Tyres and DRIRE homologation

[allanb]

I recently ordered 4 new tyres for my car (from a tyre shop, not a car dealer).  I gave the specification of the tyres that were already on it, which is consistent with the possible specifications shown on the label on the fuel filler cap.  It's also consistent with the tyre manufacturer's recommendation for the car.  As far as my query is concerned the only bit that matters is the speed code (indice de vitesse), which is 'Y' in each case (except for winter tyres.)

After they had been fitted, I checked the code on the actual tyres and saw that it was 'W', even though 'Y' appears on the invoice.

The allowable speeds for both 'W' and 'Y' are well above the car's maximum.  Still, I raised the question before I paid and drove the car away.  The workshop manager assured me that 'W' is permissible, and when I still expressed some doubt, he checked a reference manual (which I didn't see) and confirmed it.

Now I have always understood that whatever the theoretical values are, the tyres on a car must be consistent with those that were homologated for that specific model.  I also believe that there is a document called a fiche d'homologation, which contains this kind of detail.  But I don't have this document, in fact I don't think I've ever seen one.

By googling I found this:

Depuis le 1er janvier 1995 l'article R59 du Code de la Route est complété par l'arrété du 24/10/94 qui prévoit notamment :



"Il est interdit de monter sur les véhicules automobiles ... des pneumatiques sur lesquels figurent un indice de capacité de charge ou un symbole de catégorie de vitesse inférieurs aux capacités maximales prévues par le constructeur du véhicule."
  

The 'W' code is certainly not below the car's maximum speed as stated by the car manufacturer.  But is that good enough?  Can anyone tell me whether I need to enquire further?

[Anton Redman]

At first sight the difference between a speed rating of 270 kph and 300 kph is academic unless you are planning on a track day in the mists of Germany Austria or Hungary but it is a bit of a strange one.

BMW cars for instance insist on an inspection by a BMW France dealer before issuing a cert of conformity and the dealer will insist on the correct tyres as original registration speed rating being fitted.

Quite clearly the tyre dealer has ripped you off for the price difference between the two grades and higher speed  = higher cost. Only angles I can see is that he then has a pair of more expensive tyres which he can sell to a mate for a bit more than your tyres but less than retail or he covers up selling four  tyres of the wrong type to a previous customer.

Very odd - anybody any better ideas ?

[just john]

If it was me I'd be straight round for a new CT, smiling on a pass, avoiding hassle, or if a fail,
then straight back to the dealer for what it says on the tin; a set of 'Y' as it appears on the invoice.
SD can no doubt be definitive.[8-|]

[allanb]

[quote user="Anton Redman"]Quite clearly the tyre dealer has ripped you off for the price difference between the two grades...[/quote]That possibility had occurred to me, but I don't think it's an issue here because, from all the information I can find, the price difference is trivial.  (It's a bit complicated because I can't find a single on-line dealer who offers exactly the same tyre in the two different speed categories.) 

Let's just say I'm satisfied that I've got a good tyre at a decent price, and I'm not losing any sleep over that; it's only the legality that concerns me.

I'm off to talk to the CT this morning and if there's any remaining doubt I think I'll put the question directly to my insurance company, since insurance is of course a large part of the concern.

I'd still like to know where the reliable official answer can be found, if anyone knows.

[gosub]

You can find some info here:

http://www.utac-otc.com/fr/ctvl/contenu_ctrl_3.asp?fonction=5&point=532

[allanb]

Thank you for the link.

« Indices de vitesse inadaptés:   contre-visite - non »

I understand this to mean that if your tyres have the wrong speed code, not only will you still pass the CT but you won't even have to change them and come back for a re-test.

From my point of view this is good news, but it's surprising.  It seems to me to raise an obvious question: what's the point of having a speed code system?  

[Sunday Driver]

Here is the official UTAC [url=http://www.utac-otc.com/Upload/base_doc/1199/SRVF5-1_LIAISON%20AU%20SOL_C.pdf]technical instruction[/url] covering Liaisons au Sol which is issued to testing stations.  Section 4 covers the requirements for tyres.

Tyre size can be either as per what was originally homologated for that vehicle model by the vehicle manufacturer, or as now specified by the tyre manufacturer as shown on his official table of equivalence.

The load index must be at least equal to that defined by the manufacturer or, by derogation in the absence of this information, correspond to a load higher than the maximum authorised loading for the axle.

For the speed code, excluding M+S tyres, the speed index must be at minimum equal to that which has been defined by the manufacturer or, by derogation in the absence of this information, correspond to a speed greater than the maximum speed of the vehicle

Tyres mounted on the same axle must be of the same category, eg, normal use, special use, snow tyres, etc.

Tyres mounted on the same axle must be of the same structure - radial or bias belted.

If the vehicle is equipped with run-flat tyres, then all axles must be so equipped.

PS:  No mention of them all having to be Michelins/Pirellis et al...........[;-)]

 

 

[allanb]

Thanks, SD.  I was hoping you might jump into this one.

I understand the information on the link you provided.  What I don't understand is how to reconcile it with the information on the link provided by gosub.  One says clearly what the tyre speed index must be; the other appears to say that if it isn't, it doesn't matter - no contre-visite.   That makes no sense to me.  And they both come from the same site.

In the meantime I have spoken to my friendly local CT man.  He says that it is quite possible that a speed code lower than the car manufacturer's recommendation has been approved by the tyre manufacturer for this car, which would make it acceptable.  He has also offered to check this if I give him a copy of the carte grise.  But he warns me that - because the car is fairly recent - any such approval may not yet be in the data base.

The CT man and my insurance agent have both said that in any case if the tyres were fitted by a qualified professional I should be able to rely on that, since his liability insurance will protect me if he's wrong.

I'm beginning to wish I hadn't bothered to look at the tyres.  Ignorance is bliss.

[AnOther]

[quote user="allanb"]The CT man and my insurance agent have both said that in any case if the tyres were fitted by a qualified professional I should be able to rely on that, since his liability insurance will protect me if he's wrong.[/quote]Now that's one leap of faith I for one would not be willing to make. Ask them if they will put that in writing, I bet I know the answer.

Whilst it may be true that the fitter could ultimately be held responsible and CT or no CT, the fact that you are knowingly driving on tyres under specified for your vehicle would certainly not enhance your defence in court and would be of scant comfort from a wheelchair, a prison cell, or God forbid a coffin.

OTT scaremongering ?  - call it that if you will, but why take any risk at all if it is completely and utterly unneccessary - go back and insist he fits the correct Y rating tyres.

Incidentally the subject was discussed here less than 3 weeks ago;

http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/1/1602325/ShowPost.aspx#1602325

[Chancer]

And in the meantime whatever you do, dont use the car unless you are very very certain that any accidents that you might have will be under 300KPH [:-))]

Oh and make sure that your gilet de securite carrys the correct EU mark [Www]

[AnOther]

Mock if you will JR but the tiny little technicalites can bite you just as often and as just as hard as the flagrant abuses.

I'm not risk averse, believe me quite the opposite, but at the same time there has to be something to be gained from taking one and in a case like this there is simply no profit whatsoever so no reason to expose yourself to it.

[allanb]

[quote user="JRs gone native"]And in the meantime whatever you do, dont use the car unless you are very very certain that any accidents that you might have will be under 300KPH

Oh and make sure that your gilet de securite carrys the correct EU mark[/quote]

But that's the problem - with the 'W' tyres I am only allowed to do 270 km/h and I'm not sure I can stand driving that slowly.

Slightly more seriously...

Ernie: that's good advice and I'm not ignoring it, but I want to keep the tyres if I can.  I'm not going to rely on spoken assurances, but the story has only been running for 48 hours and there hasn't been time to get everything in writing.

Only one tyre professional has expressed an opinion so far, and he says they're OK.  That much I do now have in writing.  Admittedly he's the one who sold them to me, which devalues his opinion a bit, but he knows that if he's wrong he'll have to put it right free of charge, so why would he invite trouble?

As for the tyres being "under-rated" - the one thing that all parties agree on is that they are in fact rather generously over-rated for the car.

So I'm going to try to get written opinions from the people who matter, and in the meantime I'm going to relax.  I'm sorry if I've taken up a lot of forum time unnecessarily. 

I'd still like to understand the apparent inconsistency in the regulations.

[AnOther]

I'm not saying that they are underated in real terms as clearly they are not, and I'm absolutely certain that if circumstances allowed you could drive at 270kph+ on them all day long, however that does not detract from the fact that they are underated with regard to the manufacturers original specification and fit which was "Y". It's not how fast you do drive but how fast you could potentially drive which dictates the tyre spec.

You could of course use the 'I'll never go that fast' argument in many other situations but it won't wash. For instance you might buy yourself a super car capable of well in excess of 300kph but plead with your insurance company for a Renault Clio sized premium in exchange for swearing to never drive above 130kph [blink]

[Chancer]

I'm not sure if the speed rating of tyres is checked on the controle technique but it became testable for Fourgons last year, it makes sense as vans are often fully or even overloaded. On my last trip back to England I bought some part worn N rated tyres for my neighbour so that he could pass his controle technique, they were to replace perfectly serviceable ones but with a lower load index. 

AllanB.

WRT your comment about a contra-visit not being necessary, its an advisory, neither a pass or fail, you are supposed to correct the defaut but it is not judged important enough to warrant a contra-visit, rather like my trac rod inner swivel joint that needs shimming and has done for the last 2 CT's.

It does seem to be a curious British trait to seek out rules to abide by, the only way that this could possible bite you back is if you have an accident at 300kph+ where the tyres might have been a contributary factor, all the tier personnes that you wipe out in the course of the accident will be prise en charge (assuming that they survive) you might find your insurer unwilling to pay out for your vehicle, all rather academic as you would most likely have been shovelled up in a ramasse poussiére by the secouristes.

[Pickles]

Just as a minor aside with respect to tyre speed rating: IIRC, to achieve the speed rating, the tyre is only required to survive 10 minutes at the max rated speed .... the speed rating does not represent by any means a speed at which you can "drive all day". Hence the reason why tyre speed ratings are often so far in excess of the capabilities of the cars for which they are specified.

Regards

Pickles

[AnOther]

The rules have changed, or are changing are they not, whereby the tyres are checked against the Carte Grise ?

I do not share your confidence JR that an accident would need to have occured at any particular speed at all, beit above or below the tyre speed rating and contributory to the accident or not, for a sharp eyed loss adjuster to spot that you had non standard tyres and cry foul [:'(]

[Anton Redman]

" You could of course use the 'I'll never go that fast' argument in many other situations but it won't wash. For instance you might buy yourself a super car capable of well in excess of 300kph but plead with your insurance company for a Renault Clio sized premium in exchange for swearing to never drive above 130kph "

Back when I was 21, newly qualified and still living at home in London I checked out the insurance for a Cooper S, impossible / hugely expensive.  Much to my amazement I could pay reasonable, with four years NCBand a clean license, insurance on an Escort Mexico. Unfortunately my parents retired to the North leaving me with the rent on a terraced house to pay  which meant I carried on running the Wolsely 3 litre, which also towed the racing mini,  which made a profit of about 15p a mile based on the firm's expensive rates versus near break even on an 850 mini.

I never stuffed the 3 litre but was glad Policemen had discretion in those days. One December I went round the A41 roundabout above the A1M twice before I was sure the car would go in the direction it was pointed. Checked mirror Police car behind, pulled into bus stop, collected 'It is always icey there sir, don't ever do that again in my patch, and good bit of car control' in under a minute

[AnOther]

[quote user="Pickles"]Just as a minor aside with respect to tyre speed rating: IIRC, to achieve the speed rating, the tyre is only required to survive 10 minutes at the max rated speed .... the speed rating does not represent by any means a speed at which you can "drive all day". Hence the reason why tyre speed ratings are often so far in excess of the capabilities of the cars for which they are specified.[/quote]I beg to differ Pickles. A cursory search reveals several indepth articles and this quote from but one of them:

"Y" is the speed rating meaning this tire is capable of sustained speeds of 186 mph" (297kph)"

 

[allanb]

[quote user="ErnieY"]You could of course use the 'I'll never go that fast' argument in many other situations...[/quote]I'd just like to make it clear that I'm not using that argument.  But while I'm waiting for the evidence to come in, I'm using the car, and the rating gives me confidence that I'm not risking a tyre failure.

[Théière]

Hi allanb,

I,m comming in at the end of this topic I feel.  I have to agree with Anton's first comment, Why did the dealer give you a receipt with the wrong rated tyre on it? To cover his butt in the event of a court case. Most likely he would deny that those tyres are the ones he fitted as that is not what is stated on the receipt you must have bought some cheap tyres elswhere. Could you prove otherwise without any evidence?

I can sight the case of my uncle and his jaguar, he had an accident at around 35mph that involved injury to a pedestrian, the jag was taken away for examination and the insurance company voided the insurance as lower rated tyres had been fitted than should have been standard to jags'

As with most things these days only at the very end does someone decide whether you are in the wrong and it's usually an insurance company. 

[allanb]

I never intended this topic to go on for so long, but if any of you are still awake you'll be glad to know that it's been resolved; the dealer has tracked down a set of the correct tyres and has agreed to fit them with no charge. 

I can just about understand what happened.  The tyres which I ordered in the 'Y' version are being phased out of production and replaced by a new - and supposedly improved - model, which unfortunately isn't yet available in the 'Y' grade.  (This information came to me direct from Michelin.)  So the dealer ordered them in the 'W' version, which is technically more than adequate for the car, but not homologated.  He said that the car would not have failed the CT because of the tyres, and I now know that this statement is correct.  But of course he had no right to make the switch without telling me.

Incidentally, two different CT centres have confirmed that if a car has tyres with a lower speed rating than the homologated one, it will not fail, even if the grade is technically inadequate for the car - it's only a défaut à signaler.  No contre-visite.  Given the fairly strict French attitude to technical regulation, I find this quite amazing.

 

The nice lady in my insurance agency has had the last word.  She said that most of the human race would simply have told the dealer to put new tyres on the car, and afterwards driven away without even looking at the codes on the sidewalls.  So, she says, it was all my fault for asking too many questions.

Of course, she's joking.  Isn't she?

[AnOther]

Glad you've come to a satisfactory resolution. The 2 points tell me that you've done the right thing though.

If you had an accident an un-rectified défaut à signaler on the record could possibly have been used against you and also in such circumstances your 'nice lady' may indeed have had the last word, that being 'non' [:'(]

[Salty Sam]

An interesting thread guys. A friend of mine has experienced a similar problem which, following the observations made here, has also been rectified at no additional cost to himself.

So a big thank you from him!

One additional point though. It does strike me as rather disturbing to read the 'holier than thou' comments made by one contributor who, on another forum, considers it OK to 'borrow' someone elses CofC in order to register a British trailer!

Very strange.