Jim Smith’s Viewpoints on NHTSA’s future consumer tire education program is certainly less hysterical than TIA Executive Vice President Roy Littlefield’s rant published by another trade journal. Unfortunately, Smith misses the point by the same mile.
Until tire manufacturers trouble themselves to provide the people who distribute and sell their products with pertinent technical information, no dealer group can claim to be “the most logical and best-prepared” entity to run a consumer education program. Tire age, which has gotten much media attention lately, is a good example. Tiremakers have known for decades about thermo-oxidation in tires, but they have refused to acknowledge the scientific evidence that tires age and deteriorate – regardless of treadwear – let alone inform tire sellers.
Nor can retailers position themselves as protectors of the public interest while they are plotting in the trade pubs to set up an “industry-friendly” tire safety campaign. Smith’s notion of using taxpayer dollars to preserve the industry’s status quo (envisioned as a Christmas turkey on a platter) shows just how off-base they are. Why has Congress mandated this program in the first place?
While I appreciate the “Old Tires Are Death” moniker, it’s less amusing when you are dealing with the families of the victims of crashes caused by catastrophic tire failures. We have documented too many fatalities and serious injuries that have resulted from failed tires sold as “new” after sitting in a warehouse for years or from old used tires that had been painted black, or “brand new” spares that were put into service after a sitting on the back of the vehicle for a nearly a decade.
Tires are highly-engineered, safety-critical products that serve our society well, but the reality is: they have limitations. When the industry recognizes that fact, I’ll believe Smith’s claim that consumers are “the most important link in our distribution chain.”
Sean Kane
Safety Research & Strategies Inc.
Rehoboth, MA
508-252-2333
www.safetyresearch.net
