Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight
04-01-2009, 14:23
Post: #36
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight
Interesting thread...just bought 8 michelin 12r22.5 tires $660 mounted and
balanced, best deal I could find in my area. Anybody interested in 8 six year
lightly used tires?? While inspecting rims I found one cracked rear wheel lug
hole out about three inches both ways, got a NEW replacement accuride (was 27471
now 28615) for $400 from fleet pro in Orlando. That wheel is available also!

Jim Riordan
88 WBWL XXV
Stuart, fl
772-260-1328

--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "birdshill123"
wrote:
>
> Ron Marabito:
>
> Talking tires is like talking politics. Every one has an opinion. I dont
think an RV'r would install Michelins for read wear. AS you stated we will never
wear them out. I just installed 6 Michelin XZE's on our 88FC35. I went for
Michelin because they are the best. Better handling for one. You have to be very
carefull when buying truck tires for an RV. Some are steer axle only. Some are
drive axle only. I look at what the buses in Mexico run and it is Michelin by a
long shot. There are cheaper options and I happen to think there is a reason why
they spend the extra money. It is one thing to buy a cheap battery. If it fails
you get another. Tires are the only thing between you and the road. If it
fails..................!
>
>
> Bruce
> 1988 FC35
>
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 14:04
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 16:25
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-24-2009, 16:47
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-24-2009, 17:41
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-24-2009, 18:33
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 04:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - davisgr - 03-25-2009, 05:59
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 06:58
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Fred Hulse - 03-25-2009, 13:49
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-25-2009, 14:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-25-2009, 14:38
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - sfedeli3 - 03-26-2009, 01:17
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-26-2009, 13:20
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-26-2009, 13:26
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - birdshill123 - 03-26-2009, 14:29
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Steve Pfiffner - 03-26-2009, 14:48
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Pete Masterson - 03-26-2009, 15:19
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-26-2009, 15:40
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - rogerwwebb@... - 03-26-2009, 20:16
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - birdshill123 - 03-27-2009, 04:07
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 04:29
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 04:31
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 04:37
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 05:21
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-27-2009, 06:09
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 07:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Wayne Kotila - 03-27-2009, 07:20
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Pete Masterson - 03-27-2009, 08:33
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Kurt Horvath - 03-27-2009, 11:02
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-27-2009, 12:17
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Bob Lawrence - 03-27-2009, 12:27
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - David Brady - 03-27-2009, 14:44
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - David Brady - 03-27-2009, 14:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 03-27-2009, 14:46
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 03-28-2009, 05:11
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Jim Riordan - 04-01-2009 14:23
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - ronmarabito2002 - 04-03-2009, 02:50
315/80 vs 12R - was Overweight - Don Bradner - 04-03-2009, 07:43



User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)