Bridgestone RE-11?
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 3,535
Likes: 3
From: Mountain View, CA
Bridgestone RE-11?
I'm a little confused as to what's going on with Bridgestone's RE-11 tires.
We've used RE-11 tires as our track tires for a few years, and last year for autocross. As far as I remember they had a 180 treadwear rating.
Last year Bridgestone introduced the RE-11A as a replacement for the RE-11. This had a treadwear rating of 200. This was coincident with changes to the SCCA's autocross rules to allow only 200 treadwear (or higher) tires for some classes.
The reviews of the new tires were universally positive, and they were supposed to be better than the ones they replaced. However we ran some for our track tires and I was not impressed. They seemed to be substantially slower than the RE-11 tires they were replacing.
Today I was checking some tires on TireRack, and they listed the RE-11 with a banner saying "New". On checking them, they had a treadwear rating of 200. The specs for the various sizes now show a mixture of 180 and 200 treadwear ratings. I do notice for every 180 rated tire, there's a 200 rated tire in the same size.
So now I'm wondering what's going on. Are these RE-11A they're calling them RE-11. Have Bridgestone discovered the RE-11 was 200 treadwear all along? (Its happened, Hankook suddenly found their RS3 could be 200 instead of the 140 they'd been selling for years.) Or am I misremembering the rating for the tires?
An interesting observation is the RE-11A tires I have don't have the treadwear rating marked on them. They have a space for it on the sidewall, it has "Treadwear" moulded in the sidewall, but the space where the number should be is blank. This was noted on line when I was searching for what's happening.
We've used RE-11 tires as our track tires for a few years, and last year for autocross. As far as I remember they had a 180 treadwear rating.
Last year Bridgestone introduced the RE-11A as a replacement for the RE-11. This had a treadwear rating of 200. This was coincident with changes to the SCCA's autocross rules to allow only 200 treadwear (or higher) tires for some classes.
The reviews of the new tires were universally positive, and they were supposed to be better than the ones they replaced. However we ran some for our track tires and I was not impressed. They seemed to be substantially slower than the RE-11 tires they were replacing.
Today I was checking some tires on TireRack, and they listed the RE-11 with a banner saying "New". On checking them, they had a treadwear rating of 200. The specs for the various sizes now show a mixture of 180 and 200 treadwear ratings. I do notice for every 180 rated tire, there's a 200 rated tire in the same size.
So now I'm wondering what's going on. Are these RE-11A they're calling them RE-11. Have Bridgestone discovered the RE-11 was 200 treadwear all along? (Its happened, Hankook suddenly found their RS3 could be 200 instead of the 140 they'd been selling for years.) Or am I misremembering the rating for the tires?
An interesting observation is the RE-11A tires I have don't have the treadwear rating marked on them. They have a space for it on the sidewall, it has "Treadwear" moulded in the sidewall, but the space where the number should be is blank. This was noted on line when I was searching for what's happening.
I'm a little confused as to what's going on with Bridgestone's RE-11 tires.
We've used RE-11 tires as our track tires for a few years, and last year for autocross. As far as I remember they had a 180 treadwear rating.
Last year Bridgestone introduced the RE-11A as a replacement for the RE-11. This had a treadwear rating of 200. This was coincident with changes to the SCCA's autocross rules to allow only 200 treadwear (or higher) tires for some classes.
The reviews of the new tires were universally positive, and they were supposed to be better than the ones they replaced. However we ran some for our track tires and I was not impressed. They seemed to be substantially slower than the RE-11 tires they were replacing.
Today I was checking some tires on TireRack, and they listed the RE-11 with a banner saying "New". On checking them, they had a treadwear rating of 200. The specs for the various sizes now show a mixture of 180 and 200 treadwear ratings. I do notice for every 180 rated tire, there's a 200 rated tire in the same size.
So now I'm wondering what's going on. Are these RE-11A they're calling them RE-11. Have Bridgestone discovered the RE-11 was 200 treadwear all along? (Its happened, Hankook suddenly found their RS3 could be 200 instead of the 140 they'd been selling for years.) Or am I misremembering the rating for the tires?
An interesting observation is the RE-11A tires I have don't have the treadwear rating marked on them. They have a space for it on the sidewall, it has "Treadwear" moulded in the sidewall, but the space where the number should be is blank. This was noted on line when I was searching for what's happening.
We've used RE-11 tires as our track tires for a few years, and last year for autocross. As far as I remember they had a 180 treadwear rating.
Last year Bridgestone introduced the RE-11A as a replacement for the RE-11. This had a treadwear rating of 200. This was coincident with changes to the SCCA's autocross rules to allow only 200 treadwear (or higher) tires for some classes.
The reviews of the new tires were universally positive, and they were supposed to be better than the ones they replaced. However we ran some for our track tires and I was not impressed. They seemed to be substantially slower than the RE-11 tires they were replacing.
Today I was checking some tires on TireRack, and they listed the RE-11 with a banner saying "New". On checking them, they had a treadwear rating of 200. The specs for the various sizes now show a mixture of 180 and 200 treadwear ratings. I do notice for every 180 rated tire, there's a 200 rated tire in the same size.
So now I'm wondering what's going on. Are these RE-11A they're calling them RE-11. Have Bridgestone discovered the RE-11 was 200 treadwear all along? (Its happened, Hankook suddenly found their RS3 could be 200 instead of the 140 they'd been selling for years.) Or am I misremembering the rating for the tires?
An interesting observation is the RE-11A tires I have don't have the treadwear rating marked on them. They have a space for it on the sidewall, it has "Treadwear" moulded in the sidewall, but the space where the number should be is blank. This was noted on line when I was searching for what's happening.
You stumbled onto a nice puzzle, and an amazing feat of Bridgestone marketing screw-up (that is assuming their marketing department intends to inform and not confuse the customers).
From the looks of it, there are 3 flavors of RE-11 tires on the market today:
#1: Original RE-11 with UTQG rating of 180
#2: New RE-11a tires with UTQG of 200
#3: Another batch of RE-11 tires with UTQG of 200
Usually UTQG ratings are at best meaningless, but I site them above to be able to tell the tire models apart.
The confusing part is the re-emergence of #3.
The only logical explanation is that others have found that they liked the old RE-11 tire more than the 11a replacement, and Bridgestone had obliged by keeping the old tire production line going with the old tread compound.
Incrementing UTQG to 200 is consistent with what Hankook did with its RS3's (same tire, new stamp) to comply with the upcoming SCCA rule-book changes raising Street Category tire rating from 140 to 200.
a
P.S.: I also had original RE-11s and loved them, though had later switched to RS3's. Looks like I will be going to BFG Rival or Direzza ZII's next.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post