C vs CP tyres - ride comfort only (1 Viewer)

[a900ss]

I have a 4T van, only bought it end of last year, so not owned too long but the front ride comfort is AWFUL!!! (a Class Hymer Fiat based)

It has Continental Camper CP tyres which are almost brand new so I’m reluctant to change them but has anyone gone from CP to C and noticed a step change in comfort? Not a small change, I’m looking for a big change. I’m not asking for opinions if you haven’t changed from C to CP (or the other way round). I’m really to trying to ascertain some real fact. (Sorry if that appears rude or dismissive).

Pressures are at 55PSI front and 65PSI rear as per conti guidelines. I know Michelin suggest higher pressures but I really don’t think I could handle that.

It’s fine on motorways and dual carriageways but UK roads are pot hole heaven at the moment and I’m starting to not enjoy taking it out.

(For the C vs CP arguments, I’m not interested in standing around and safer sidewalls. I use my van a lot, circa 12k per annum and the load ratings are all in order. I’m ONLY interested in comfort in this thread).

Thanks in advance.

PS tyre size is 225/75 16

 

[Hettie's Crew]

We went from 215/70 15 (109) Continental CP tyres to 225/70 15 (112) Continental C tyres (4Season) and noticed a significant reduction in noise with a more comfortable ride because we were able to use lower pressures.
The choice of 4Season was recommended by Continental technical department for that size.
2014 Hymer B544.

 

[Wh05apk]

Our last van we went to michelin cross climates on a "c" from michelin cp and there was only a slight improvement (not enough to justify a change) that was on a 5t tag. We used the pressures from the tyre safe website (similar to yours) which improved things massively.

 

[Guigsy]

We went from 215/70 15 (109) Continental CP tyres to 225/70 15 (112) Continental C tyres (4Season) and noticed a significant reduction in noise with a more comfortable ride because we were able to use lower pressures.
The choice of 4Season was recommended by Continental technical department for that size.
2014 Hymer B544.

I did a similar swap but on 16" wheels in my A-class. It went from me wincing every time we went over a road imperfection, generally unpleasant to drive, to it being merely rattly. It was definitely worth the cost, even though my tyres were nearly new.

 

[Lenny HB]

Changed from Michilen CP's (worse than Conties) to Toyo Observe Van, vast improvement in ride quality and grip levels also had full air suspension fitted.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[a900ss]

I did a similar swap but on 16" wheels in my A-class. It went from me wincing every time we went over a road imperfection, generally unpleasant to drive, to it being merely rattly. It was definitely worth the cost, even though my tyres were nearly new.

'Wincing every time' is exactly how I feel as I can see the road imperfection ahead, avoid what I can but still know it's going to be rough and crash. Thanks

 

[a900ss]

Changed from Michilen CP's (worse than Conties) to Toyo Observe Van, vast improvement in ride quality and grip levels also had full air suspension fitted.

I'd love to go full air but £8k on a 2010 van doesn't make sense.

 

[bigtree]

I didn’t find the ride too bad when I bought the Fiat Carthago as I found it had the VB heavy springs on the front, I then started the uprate procedure changing from CP to C tyres and higher load ratings. That improved the ride a bit more, I then got full VB air which is very comfortable.

 

[a900ss]

I have had the front suspension overhauled as it was a bit low when I bought it. It was fitted with new coils (Heavy Duty ROC4026198) and Monroe Magnum Dampers. So I think it's the tyres more than the suspension that's causing it. Admittedly, full air would defo help.

 

[Madcaravanner]

WE changed to all round Maxxis Vansmart on recommendation from our motorhome owning Tyre Fitter company boss
and since then they have also brought out the Maxxis Campro MAC 2
The ride is very quiet and comfortable (65 psi all round) and they seem to have less wear per 1000 miles than the old Continentals and they are all weather too

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

The following year, I went to VB 4C full air. The step change was roughly the same as when I took it from camper to van tyres. It's still not plush, and it still booms on potholes, but it's less stiff and jiggly than many modern cars. Just not as quiet, but what do you expect from a plastic box on pretty agricultural chassis!

 

[Simon Meadwell]

I have rough ride. Fitted semi air on rear not much better. ( although not adjusted pressures yet.) Then heavy duty VB dampers on front small improvement so van tyres next but still got a lot of meat on my continental campers so nextyear.

 

[a900ss]

Changed from Michilen CP's (worse than Conties) to Toyo Observe Van, vast improvement in ride quality and grip levels also had full air suspension fitted.

Arent these Winters though? OK using all year round?

 

[Lenny HB]

Arent these Winters though? OK using all year round?

Yes & yes.

 

[bigtree]

I fitted Nankang AW8’s which are all season mainly for the ratings they had , I wanted a bit more grip due to the van being fwd. If I had just gone ordinary C tyres I would have fitted Nexen Roadian CT8’s which I had on my Frankia, they were excellent.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[roadwarrior]

this is an old thread but its worth saying for others, cp tyres can have 3 attributes over conventional van tyres ( which are quite legal in this country ) ( i use continental vanco camper myself) the most contentious one is that just because they can be blown up to 80psi does not mean you have to - and CERTAINLY isnt compulsary like some think. it has tough sidewalls and so is much more resistant to being parked up for 5 months on the drive before going out of shape. those who do lots of miles round the 12 month calender really dont need them as van tyres will do the job just as well in that scenario. Obviously if they can go to 80psi they can take more load - having just upped mine to 4250 i would have needed them now anyway as it happens, but even now im only putting in 73psi. and thirdly mine are low temp and snow acceptable with the 3 snowflakes on a mountain symbol. All conventional tyres (summer tyres) at 6c starts to harden and start to become unsafe. I have no idea about road noise as the winchcombe has a merc engine and i can barely hear the engine never mind any road tyre noise.

 

[Lenny HB]

Obviously if they can go to 80psi they can take more load -

Not so if you look at tyre load rating standard van tyres are available in higher load rating than CP tyres.

 

[roadwarrior]

Not so if you look at tyre load rating standard van tyres are available in higher load rating than CP tyres.

noted and stand corrected, and should spark some more psi related questions im sure, i was just commenting on some folks insistance that if it says 80psi thats what they put in, regardless of actual needs

 

[maison]

We have just switched to Falken All Season tyres.

Ride is much improved, Road imperfections are smoothed out but potholes, sunken manhole covers etc still elicit a “crash” over them due to the harsh FIAT Ducato suspension. However, even this is reduced.

We were running CP tyres at 56psi front and 62 psi rear. Now, using Falken’s own guide to tyre pressure v axle loads we are at running at 46psi front and 48psi rear, so that softens the ride too.

Overall a big improvement but the FIAT suspension limits what can be achieved.

 

[MichaelT]

We have just switched to Falken All Season tyres.

Ride is much improved, Road imperfections are smoothed out but potholes, sunken manhole covers etc still elicit a “crash” over them due to the harsh FIAT Ducato suspension. However, even this is reduced.

We were running CP tyres at 56psi front and 62 psi rear. Now, using Falken’s own guide to tyre pressure v axle loads we are at running at 46psi front and 48psi rear, so that softens the ride too.

Overall a big improvement but the FIAT suspension limits what can be achieved.

Doesn't it roll more in corners at those pressures? We have CP and I run at 62 front 72 rear, still a bit hard ride but I found if I set lower pressures it felt we were rolling on corners and it felt unstable.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[maison]

Not that I have noticed so far. The FIAT suspension is firm enough to limit roll.

Our maximum weight is 3.2tonnes so we are fairly lightweight, hence Falken’s recommendation for tyre pressures.

 

[Hettie's Crew]

the most contentious one is that just because they can be blown up to 80psi does not mean you have to - and CERTAINLY isnt compulsary like some think.

Certainly don’t agree with this statement, they are designed to operate at those high pressures and their rigid side walls suffer at lower pressures that result in much more side wall flex, cracking then occurs.
Michelin will only ever give a slightly lower pressure for front axle fitting because of the lower axle weight.

 

[dunnah01]

Now running out Michelin Agilis at 50/60 front 60/70 rear and the ride is actually OK on our Alko 4.25t van. The 80/90 f&r that Michelin always quote was very crashy.
If there are any issues I won't let you know because I'll be upside down in a hedge but so far after about 20k we're still good although the fronts are due to be changed after a 35k total so far.

 

[roadwarrior]

Certainly don’t agree with this statement, they are designed to operate at those high pressures and their rigid side walls suffer at lower pressures that result in much more side wall flex, cracking then occurs.
Michelin will only ever give a slightly lower pressure for front axle fitting because of the lower axle weight.

rubbish, so your saying because the sidewalls are more rigid they will flex more ? I think you have your thinking topsy turvy.

 

[Guigsy]

the most contentious one is that just because they can be blown up to 80psi does not mean you have to

I think if you ask Michelin or Continental, that is their recommended pressure.

Whereas with van tyres, they provide a range of lower pressures, depending on axle load.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[roadwarrior]

I think if you ask Michelin or Continental, that is their recommended pressure.

Whereas with van tyres, they provide a range of lower pressures, depending on axle load.

go ask them then

 

[Gellyneck]

rubbish, so your saying because the sidewalls are more rigid they will flex more ? I think you have your thinking topsy turvy.

Think the comment being made is the if you run them at a lower pressure there is the potential for side wall cracking as they're designed to be inflated to the recommended pressure.

 

[roadwarrior]

go ask them then,but be sure to ask the question in an impartial manner, as i said this is a contentious subject because nobody knows and everybody is an expert and everybody thinks they know best, but simple "unbending " laws of physics ( pun intended) will state that a more rigid item will flex LESS not more - THAT, after all is the whole purpose of a more rigid sidewall, Why would tyre manufacturer possibly say 80psi is perfect on all vehicles in all circumstances -that would be illogical would it not ? I did once on this forum attempt to teach how to assess the amount of air needed on any vehicle purely by looking at a tyre from a certain angle.
I used to MAKE and was trained to repair tyres at Dunlop in erdington Birmingham. We were taught how to repair a tyre before beinglet near making tyres. But i am aware of this, if you choose not to hear you will hear nothing and you will always be be right in all things. I have stated what i know to be true, it is your right to ignore it.
WE motorhomers can be a grumpy lot and despite having a common love we all go about it in a differant way.

 

[Hettie's Crew]

rubbish, so your saying because the sidewalls are more rigid they will flex more ? I think you have your thinking topsy turvy.

No, I’m saying they are not meant to flex much in normal operation at the recommended pressures, therefore reducing the pressures puts more flex into the side wall than they are designed for and the rigid construction of the side wall can’t cope, resulting in cracking.

 

[Gellyneck]

go ask them then,but be sure to ask the question in an impartial manner, as i said this is a contentious subject because nobody knows and everybody is an expert and everybody thinks they know best, but simple "unbending " laws of physics ( pun intended) will state that a more rigid item will flex LESS not more - THAT, after all is the whole purpose of a more rigid sidewall, Why would tyre manufacturer possibly say 80psi is perfect on all vehicles in all circumstances -that would be illogical would it not ? I did once on this forum attempt to teach how to assess the amount of air needed on any vehicle purely by looking at a tyre from a certain angle.
I used to MAKE and was trained to repair tyres at Dunlop in erdington Birmingham. We were taught how to repair a tyre before beinglet near making tyres. But i am aware of this, if you choose not to hear you will hear nothing and you will always be be right in all things. I have stated what i know to be true, it is your right to ignore it.
WE motorhomers can be a grumpy lot and despite having a common love we all go about it in a differant way.

Is that a response to my one liner above?

If so, I made no comment as to the sidewalls flexing LESS.

In fact, if the sidewall was cracking it would mean it was potentially flexing more.

I have asked the manufacturer and they advised (so straight from the horses mouth and not from a third party) for 225/75 R 16 CP 8ply with a load rating of 116/118 -
Fronts @ 58psi and rears @ 76psi for our maximum axle weights.
At their maximum load rating they also advised fronts @ 69psi and rears @ 80psi (albeit they quoted them in bars).

The 10 ply version pressures are slightly different.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}