHH and they said that in the past any tyres replaced before 16000 they
did not pay for, and billed Digital.

Fleet then cross charged ? this to the your cost centre.

What seems to have happened (after phoning a quite abusive girl in fleet) is
they changed the way this works and you now have to pay for the tyres yourself
(presumably paying full price, not a PHH discount) and claim on expenses.

This I'm now doing. What happens when I get to 16000 miles ? Shall I get a new
set ? Who owns what tyes any more.

Why things have been changed this way is beyond me, it must cost much
more for Digital.

Ian.

    
    You COULD save Digital some money by trekking off to Micheldever 
    Tyres (or a similar concern). Maybe if Digital started receiving much
    lower bills for tyres from their staff than from Hertz/PHH they'd
    realise how much the lease companies are screwing them in other areas!
    
    Mark

    
    Re:  <<< Note 1614.47 by VOGON::KAPPLER "but I manage ..." >>>
    
    
    	Did anyone ever answer your question?
    
        Can/will CC managers refuse to pay up?

    
    I bought up CC managers in my "SPOOF" memo which seemed to fool too
    many people and resulted in a stroppy call from Personnel!
    
    They AREN'T (as far as I know) involved.
    
    Mark
    

    
    OK then... but what about the person who signs my expenses, who may or
    may not be a CC manager?
    
    BTW .47 didn't look like a spoof. Perhaps I've suffered a sense of
    humour failure. :-)
    

    
    No .47 was, I think, a reply to .41, which was a spoof.
    
    Mark

    
    Re: Ian
    
    At least you'll be able to get yourself whatever tyres you want
    ;-) That'll be a lot better than Micheldever telling me you can 
    only have Uniroyals or Continentals on a PHH card. 
    
    I'd get a cash advance to pay for the expense! That way you'll avoid
    any nasties about getting the tyres fitted and then finding that
    someone is objecting to signing the expense form!

    Richard.
    
    ps. Can I borrow your old ones so I can get mine replaced as well?

But to pick up on an earlier question - 

I will have to replace mine before 16000. Assuming I have to pay for them, who
owns them when my car does get to 16000 ? Can I insist on a new set from PHH and
then flog these ? Or will PHH buy them from me ?

    I'm trying to imagine the lease companies coming to pick up old cars,
    only to find them all on bricks, minus tyres.
    
    :-) :-)

.74 says it all. It just proves how crazy this system is.

We are being ripped off by someone - I'm just not sure who.

Peter.

>>    only to find them all on bricks, minus tyres.
    
    Sounds like a common occurrence for vehicles in/from DEC park   ;-)
    
    J.R.

    Well, here we are in '92 and the new 1.6mm min tread law comes into
    effect. A good thing if it improves road safety.
    
    However, I heard on the radio that this only applies to cars. 
    This new law does not affect Lorries and motorcycles which are 
    still OK down to 1mm.
    
    Anybody know the reason for this apparent ambiguity.
    
    HNY
    
    Roy

    As for bikes...
    
    Take a look at the amount of tread you get on a new sports-type bike
    tyre - you don't get much above two mm to start with!!  
    
    Rob

    I don't know where you get your information Rob, but I believe new bike
    tyres come with 5-6mm of tread with a recommendation that they are
    changed at 3mm. Sports tyres may have a larger gap between the tread
    but this does not mean that the depth is any different. Being softer
    compound though, they with wear quicker.
    
    I think it even more important that m'cycle tyres have deep tread to
    expell water in the wet to avoid aquaplaning.
    
    Roy

    Well,
    
    From the types I've bought you just don't get a lot of tread - I've not
    actually measured any, but it doesn't look anything like 5-6 mm when
    new - or perhaps I just wear them out too quickly (!)
    
    Rob

    I'm not sure that the depth of tread on a motorcycle tyre makes a
    great deal off difference to aquaplaning or not, that is anymore that
    in a car. For sure, underbraking I have had a bike loose traction in
    the wet with both new and old tyres. In terms of safety on a bike the
    single biggest advantage to wet weather breaking is not the tread depth
    on the tyre but abs. I have locked up both wheels in the wet with abs
    and fully expected to be to be on my butt but was pleasantly suprise to
    find the bike stopped in a straight line under full control. Not
    something I would expect on a non abs bike. 
    
    Having said that if someone is stupid enough to let a tyre go untill it
    is more like a slick then what can you expect. For my money the front
    tyre is more inportant that the rear when it comes to braking. 
    
    
    	Garry

    OK OK - I was talking complete rubbish about bike tyres - but then this
    is the car conference isn't it :-)  :-)
    
    I'm very very very sorry and I won't do it again - Rob

    
    This weekend i had to replace the tyres on my RST, the car is shod with 
    NCTs. They had covered 14000 miles and were down to about 1mm of tread
    left, hence making them illegal. Hertz didnt argue at all about it 
    being less than 16000 miles or that it  was due to driver abuse.
    So the tyres were replaced with the new NCT2s.
    When i first walked in and asked for the tyres the price i was quoted
    was #77 (quid) each, i said no problem i'm not paying Hertz are.
    On the reciept they gave the total for fitting and balancing was #310 !
    Just a slight rip off dont you think when it would have cost me about 
    #170 if i had been buying them personally.
    
           Nick
    

    >>Hertz didnt argue at all about it being less than 16000 miles.
    
    I understand that the Hertz will not pay for tyres that have covered
    less than 10000 miles. Its PHH that will not pay below 16000 miles, so
    its no surprise that there was no problem with Hertz.
    
    Roy

 I changed my front tyres during the Christmas break, The nearside tyre was at
1.6 mm, the offside was at 3mm so I had one new tyre and swapped the tyre with
3mm of tread for the spare.

  I had done 15000 miles on these tyres but PHH would not pay ( I drive a R5 GT
Turbo ). I called PHH who said that the 16000 mile cut off was agreed by
Digital. I then talked to someone in Car Fleet who said "yes but I think they
ought to make allowances for performance cars."

 Both the tyre company ( ATS ) and the contact in Fleet agreed that 15000 miles
 of wear out of the front tyres for this type of car was reasonable and does
 not constitute driver abuse.

 Perhaps if all of you out there with similar cars made your views on the
subject of tyre wear known to fleet we could get this stupid rule changed.

  Barrie_who_obects_to_being_told_he_abuses_his_car.

> Both the tyre company ( ATS ) and the contact in Fleet agreed that 15000 miles
> of wear out of the front tyres for this type of car was reasonable and does
> not constitute driver abuse.

So, get this in writing and submit a claim to your cost centre.


You pay enough to lease the car, and this type of thing was loaded into the
lease cost whether they admit it or not.

How do you get as little as 16K miles on a set of tyres!!! I have done
46K miles on my tyres, and it seems unlikely that they will need to be
changed before the car goes back at 50K. 

I would suggest that the driver abuse threshhold should go up rather 
than down.

Stewart

RE: -.1

It is down to the type of car...

So far I've got over 40,000 miles out of the set of tyres on one of my cars
(and they are less than half worn), and only 12,000 on the other.

One car is a GTI the other is a VW Transporter.

    re .87
    
    Its like petrol mileage. Even driven by the same driver, a car with a
    bigger engine is going to get worse mpg than a smaller engine.
    
    In the case of tyres it may be partially due to the width of the tyre.
    A wide tyre is going to have a greater difference in speed between
    inside and outside edges when cornering (not much I admit, but I expect
    it will make a difference). When manoevering it is much harder to turn
    the steering wheel with wide tyres than narrow tyres, so it is more
    necessary to have power steering, again there will be more wear. There
    may also be a difference in the formulation of the rubber. High
    performance tyres are supposed to give greater grip, which probably
    means softer rubber.
    
    Andrew

    
         Having just read the current tyre replacement policy on VTX, I
    feel very uncomfortable with its implications, being a PHH lease
    holder. I checked the present condition of my tyres last night, as a
    matter of interest, fully expecting to find that after some 13000 miles
    they would still possess much the same amount of tread as when new, but
    I got quite a shock on close examination; I think they are probably
    within the 1.6mm limit (with reference to a mental image of 1mm
    graduations on a ruler) but I was struck by the fact that wear was
    evident over a distinct pattern, predominantly at the edges. The
    vehicle is a PHH leased Mercedes 190E 1.8.
           I would certainly not consider for one moment, with the greatest
    of respect, that I have subjected the vehicle to driver abuse, but
    cannot understand why a vehicle leased by HERTZ, presumably subjected
    to the same road surface conditions as a vehicle leased by PHH, would
    theoretically qualify for replacement of tyres 6000 miles (six months?)
    before a PHH vehicle, and while there are many aspects to the logic
    behind this calculation, discomfort is further irritated by the
    possibility that PHH are in common with a great many other companies
    currently addressing the effects of economic recession. I would feel
    more comfortable if this hypothesis could be refuted and an explanation
    given as to the logic behind the policy; I will check again but I
    cannot find any documentation which indicated tyre replacement policy
    when I first entered into contract with the lease.
         In the meantime I have retained a hard copy of the details on VTX
    for possible presentation to an officer of the law in the execution of
    his duty while I believe the vehicles tyres are within the limit, and
    will check up on the amount of insurance cover which I have to protect
    me while travelling on company business, but in view of the
    implications and possible confusion arising from the policy I would
    like to see clarification of the issue perhaps outwith the forum of
    this notesfile, from Digital car fleet.
    
    Best Regards, Brian

    
    As I said on this topic in another conference, it's us as individuals
    that are accountable under the law. It's your licence that gets 3
    points per tyre (not to mention your neck at risk if the
    traction/adhesion is poor). It's you that pays the fine, & gets a
    criminal record.
    
    Answer is simple. Either get your CC to pay, or return the vehicle to 
    fleet, & rent something with legal tyres.
    
    This company has NO RIGHT to insist you drive an illegal vehicle. 
    
    As for the really rather silly comment a few back about tyre life, you
    try & get better than 15k out of front tyres with the following
    combination :
    
    		195/60's
    		power steering (& 2.4 turns lock-to-lock)
    		front wheel drive
    		170 bhp
                60/40 weight distribution
    
    It's just not possible with my wagon, driven normally. The original
    Dunlops lasted 8k -- down to bald, not 1.8mm. Pirellis are the best I've
    found in the 80k I've done with the car -- usually give 12-14k. Rears are
     great for 45k -- but nowadays you are recommended not to rotate. 
    
    Colin

    
    Re the 50k tyres.
    
    What do you drive?
    
    Mark

    My Rover 214 SLi has now done 37k on its original tyres, and they are
    still legal.
    
    
    Shaun.

    re .91     an aside..
    
    a tyre worn down on both edges (more than the centre) usually
    indicates underinflation
    
    conversely, a tyre worn in the centre usually indicates overinflation
    
    and uneven wear might indicate tracking problems....
    
    So the moral is check the pressures regularly; and never rely on the 
    pressure gauges at garages, there are great variances between different
    sites.
    
    Huw.

>So, get this in writing and submit a claim to your cost centre.


	I think it's quite wrong to load this onto a cost centre, the leases 
	should include costs for reasonable tyre-life.

	It's PHH that should be tackled through car-fleet, to give the same 
	conditions as Hertz, or if you think both are low, tackle both through
	fleet.

	Heather

    Few points here:
    
    (1) PHH lease costs generally seem to be less than Hertz, which is why
    most lease cars these days seem to be from PHH; perhaps the reason is
    that Hertz assume greater driver abuse of tyres? [or that they take
    more account of likely tyre wear?]
    
    (2) The type of driving you do can dramatically affect the wear rate of
    your tyres. I used to have a VW Golf 1600CL that did 47000 on one set
    of tyres, with loads of tread left, because nearly all my mileage was
    on motorways. My previous lease car (Astra SRi) also did nearly 40000
    [!!] before I needed new front tyres (for the same reason as on the
    Golf). However, other cars I have owned have gone through tyres far
    quicker...and I've always driven in the same way from one car to
    another to my knowledge.
    
    (3) It's wrong to criticise apparently fast tyre wear as "driver
    abuse", without first knowing the type of car, the type of roads,
    driving style, tyre pressures, etc. etc. I don't know much about
    dynamics and physics, but presumably if you constantly brake into
    bends, thus unbalancing the car and causing increased understeer,
    rather than driving the car round the bend on a constant/slightly
    increasing throttle, then your tyre wear will be much higher.
    
    (4) I feel that a 16000 mile cut-off is totally unreasonable,
    especially for performance cars driven mostly on backroads, whereas
    10000 is a bit too generous. I personally wouldn't feel aggrieved with
    a 12000 limit...
    
    What's more unreasonable is to have a different limit between PHH and
    Hertz...
    
    
    Stephen

    I've driven diesel BX's for years: I used to get 35K+ out of the
    michelin tyres, and I scoffed at my colleague getting only 17K out of
    the tyres on his pug 405 SRi.
    
    Now i've had a rover 416 GSi, with NCT2's, and at 16.5K my tyres are
    distinctly worn!. Yes, the performance has something to do with it, but
    also the performance tyres seem to wear more rapidly.
    
    So I'm glad (even though I'm over 16K) that my lease is Hertz.
    
    Richard

    Because PHH and Hertz are totally seperate companies (as far as I know)
    its not unreasonable to expect that their terms & conditions are
    slightly different.
    
    Presumably these mileage cut off points for tyres have been in
    existance for quite some time. Its only recently that low profile
    softer compound tyres have become popular. Its not in the lease
    companies interests to change the cut off points. If they did, it would
    increase the lease costs.
    
    I don't think that as individuals we will be penalised as cost centre
    managers are aware that tyres may need replacing after a low mileage
    and will allow them through as expenses.
    
    Roy. (20,000+ miles, RS Fiesta, still on originals with plenty tread to
    	  go.)

    
    It would be interesting to note the effect on the rate and extent of
    tyre wear in relationship to the weight exerted on these load-bearing
    components, with particular reference to the frequently large amount of
    essential equipment and spare parts carried by Field Service Engineers.
         This would perhaps offer the opportunity of suggesting that, for
    example, HERTZ would acquire and supply vehicles for those applications
    which are more demanding on tyres, while PHH would supply vehicles not
    intended for applications other than passenger use. 
         Although this would possibly alter dramatically the ratio of
    vehicles supplied by each of the two companies, PHH may find that being
    a minority supplier, outgoings re. tyre replacement becomes
    insignificant, while the proposed solution may enable HERTZ to offer
    their customer any added benefits consistant with high volume supply.
    
    Brian
      

>>    Because PHH and Hertz are totally seperate companies (as far as I know)
>>    its not unreasonable to expect that their terms & conditions are
>>    slightly different.
    
    But in a previous note it was stated that these wear limits have been
    agreed by Digital.  If they are so different, how come ?
    
    J.R.

    re: .83
    
    Rip off..???
    
    My calculator says:  4 x 77 = 308
    	                 
                       + V.A.T.    53.90
    
                     Sub total  = 361.90
    
                       + Balance   ????
    
                         Total  =  361.90 + Balance (+ VAT on balance)
    
    where does the 170 come from..???
    
    Mr curious        

    
    Re .102
    
    Did they just replace 2 and charge for 4?
    
    Mark

I would imagine that Hertz get a discount of that figure, that is probably
deliberately hidden from us, so that we don't get evidence of the rip off
we are being subject to.

In the same way that we don't get told the actual cost of the car that is
purchased for us - I wonder how this impacts the �19,250 car tax limit,
which is based on price paid, not list price...

Peter.

Re .100,

>    It would be interesting to note the effect on the rate and extent of
>    tyre wear ... large amount of
>    essential equipment and spare parts carried by Field Service Engineers.

>    HERTZ would acquire and supply vehicles for those applications
>    which are more demanding on tyres, while PHH would supply vehicles not
>    intended for applications other than passenger use. 

>   PHH may find that being a minority supplier ...

This is a total rathole, but I would expect Field Service Engineers
would represent only a very small proportion of Digital lease car holders.

In your example, Hertz would thus be the minority supplier.

I don't have any official figures to back up this assertion but I would
think that groups of car users in order of size would be:

(1) Never or hardly ever use for business.
(2) Use to carry self to meetings, customer sites etc.
(3) Use to carry self and parts etc (Field Service.)

I realise that the ratio of these will vary greatly from site to site
but I would suspect that would be the result in the UK car scheme as a
whole (Engineering as well as the UK Sub).

Jon

    .104�I wonder how this impacts the �19,250 car tax limit
    
    Fleet does hold details of the price paid of the vehicle for just this
    reason.
    
    Roy

re .83 ish,

I just had to replace my tyres cos of driver abuse. 185/65 VR14 Klebers
and it cost me 188.81 from ATS, which I'm claiming back.

A friend just replaced hers, after 17000 miles, with the same car, and
the bill was 218 for Uniroyals 185/65 VR14's again at ATS.

So much for any discount via PHH. Someones getting ripped off.

Ian.

    
    re.102
    
    to answer your question i have got the reciept here.
    
    unit price of tyre. #262.40  (Hertz discount = 53%)
    
        tubeless valve. #1.55
    
         wheel balance. #2.90
    
    multiply all this by 2 and add V.A.T.  -  you get  -
    
    
        tyres. #246.66
       valves. #3.10
    balancing. #5.80
            =  #255.56 + #44.72 = #300.28 
    
    My comment of 170 was based on 2*#77 + balancing + valves + V.A.T.
    and was just a rough guess.
    But as you can see they were still ripped off.
    
    Nick.

    
    I've recently 'upgraded' my car from a 1.8 Sierra to an MR2. When I'd
    finished with the Sierra I'd done 30,000 miles on the original set of
    tyres. By my calculations I'm due for my second set of replacements in
    2000 miles. Does this mean that after I've driven the 2000 miles in the
    MR I'm allowed to have a new set of tyres and still be 16,000 miles in
    'credit'???!!!!!!!!!
    
    If the lease companies are going to be silly about it, then so can we!!

    How will the lease company handle the concept of people removing tyres
    from the car ( Those they have had to pay for due to abuse !) when they
    hand the car back at the end of the lease.
    
    With tyre life on lease cars it should be Swings and Roundabouts, I
    have a R5 turbo, and I have just replaced two tyres after 30,000 miles
    and I still have apporx. 2mm left on the back tyres, someone else with
    same car might only get 14,000 miles....One should compensate the
    other...they do well on one car not so good on the other, they should
    only charge if average life is below a certain mileage.
    
    If the clutch on my car goes after say 30,000 miles will they charge for
    that? Could they say I have been riding the clutch and thus this is
    abuse? Brake pads ... Windscreen wipers ( Short life due to abuse , due
    to use on a dry screen ).....
    
                              KR
    
    P.S. Kwik Fit put 48 pounds pressure in the new tyres, I did wonder why
    it felt bumpy for the first 10 miles... ( Should be 28 on this car).
    
    
     

So, you take your leasemobile into Kwik Fit to get a new set of front tyres,
but you have only done 15,950 miles.

PHH refuse to replace them due to driver abuse.

So, you hire a car for that day (probably 15-20 quid).

Then the next day you take a replacement PHH car as a valid component of your
lease that states that should the car be off the road for more than one day
they will provide an alternate and equivalent vehicle.

Now, see how long it takes PHH to sort things out!!!!!!

mb

    re:several
    
    I happened to glance at the tyres on my motor this morning, and noticed
    that the fronts were down to the tread wear indicator, i.e. they need
    replacing. The car is a PHH car, and has done 16,350 miles. Phew, I'm
    ok to replace them !! However, experience suggests that the replacement
    tyres never last as long as the originals, even for the same make.
    Therefore, the next time should be interesting.
    
    I spoke to the (average earnings) man at Kwik-Botch, and he tells me
    that they are a special order. They are Eagle NCTs, 195/50. Apparently,
    they are specially made with a special compound for the R19 16V, hence
    the special order. (BTW, phone at lunch time, tyres can be here this
    afternoon, their logistics must be better than ours !!).
    
    Anyway, it would appear that the special compound is softer than
    normal. This would explain the relatively rapid wear ("that's about
    what you'd expect, guv"). It will also explain the fact that the tyres
    have worn a lot in the middle, but not much on the outside. And no, the
    tyres are not pumped up too high. If anything, they are low at the
    moment. 
    
    I phoned car fleet out of curiosity. It would appear that if I do less
    than 16,000 on the next set, I will have to argue the case with PHH
    with little hope of success, even though the tyres is specifically
    designed for that sort of wear, and should be costed into the lease.
    
    I wonder if next time I could swap the back wheels for the front, take
    the car to Kwik-Fit and claim that the rear tyres now need
    replacing after 30,000 miles, get them replaced, and then swap them back
    to the front !!
    
    We can all play daft if we have to !!!
    
    Colin

Colin,

Get your garage to rotate the tyres at services!

Greg

re.112:

One reason why 2nd and subsequent tyres wear faster is because the cars
suspension is wearing too.

/Dave.

    Regarding the low mileage high tyre wear business.
    
    The lease companies will not pay for replacement tyres if they need 
    replacing before a certain mileage (Hertz 10000 miles, PHH 16000).
    
    However, I would of thought that all/most cost cenre managers realise
    that certain types of tyres will wear quickly and need early
    replacement.
    
    Certainly a decision was made in our cost centre to pay for these
    costs and not pass it on to the individual unless it really was 
    driver abuse.
    
    Has anybody honestly been made to pay for tyres yet ?
    
    Roy

>>One reason why 2nd and subsequent tyres wear faster is because the cars
    
    And you may have been running-in the vehicle for a portion of the
    mileage of the original set.
    
    Also, you would probably drive a car 'harder' when you 'get to know it'
    after some time.  I don't mean that you would thrash it, but it is very
    likely that you will drive at higher average speeds (including cornering)
    with a car you are familiar with, rather than one you are not yet used to.
    
    Possibly, anyhow...
    
    J.R.

    
    My original Pirelli tyres (horrid, no grip P600s!) were worn out on
    the front at 16,000 miles. The Goodyear Eagles (lots more grip) are
    looking a lot more healthy at 12,000 miles than the Pirellis did at 
    7,500!
    
    Makes you wonder how hard a life demonstrators really get! :^)
    
    Mark

    The front tyres on my R5Turbo, are still going at 33500 miles, I had
    them checked a month ago and the Kwik Fit fitter said come back in 3000
    miles. The tyres were taken from the back of the car at 20,000 miles.
    The back tyres ( Ex. Front ) were changed at 31,000 miles. I drive the
    car very hard , do the a wheel spin now and then.... The tyres must be
    made up from a harder than the normal compound.
    
    
                     KR

    
    Blimey! What sort of tyres have you got?
    
    Mark

    Just the standard ones that come fitted on the car when new .
    
                         KR
    
    MVX is it ? MX or something like that.. 195/??

    
    Yep MVX's. I'm amazed you get that kind of life out of them!
    
    Maybe you're not as hard on them as you think you are, I only used
    to get 18,000 out of mine (2 sets on the front) and most people I've
    spoken to quote similar figures.
    
    Mark
    
    PS Maybe _I'm_ hard on tyres!?!?

    I really can't believe these stupid tyre rules we have...
    
    I got 20000 out of a set of Michelin MXVs on my Astra SRi (driven hard,
    but sympathetically), before I even needed to swap fronts to back:
    fronts needed swapping at 40000 total!
    
    However, my ZX Volcane is eating tyres like there's no tomorrow...
    like, fronts 40% worn at 6000 miles! And I reckon I'm driving in
    exactly the same way as I did the Astra (same driving style, routes,
    etc.)
    
    It's quite clear that different car/tyre combinations behave in totally
    different ways under the same driving conditions.
    
    
    |SD

    re:15
    
    Whilst I agree that I personally am unlikely to be out of pocket,
    that's not the point. Why should my boss pick up a hefty tyre bill,
    when he's already paying through the nose for my car as it is ?
    
    In these tough times, it's not enogh to simply shrug ones shoulders and
    accept that the CC picks up the tab !!
    
    Colin

    Colin,
    
    Surely its swings and roundabouts. The lease companies specify the cut
    off points for tyre wear and work out the lease costs accordingly.
    
    If they lowered the tyre wear limit, they would be paying out more for
    tyres and therefore have to increase the lease costs as well.
    
    Roy

>>    <<< Note 1614.124 by KERNEL::SHELLEYR "I only _work_ in outer space" >>>

>>    Colin,
    
>>    Surely its swings and roundabouts. The lease companies specify the cut
>>    off points for tyre wear and work out the lease costs accordingly.
    
>>    If they lowered the tyre wear limit, they would be paying out more for
>>    tyres and therefore have to increase the lease costs as well.
    

    I'd agree, *except* that HERTZ obviously consider they can make a profit,
    and yet they must still work out cheaper than PHH or we'd have no
    HERTZ cars in the fleet!.
    
    Personally I'm not involved as my car is Hertz. HOWEVER, at the time of
    change I'm considering whether I'd REFUSE a PHH lease as the conditions
    were inferior to HERTZ's!.
    
    Are we within our rights to do this?, is this the only way to exert
    consumer pressure on car fleet?.
    
    Richard

    Thats a good point Richard, but as an employee the benefit is the same
    from both lease companies. 
    
    IMHO It should be up to Fleet to determine the better value quote.
    I bet they don't give a thought to the fact that with 
    a PHH quote it _might_ cost the company up to �400 a year (�100ish each
    for performance tyres) more if tyres need 
    replacing between 10000 and 16000 miles. 
    
    Roy

Re: .126

>    a PHH quote it _might_ cost the company up to �400 a year (�100ish each
>    for performance tyres) more if tyres need 


... and the rest. PHH and Hertz negotiate _massive_ discounts from the tyre
dealers. If we end up buying privately (even if it is claimed back off our
cost centres), we may end up paying TWICE the price for tyres. Mine are around
�150 each full price, and the garage says that on average they last 9000 miles!


mb

	I'm on my second Citroen BX GTI. I like to cruise fast and
accelerate hard but I don't like to spin wheels, either when accelerating
or braking (actually the car has ABS, so I can't lock up when braking).
The front tyres last about 25000 miles and the rear tyres never wear out.

	It may be something about the Citroen's suspension but, on my
previous car, I realised that one rear tyre was looking a bit soft. When
I checked, it measured only 5p.s.i. So I pumped it up. A week later it was
5p.s.i. At the time, I was so busy that I couldn't get to take it in for
checking, so I kept pumping it up for about 6 weeks. When I did take it
in I told the garage that I thought the tyre would have wall damage and
would need replacement but, no, it was perfectly ok and just had a nail
through the tread. They welded it up and it lasted the rest of the lease
(about 55000 miles).

	I once saw a Citroen CX driven around Brands Hatch with one rear
wheel removed without scraping the ground. So, it is probably the suspension
design that helps.

re .127,

I had to buy my tyres privately and claim the cost back.

Kleber 185 VR14 x2  188.81p @ ATS Fareham.

3 Days later Michellins 185 VR14 x 2  again from ATS Fareham
cost over 200 pounds, can't remember the exact figure, but WITH a PHH card.

Even taking into account the different makes of tyre this does not look
like a _massive_ discount to me.

Someones getting ripped off and it isn't PHH.


Ian.

Re: .129

Ian

Maybe i am wrong, but when i had my rears changed (at 12,000 miles) the full
price was around �150 a tyre, but the bit of paper that you (sometimes) sign
was around �70.

Of course the FULL list price doesn't always apply, and you can often haggle
when buying privately, but would you want to spend your own time haggling if
PHH had just shafted you due to "driver abuse"?

mb

p.s.

... and you managed to get through a pair of Kleber's in 3 days  ;-)

    The tyres for the Renault are 195/50 15", special compound Eagle NCTs.
    I believe that the list price is around 250, but the man at Kwik-Bungle
    quoted about 86ish. He suggested that PHH may get them cheaper.
    
    If I (or my CC) were paying for tyres, I would haggle like mad !!
    
    BTW, As I said before, I phoned on Friday am, and was quoted delivery
    pm. I've just checked and they're actually due in tomorrow am, so maybe
    their logistics ARE as good as ours !! ;-) :-)
    
    Colin

    
                                
 �    The tyres for the Renault are 195/50 15", special compound Eagle NCTs.
 �   I believe that the list price is around 250, but the man at Kwik-Bungle
    
    What !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    I'm using 225/60 dunlop d40 sports, and they only charged me 85 quid,
    and that was from an official Porsche center, when having the last
    service. Anybody know what these would be charged at in the UK ?
    
    

� ...225/60 dunlop d40 sports, and they only charged me 85 quid

    I had 225/50 D40s on my Carrera when I bought it. Part worn... in the wet...?

    �85 is too much !

 	� ...225/60 dunlop d40 sports, and they only charged me 85 quid
        � ...what would they charge in the UK?
    
    More than that, I guarantee!
    
    Mark

    RE:
>>    <<< Note 1614.126 by KERNEL::SHELLEYR "I only _work_ in outer space" >>>

>>    Thats a good point Richard, but as an employee the benefit is the same
>>    from both lease companies. 
    
    But the whole point is that it ISN'T. If I take a PHH lease I have to
    be carefull that the tyres don't wear out in under 16000 miles, if I
    take a Hertz lease I only have to worry if under 10000 miles, which in
    practice is very unlikely, and therefore not a worry.
    
    So a PHH contract has built in worry, whilst a Hertz hasn't.
    
    
    For the benefit to be the same the contracts should be IDENTICAL.
    
    Richard

    Richard, I now see your point.
    
    I was assuming that it would be the cost centre taking the hit for the
    extra cost of tyres rather than us as individuals. That is certainly
    the decision that has been made for the cost centre I work in.
    
    Roy

    RE: .131
    
    Those prices are ridiculous in comparison to the quotes I got. I
    replaced the Goodyear Eagle NCTs (same size as the R5GTT 195x50x15) on
    my Escort RST. I was quoted 60 quid plus VAT each which is very good
    value. In the end though I went for Yokohama A008s as I'd heard
    wonderful things about them. It was either these, or Bridgestone RE71s,
    but they were an extra 10 quid + VAT each. Got 4 Yokos for 350 quid
    inc. balance on inside of rims.
    
    Gary. 

    
    The Renault tyres are only 195/50 x 13 <-----
    
    Mark

    The Renault 19 16V tyres are 195/50 15" ....
    Special compound, too.
    List price now around 309, real price nearer 80.

    Re. last
    
    � Depends on the Renault.
    
    � replaced the Goodyear Eagle NCTs (same size as the R5GTT 195x50x15) on
    
    No it doesn't! :^)
    
    Mark
    

    R5GTT tyres are 195/55 x 13
    
    Cheers Martin

    An old topic comes to life...
    
    I had the front tyres on my Pugeot 405 GRDT yesterday and the man at
    ATS had a lot of hastle from the (nice?) man from Hertz, who didn't
    want to replace them (just over 10k mikes), and then wanted to replace
    one and use the spare - leaving me with two different types of tyre. 
    In the end they changed both front tyres, but had the mecanic check the
    tyre SERIAL numbers.
    
    The ATS guy said that the P4000s never last much more than 10k miles on
    a FWD car anyway, and since my conversion to diesel I've not been
    pushing the tyres much.  Rear tyres were calculated to require
    replacement at +60k miles!   
    
    
    Jc

    
    10K miles? Gulp.
    
    My 1.7TD Cavalier has just had new tyres on the front at 27K miles. I
    normally aim for 30K, but the tracking was a bit off on the Cav, and I
    didn't notice until it had scrubbed of a bit of rubber.
    
    To be honest, I'm not too surprised that the Hertz guy was quibbling
    (but swapping one tyre was a pretty dumb idea!)
    
    Nigel
    

    I have a very late '92 Pug 405GLDT Estate, and I've just had my Eagle
    NCT2s replaced at 24K miles. 10K isn't a bit quick, it's ridiculous;
    I'm not surprised they complained. My rear tyres look almost new.
    
    As an aside, I never "squeal" or spin my front tyres, but I do give the
    car a fair bit of stick; they get a hard time going quickly around
    motorway slip roads, which as anyone who's been here (Belgium) will
    tell you, are often very tight 360� jobbies. The handling of the car is
    superb, and as a result, I notice that the outer edges of the tyres
    scrub rather more than I would normally expect. The majority of the
    tyre faces were down to the 2mm marks at the time of replacement.
    
    Laurie.

	Re .142

	Where on earth have you been driving John?   My petrol 405 GR
	estate, which you may remember was delivered  on the same day
	as yours, has done 11K miles.  I checked last night,  and the
	front tyres are only marginally more worn than the rear, good
	for another 15,000 at least I reckon.

	Do  tyres on  diesels generally wear out more quickly than on 
	petrol engined cars? 

	Ian.

    re .last_few,
    
    I guess the front of the diesel version is heavier than the petrol
    version, but probably not that much. 
    
    Most of the 10k miles has been on county roads. Probably mostly 30<>50
    mph, and no black stripy bits on the tarmac, either.
    
    Interestingly, Ians car in .142 seems to have similar wear front and
    rear - my rear tyres now have the same tread as the front ones.  Are
    they P4000s as well?
    
    Jc