Re: Tires tires tires....

[noway]

Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?

"William Warren" <wbwarren3@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:a4QBa.26076$Io.2168281@newsread2.prod.itd.ear thlink.net...
> Well,I am new to newsgroups,but my mother has a 1999 Lexus RX300,and the
> standard tires(Bridgestones)costed us about $300 for 1 tire,plus,the place
> where we were getting it,didnt have one.No offence,but I suggest,that when
> replacing tires,get different tires.
> Sincerly,
> William
> "Cliff Freeling" <clifffreeling@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:a0698655.0305050749.63307df6@posting.google.c om...
> > Tires to me are just round rubber things that (hopefully) give me
> > a safe and good ride; I don't keep up with them or the people who
> > make them.
> >
> > I'm looking for a new set at present, but I don't want to drop
> > over half a grand on something that's going to simply piss me
> > off like the last set of Dunlops I bought (bad flat spots).
> > Has Dunlop bought Michelin? A guy at a tire place told me that
> > on the phone yesterday, but I'm wondering if he was just babbling.
> > He said Dunlop used "soft rubber" which made them prone to the
> > flat spots I mentioned. Without giving it much thought, just going
> > by things I've heard over the years, I've followed the line of
> > thought that the big name tires not to buy are Goodyear, Firestone,
> > and now, Dunlop. I'll always remember a set of tires I bought for
> > my little Mazda over ten years ago. They were called Kleber (French,
> > and I believe I was told they were Michelin's low-end product).
> > They were the best damn tires I ever had...great ride and handling;
> > and they stayed that way till I sold the car; never a bit of cupping.
> > But it seems I've gotten more junk than not since then for my cars.
> > What's the quality of Continental? Bridgestone? Is Michelin still
> > the great tire it once was? I had a set of them for my Toyota back
> > in the '70s and they were tops. Thanks for reading and good feedback
> > welcome!
> >
> > ---
> > Cliff
> >
>
>

[Philip®]

Well........ (wince)

"Bridgestone Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, is the world's
largest manufacturer of tires and other rubber products. Tires account
for 80 percent of Bridgestone Group sales worldwide. The company also
manufactures industrial rubber and chemical products, sporting goods,
and other diversified products. It sells its tires and other products
in more than 150 nations." (looks like Bridgestone owns
Firestone)

http://mirror.bridgestone-firestone.com/corporate/profile_fr.html

--

~Philip

"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried


>noway wrote:
> Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?
>
>Cliff

[Liam Devlin]

Mark A wrote:
> Bridgestone and Firestone merged, although Bridgestone is the one that
> really runs the show.

Bridgestone probably picked up Firestone at fire sale prices. :)

[Mark A]

"Liam Devlin" <LiamD@XXXX.optonline.net> wrote in message
news:3EFBF123.8090501@XXXX.optonline.net...
> Mark A wrote:
> > Bridgestone and Firestone merged, although Bridgestone is the one that
> > really runs the show.
>
> Bridgestone probably picked up Firestone at fire sale prices. :)
>
It happened in the early 1990's.

[noway]

Well hopefully there tires are better now, cause Firestone has had crap
tires all through history. It didn't start with the big recall, it was
always like that and it finally caught up with them. I just bought a new
Civic, and am seriously considering Michelin MXV4 Plus tires as soon as the
insurance company pays me for my car that was totaled due to some idiot
smashing me in the back end.

And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on the car
so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of any type.

Back in 76 I bought a set of Firestone 731 or 721 whatever they were, and
used them for 3 months, couldn't stand them, and changed to Michelin. Bought
a Toyota in 90, came with Firestones and they lasted 5000 miles at which
time one of them totally blew out on the highway. Bought a set of Michelins,
and the car drove so much better.

My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad stories
about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion Goodyear and
Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I tend to agree with
more and more.

Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within a week
brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins. They sucked so
bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega sway. I just told
them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if they wanted to take it for a
drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would have agreed.

"Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:p3QKa.14558$C83.1376607@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
> Well........ (wince)
>
> "Bridgestone Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, is the world's
> largest manufacturer of tires and other rubber products. Tires account
> for 80 percent of Bridgestone Group sales worldwide. The company also
> manufactures industrial rubber and chemical products, sporting goods,
> and other diversified products. It sells its tires and other products
> in more than 150 nations." (looks like Bridgestone owns
> Firestone)
>
> http://mirror.bridgestone-firestone.com/corporate/profile_fr.html
>
> --
>
> ~Philip
>
> "Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
>
>
> >noway wrote:
> > Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?
> >
> >Cliff
>
>

[Philip®]

Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some very
hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even the
OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.

I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
exclusively.
--

~Philip

"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried


>noway wrote:
> And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
> the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
> any type.
>SNIP<
>
> My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
> stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
> Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
> tend to agree with more and more.
>
> Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
> a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
> They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
> sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
> they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
> have agreed.
>

[BenDover@mailcity.com]

It should be pointed out that Bridgestone, like the Japanese auto
makers, pays no US federal corporate income taxes on profits they
earn in the US because of tax credits for taxes paid in Japan.
Be as smart as the Japanese support you own economy 'Buy
American,' buy Goodyear.




"Philip" wrote:
>
> Well........ (wince)
>
> "Bridgestone Corporation, headquartered in Tokyo, is the world's
> largest manufacturer of tires and other rubber products. Tires account
> for 80 percent of Bridgestone Group sales worldwide. The company also
> manufactures industrial rubber and chemical products, sporting goods,
> and other diversified products. It sells its tires and other products
> in more than 150 nations." (looks like Bridgestone owns
> Firestone)
>
> http://mirror.bridgestone-firestone.com/corporate/profile_fr.html
>
> --
>
> ~Philip
>
> "Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
>
> >noway wrote:
> > Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?
> >
> >Cliff

[noway]

I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they had,
and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be better for
general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The owners manual
doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS brakes, so not sure
how something like 195 60 15 would affect that, but there is very little
difference in size.

I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them don't come
in 185 65 15.

Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.

"Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
> Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
> too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
> yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
> rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some very
> hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even the
> OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.
>
> I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
> and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
> exclusively.
> --
>
> ~Philip
>
> "Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
>
>
> >noway wrote:
> > And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
> > the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
> > any type.
> >SNIP<
> >
> > My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
> > stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
> > Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
> > tend to agree with more and more.
> >
> > Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
> > a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
> > They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
> > sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
> > they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
> > have agreed.
> >
>
>
>

[TM]

Do stay away from the MXV4 Plus. These tires are know for the very poor
performance on wet roads, traction is terrible, cornering is worse,
braking is almost acceptable.

The MXV4 Plus that I had, had the added shimmy that could not be
balanced out.

Check the Maxima and Subaru newsgroups (the ones I read) for user
comments and also check the Tire Rack reviews section.

I now use Yokohama and I am a happy camper.


noway wrote:
> I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they had,
> and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be better for
> general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The owners manual
> doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS brakes, so not sure
> how something like 195 60 15 would affect that, but there is very little
> difference in size.
>
> I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them don't come
> in 185 65 15.
>
> Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.
>
> "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
>
>>Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
>>too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
>>yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
>>rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some very
>>hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even the
>>OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.
>>
>>I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
>>and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
>>exclusively.
>>--
>>
>> ~Philip
>>
>>"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
>>describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
>>
>>
>>
>>>noway wrote:
>>>And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
>>>the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
>>>any type.
>>>SNIP<
>>>
>>>My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
>>>stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
>>>Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
>>>tend to agree with more and more.
>>>
>>>Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
>>>a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
>>>They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
>>>sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
>>>they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
>>>have agreed.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Stephen Clark]

I beg to differ with you...my MXV4's have been excellent in all respects.
Just realize they are not high-performance tires, they are touring tires. If
you had problems, perhaps you are pushing them too hard, or your
expectations are too high. If you had shimmy, they were not balanced
properly, or you had defective tires, possible in any brand.

There is a reason they have been standard equipment on BMW and Mercedes for
years.


--
Stephen Clark
89 Audi 100
99 Lexus RX300
Houston, Texas USA




"TM" <tm@dontspam.me> wrote in message news:3EFCAAE3.1020703@dontspam.me...
> Do stay away from the MXV4 Plus. These tires are know for the very poor
> performance on wet roads, traction is terrible, cornering is worse,
> braking is almost acceptable.
>
> The MXV4 Plus that I had, had the added shimmy that could not be
> balanced out.
>
> Check the Maxima and Subaru newsgroups (the ones I read) for user
> comments and also check the Tire Rack reviews section.
>
> I now use Yokohama and I am a happy camper.
>
>
> noway wrote:
> > I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they
had,
> > and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be better
for
> > general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The owners manual
> > doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS brakes, so not
sure
> > how something like 195 60 15 would affect that, but there is very little
> > difference in size.
> >
> > I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them don't
come
> > in 185 65 15.
> >
> > Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.
> >
> > "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
> >
> >>Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
> >>too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
> >>yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
> >>rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some very
> >>hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even the
> >>OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.
> >>
> >>I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
> >>and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
> >>exclusively.
> >>--
> >>
> >> ~Philip
> >>
> >>"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> >>describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>noway wrote:
> >>>And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
> >>>the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
> >>>any type.
> >>>SNIP<
> >>>
> >>>My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
> >>>stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
> >>>Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
> >>>tend to agree with more and more.
> >>>
> >>>Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
> >>>a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
> >>>They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
> >>>sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
> >>>they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
> >>>have agreed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Lee Rothman]

That's a bunch of bull poop. The MXV4+ tires are amazing in the wet weather
and even heavy hail storms (which I tested them in). I haven't had them on
actual snow yet, but I'm not worried based on my experience in that hail
storm. In rain I can easily cruise at 80+MPH on the interstate and not a
slip to be had. What else could you want from a tire? They aren't
cheap.........but quality never is. I've been cornering hard with them in
Northern California on my trip this week through mountain passes and they
just won't break loose. I'm more impressed with these tires the more I drive
with them. I may well replace them with the like tire when the time
comes...........I must say I have been VERY pleasantly surprised after
reading all the garbage about this tire. They are VERY worthy to say the
least..........

[Timothy J. Lee]

In article <mA0La.333873$3n5.150355@news2.central.cox.net>,
noway <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they had,
>and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be better for
>general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper.

The MXV4 Plus is a low rolling resistance tire that is less sporty
than the various Pilot tires. It is also usually very expensive.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

[Brian Gordon]

In article <j1PKa.329361$3n5.164650@news2.central.cox.net>,
noway <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?
> [...]

Firestone -- weren't they the company that replaced tires for free, even though
it was a Ford problem, not theirs?

--
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Brian Gordon -->briang@panix.com<-- <This space for rent> |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

[noway]

I've been searching the net for reviews on MXV4+ and the bad reviews seem to
be from people that don't do normal maintenance on there car, don't own a
tire gauge, or don't know how to spell. Tires need to be properly inflated,
and aligned.

I had a set of Yokohama's for a week, and luckly sears took them back, cause
I'd go into a turn on the highway, have to oversteer and wait for my back
end to catch up, then countersteer to make up for the sway. It felt like I
was driving an overloaded car. I tried tire pressures plus and minus 1 - 4
pounds from recommended and it didn't help a bit. Replaced them with
Michelin Weatherwise.

I also have a Hyundia Elantra that came with MXV4's and they are a real nice
tire. I can do some pretty heavy duty corning with that car, very little
sway when I whip the wheel back and forth on the highway.


"TM" <tm@dontspam.me> wrote in message news:3EFCAAE3.1020703@dontspam.me...
> Do stay away from the MXV4 Plus. These tires are know for the very poor
> performance on wet roads, traction is terrible, cornering is worse,
> braking is almost acceptable.
>
> The MXV4 Plus that I had, had the added shimmy that could not be
> balanced out.
>
> Check the Maxima and Subaru newsgroups (the ones I read) for user
> comments and also check the Tire Rack reviews section.
>
> I now use Yokohama and I am a happy camper.
>
>
> noway wrote:
> > I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they
had,
> > and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be better
for
> > general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The owners manual
> > doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS brakes, so not
sure
> > how something like 195 60 15 would affect that, but there is very little
> > difference in size.
> >
> > I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them don't
come
> > in 185 65 15.
> >
> > Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.
> >
> > "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
> >
> >>Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
> >>too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
> >>yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
> >>rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some very
> >>hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even the
> >>OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.
> >>
> >>I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
> >>and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
> >>exclusively.
> >>--
> >>
> >> ~Philip
> >>
> >>"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> >>describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>noway wrote:
> >>>And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
> >>>the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
> >>>any type.
> >>>SNIP<
> >>>
> >>>My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
> >>>stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
> >>>Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
> >>>tend to agree with more and more.
> >>>
> >>>Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
> >>>a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
> >>>They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
> >>>sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
> >>>they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
> >>>have agreed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

[Philip®]

"noway" Check http://www.tirerack.com For a sampling of what
I found: (sorry for the huge link).

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compare1.jsp?sortCode=37550&width=185%2F&
ratio=65&diameter=15&jump=Y&performance=HPAS&performance=GTAS&performan
ce=PAS&performance=AS&startIndex=0&pagelen=20&pagenum=1&pagemark=1&sear
ch=true&vehicleSearch=true&dg=true&sortValue=18&minLoad=S&loadRank=2&x=
53&y=4

--

~Philip

"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried


>noway wrote:
> I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they
> had, and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might
> be better for general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The
> owners manual doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS
> brakes, so not sure how something like 195 60 15 would affect that,
> but there is very little difference in size.
>
> I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them
> don't come in 185 65 15.
>
> Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.
>
> "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
>> Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this
>> size too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in
Costco
>> yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
>> rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some
>> very hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well.
>> Even the OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at
>> times.
>>
>> I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
>> and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
>> exclusively.
>> --
>>
>> ~Philip
>>
>> "Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
>> describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
>>
>>
>>> noway wrote:
>>> And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15)
on
>>> the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series
of
>>> any type.
>>> SNIP<
>>>
>>> My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
>>> stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
>>> Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
>>> tend to agree with more and more.
>>>
>>> Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and
>>> within
>>> a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
>>> They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck.
>>> Mega sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and
>>> if
>>> they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they
would
>>> have agreed.

[Philip®]

"AMAZING" is the word I would use too. One is pretty hard pressed to
get a light weight front wheel drive car past 70 mph when front wheels
are hydroplaning over deep water. :^)
--

~Philip

"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried


>Lee Rothman wrote:
> That's a bunch of bull poop. The MXV4+ tires are amazing in the wet
> weather and even heavy hail storms (which I tested them in). I
> haven't had them on actual snow yet, but I'm not worried based on my
> experience in that hail storm. In rain I can easily cruise at 80+MPH
> on the interstate and not a slip to be had.

['nuther Bob]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 05:14:19 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>"AMAZING" is the word I would use too. One is pretty hard pressed to
>get a light weight front wheel drive car past 70 mph when front wheels
>are hydroplaning over deep water. :^)


My experience too. Michelins always wear well, they always suck in
the rain.

Bob

['nuther Bob]

On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:33:20 GMT, BenDover@mailcity.com wrote:

>It should be pointed out that Bridgestone, like the Japanese auto
>makers, pays no US federal corporate income taxes on profits they
>earn in the US because of tax credits for taxes paid in Japan.
>Be as smart as the Japanese support you own economy 'Buy
>American,' buy Goodyear.

You might want to take that up with the US Government then - they
set up the tax code.

While you're checking that out, you might want to check out what
some major "US" companies are doing to avoid paying any taxes
by using the "Bermuda Tax Loophole". Be sure to note who's company
was first to take advantage of that.

Bob

[mikehoutz]

Mr Shumacher seems to like them
"noway" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:j1PKa.329361$3n5.164650@news2.central.cox.net ...
> Bridgestone is a Firestone company. Need I say more?
>
> "William Warren" <wbwarren3@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:a4QBa.26076$Io.2168281@newsread2.prod.itd.ear thlink.net...
> > Well,I am new to newsgroups,but my mother has a 1999 Lexus RX300,and the
> > standard tires(Bridgestones)costed us about $300 for 1 tire,plus,the
place
> > where we were getting it,didnt have one.No offence,but I suggest,that
when
> > replacing tires,get different tires.
> > Sincerly,
> > William
> > "Cliff Freeling" <clifffreeling@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:a0698655.0305050749.63307df6@posting.google.c om...
> > > Tires to me are just round rubber things that (hopefully) give me
> > > a safe and good ride; I don't keep up with them or the people who
> > > make them.
> > >
> > > I'm looking for a new set at present, but I don't want to drop
> > > over half a grand on something that's going to simply piss me
> > > off like the last set of Dunlops I bought (bad flat spots).
> > > Has Dunlop bought Michelin? A guy at a tire place told me that
> > > on the phone yesterday, but I'm wondering if he was just babbling.
> > > He said Dunlop used "soft rubber" which made them prone to the
> > > flat spots I mentioned. Without giving it much thought, just going
> > > by things I've heard over the years, I've followed the line of
> > > thought that the big name tires not to buy are Goodyear, Firestone,
> > > and now, Dunlop. I'll always remember a set of tires I bought for
> > > my little Mazda over ten years ago. They were called Kleber (French,
> > > and I believe I was told they were Michelin's low-end product).
> > > They were the best damn tires I ever had...great ride and handling;
> > > and they stayed that way till I sold the car; never a bit of cupping.
> > > But it seems I've gotten more junk than not since then for my cars.
> > > What's the quality of Continental? Bridgestone? Is Michelin still
> > > the great tire it once was? I had a set of them for my Toyota back
> > > in the '70s and they were tops. Thanks for reading and good feedback
> > > welcome!
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Cliff
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Liam Devlin]

mikehoutz wrote:
> Mr Shumacher seems to like them

You aren't seriously comparing racing tires to street tires, are you?

[Liam Devlin]

Philip® wrote:
> "AMAZING" is the word I would use too. One is pretty hard pressed to
> get a light weight front wheel drive car past 70 mph when front wheels
> are hydroplaning over deep water. :^)

Are you claiming that all Hondas (or "light weight front wheel drive
cars") hydroplane at 70 MPH, no matter which tires or pressures?

[MajorDome@mailcity.com]

You are correct foreign corporations, particularly Japanese
corporations, have a gigantic advantage over American
corporations by not paying millions of dollars in federal
corporate taxes every year and more American corporation are
moving their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing
field. Soon they will take the jobs as well. We should all be
writing to our Congressman and Senators to change the tax code to
one similar to that in Europe that requires taxes be paid on
profits earned within the country. In the meantime we can lower
our own tax load, the extra amount we pay to make up for the
money lost to Japan, by buying products made by American tax
paying corporations. The first to take tax advantage by moving
off shore were the ship owners in the fifties. All American ship
are registered in counties like Panama and Libya. American
corporations are moving 'off shore' as we speak, over 250 did so
in 2001. If American soon don't wise up and buy American products
the only job skill your children and grand children will need is
how to say; 'Do you want fries with that?' or 'Welcome to
WalMart'


mike hunt



"'nuther Bob <" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:33:20 GMT, BenDover@mailcity.com wrote:
>
> >It should be pointed out that Bridgestone, like the Japanese auto
> >makers, pays no US federal corporate income taxes on profits they
> >earn in the US because of tax credits for taxes paid in Japan.
> >Be as smart as the Japanese support you own economy 'Buy
> >American,' buy Goodyear.
>
> You might want to take that up with the US Government then - they
> set up the tax code.
>
> While you're checking that out, you might want to check out what
> some major "US" companies are doing to avoid paying any taxes
> by using the "Bermuda Tax Loophole". Be sure to note who's company
> was first to take advantage of that.
>
> Bob

[John D.]

Probably...but you'll have to say it in Spanish!

It's already happening in our southern border cities.

John D.



MajorDome@mailcity.com wrote in message news:<3EFDFFBA.2AFA67A@mailcity.com>...
> You are correct foreign corporations, particularly Japanese
> corporations, have a gigantic advantage over American
> corporations by not paying millions of dollars in federal
> corporate taxes every year and more American corporation are
> moving their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing
> field. Soon they will take the jobs as well. We should all be
> writing to our Congressman and Senators to change the tax code to
> one similar to that in Europe that requires taxes be paid on
> profits earned within the country. In the meantime we can lower
> our own tax load, the extra amount we pay to make up for the
> money lost to Japan, by buying products made by American tax
> paying corporations. The first to take tax advantage by moving
> off shore were the ship owners in the fifties. All American ship
> are registered in counties like Panama and Libya. American
> corporations are moving 'off shore' as we speak, over 250 did so
> in 2001. If American soon don't wise up and buy American products
> the only job skill your children and grand children will need is
> how to say; 'Do you want fries with that?' or 'Welcome to
> WalMart'
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> "'nuther Bob <" wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:33:20 GMT, BenDover@mailcity.com wrote:
> >
> > >It should be pointed out that Bridgestone, like the Japanese auto
> > >makers, pays no US federal corporate income taxes on profits they
> > >earn in the US because of tax credits for taxes paid in Japan.
> > >Be as smart as the Japanese support you own economy 'Buy
> > >American,' buy Goodyear.
> >
> > You might want to take that up with the US Government then - they
> > set up the tax code.
> >
> > While you're checking that out, you might want to check out what
> > some major "US" companies are doing to avoid paying any taxes
> > by using the "Bermuda Tax Loophole". Be sure to note who's company
> > was first to take advantage of that.
> >
> > Bob

['nuther Bob]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:07:12 GMT, MajorDome@mailcity.com wrote:

>No, it was FORD that replaced tires for free, even though
>it was a Firestones problem, not Fords. Later on Firestone
>also replaced tires for free.

Firestone supplied the crappy tires. Ford suggested setting the
pressure to 26 lbs because their crappy SUV flipped over too
easily. It's all in the court documents. We can let the lawyers
argue over who's 51% at fault.

Bob

['nuther Bob]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:54:51 GMT, MajorDome@mailcity.com wrote:

>and more American corporation are
>moving their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing
>field.

This is not quite the same issue. Large "American" corporations
that earn billions in *US* profits each year are moving the
"Corporate Headquarters" to Bermuda to avoid paying any taxes.
There are no jobs going to Bermuda, just a few pieces of paper.

Do a web search on "Bermuda Tax Loophole". You can ignore the
political nonsense at first and concentrate on the issue of the
taxpayers being ripped off. Once you understand it you can go
back and notice that the Republicans - the guys always telling
me that they are going to lower my taxes - are fighting tooth and
nail against changing the rules to stop this rip off. You might
also notice the Dick Cheney's company Halliburton was one of the
first to exploit this loophole.

Bob

[wolftim]

I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
Great Tire!!
"Stephen Clark" <noone@nowhere.not> wrote in message
news:3efcba72$1_1@127.0.0.1...
> I beg to differ with you...my MXV4's have been excellent in all respects.
> Just realize they are not high-performance tires, they are touring tires.
If
> you had problems, perhaps you are pushing them too hard, or your
> expectations are too high. If you had shimmy, they were not balanced
> properly, or you had defective tires, possible in any brand.
>
> There is a reason they have been standard equipment on BMW and Mercedes
for
> years.
>
>
> --
> Stephen Clark
> 89 Audi 100
> 99 Lexus RX300
> Houston, Texas USA
>
>
>
>
> "TM" <tm@dontspam.me> wrote in message
news:3EFCAAE3.1020703@dontspam.me...
> > Do stay away from the MXV4 Plus. These tires are know for the very poor
> > performance on wet roads, traction is terrible, cornering is worse,
> > braking is almost acceptable.
> >
> > The MXV4 Plus that I had, had the added shimmy that could not be
> > balanced out.
> >
> > Check the Maxima and Subaru newsgroups (the ones I read) for user
> > comments and also check the Tire Rack reviews section.
> >
> > I now use Yokohama and I am a happy camper.
> >
> >
> > noway wrote:
> > > I checked www.michelin.com and went through all the pilot series they
> had,
> > > and none had that size, but the MXV4 Plus looked like it might be
better
> for
> > > general driving anyway, and likely a lttle cheaper. The owners manual
> > > doesn't recommend using different size tires due to ABS brakes, so not
> sure
> > > how something like 195 60 15 would affect that, but there is very
little
> > > difference in size.
> > >
> > > I also got on Sears.com and checked there tires and a lot of them
don't
> come
> > > in 185 65 15.
> > >
> > > Haven't delt with Dunlop much except for motorcycle tires.
> > >
> > > "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:QzYKa.14898$C83.1417104@newsread1.prod.itd.ea rthlink.net...
> > >
> > >>Why is a 185/65x15 and odd sized tire? My Corolla came with this size
> > >>too, yet 195's are also fitted to the same rim. I was in Costco
> > >>yesterday and noted a Michelin of this size with a 680 tire tread
> > >>rating and and advertised 80k miles life. That has GOT to be some
very
> > >>hard rubber .... rubber that I would not expect to grip well. Even
the
> > >>OEM Goodyears are 400 or 480 and they howl pretty easily at times.
> > >>
> > >>I would agree with your father. The trucking company I retired from
> > >>and two LTL's I drove for used Dunlop, Michelin, and Goodyear
> > >>exclusively.
> > >>--
> > >>
> > >> ~Philip
> > >>
> > >>"Multiculturalism and coercive tolerance of bizarre lifestyles
> > >>describes a social experiment, not a civilization." --Paul Gottfried
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>noway wrote:
> > >>>And Honda in there infinite wisdom put odd size tires (185 65 15) on
> > >>>the car so I'm unable to match the size for Michelin Pilot series of
> > >>>any type.
> > >>>SNIP<
> > >>>
> > >>>My father drove truck all his life, and he can tell you lots of bad
> > >>>stories about Firestone Tires, all through history. In his opinion
> > >>>Goodyear and Michelin are the only good tires on the road, which I
> > >>>tend to agree with more and more.
> > >>>
> > >>>Then there is Yokohama. I bought a set of those for a car, and within
> > >>>a week brought them back to Sears and exchanged them for Michelins.
> > >>>They sucked so bad my car drove like an overloaded pickup truck. Mega
> > >>>sway. I just told them my car was unsafe with these tires, and if
> > >>>they wanted to take it for a drive, be my guest. I'm sure they would
> > >>>have agreed.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
Newsgroups
> ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

[Timothy J. Lee]

In article <3efcba72$1_1@127.0.0.1>, Stephen Clark <noone@nowhere.not> wrote:
>I beg to differ with you...my MXV4's have been excellent in all respects.
>Just realize they are not high-performance tires, they are touring tires.

It is likely that they (and other tires commonly used as OE) get a
lot of poor reviews because they came with the car, and the buyer
has significantly different preferences for tires than the car company
does. E.g. the manufacturer may want a tire that gives a quiet ride,
low rolling resistance (for good fuel economy), reasonably good
handling, and some all-weather capability. But some buyers may want
a really sporty tire and will complain that the OE tires do not handle
well enough. Those driving in lots of snow will probably find dedicated
snow tires to be better than OE all-season tires for that purpose.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

[MikeHunt2@mailcity.com]

True, but I suppose that is better than importing the stuff
they pick in the US! ;)


mike hunt



"John D." wrote:
>
> Probably...but you'll have to say it in Spanish!
>
> It's already happening in our southern border cities.
>
> John D.
>
> MajorDome@mailcity.com wrote in message news:<3EFDFFBA.2AFA67A@mailcity.com>...
> > You are correct foreign corporations, particularly Japanese
> > corporations, have a gigantic advantage over American
> > corporations by not paying millions of dollars in federal
> > corporate taxes every year and more American corporation are
> > moving their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing
> > field. Soon they will take the jobs as well. We should all be
> > writing to our Congressman and Senators to change the tax code to
> > one similar to that in Europe that requires taxes be paid on
> > profits earned within the country. In the meantime we can lower
> > our own tax load, the extra amount we pay to make up for the
> > money lost to Japan, by buying products made by American tax
> > paying corporations. The first to take tax advantage by moving
> > off shore were the ship owners in the fifties. All American ship
> > are registered in counties like Panama and Libya. American
> > corporations are moving 'off shore' as we speak, over 250 did so
> > in 2001. If American soon don't wise up and buy American products
> > the only job skill your children and grand children will need is
> > how to say; 'Do you want fries with that?' or 'Welcome to
> > WalMart'
> >
> >
> > mike hunt
>

[MikeHunt2@mailcity.com]

I'll try once more because apparently you are a bit slow, then
I quit. That is what I said: American corporation are moving
their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing field, so
they DON'T have to pay federal corporate taxes like the Japanese
corporation DON'T pay US federal corporate income taxes on the
billions in *US* profits each year. We as American should be
concerned about BOTH problems and should help ourselves by
primarily buying those products made in America by corporation
that pay US corporate income taxes. Get it now?



"'nuther Bob <" wrote:


>
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:54:51 GMT, MajorDome@mailcity.com wrote:
>
> >and more American corporation are
> >moving their headquarters 'off shore' to level the playing
> >field.
>
> This is not quite the same issue. Large "American" corporations
> that earn billions in *US* profits each year are moving the
> "Corporate Headquarters" to Bermuda to avoid paying any taxes.
> There are no jobs going to Bermuda, just a few pieces of paper.
>
> Do a web search on "Bermuda Tax Loophole". You can ignore the
> political nonsense at first and concentrate on the issue of the
> taxpayers being ripped off. Once you understand it you can go
> back and notice that the Republicans - the guys always telling
> me that they are going to lower my taxes - are fighting tooth and
> nail against changing the rules to stop this rip off. You might
> also notice the Dick Cheney's company Halliburton was one of the
> first to exploit this loophole.
>
> Bob

[TM]

Wait until you corner with those tires on wet roads. I even talked to
Michelin engineers and they admitted that the rubber used is harder for
less rolling resistance (better fuel consumption) and that this has
degraded the wet road performance.

Now, compare MXV4 V rated at $150 and Yokohamas AVS dB at $80. The
Yokohamas are way superior tires in every aspect but life expectancy.

The manager at a tire store, while my MXV4 were being tested for the nth
time, mentioned the wet traction problem with the Michelin's he had in
his car. I had not mentioned it. He added that in his experience,
Michelin tires were way overpriced and that being good tires, they did
not justify the added expense. If you want his phone number i will be
glad to email it to you.


Lee Rothman wrote:
> That's a bunch of bull poop. The MXV4+ tires are amazing in the wet weather
> and even heavy hail storms (which I tested them in). I haven't had them on
> actual snow yet, but I'm not worried based on my experience in that hail
> storm. In rain I can easily cruise at 80+MPH on the interstate and not a
> slip to be had. What else could you want from a tire? They aren't
> cheap.........but quality never is. I've been cornering hard with them in
> Northern California on my trip this week through mountain passes and they
> just won't break loose. I'm more impressed with these tires the more I drive
> with them. I may well replace them with the like tire when the time
> comes...........I must say I have been VERY pleasantly surprised after
> reading all the garbage about this tire. They are VERY worthy to say the
> least..........
>
>

[noway]

I've heard the same from a lot of people, and the ratings on tirerack.com
lean toward the same conclusion. I do have a set of MXV4 (not the plus) on a
car and they aren't bad, but the plus model is a totally different design.
I've always bought Michelins, but Bridgestone has a 30 day money back test
drive, so I ordered a set Turanza LS-H for my 2003 Civic EX. Can't go wrong
there. I really hope they are as nice as everyone says, cause I don't want
to deal with changing tires again, and these Firestones my car came with are
just pounding me to death on the highway. They have to be the worst thing on
the road, but I planned on getting new tires when I bought the car.

"TM" <tm@dontspam.me> wrote in message news:3EFFA82B.3080708@dontspam.me...
> Wait until you corner with those tires on wet roads. I even talked to
> Michelin engineers and they admitted that the rubber used is harder for
> less rolling resistance (better fuel consumption) and that this has
> degraded the wet road performance.
>
> Now, compare MXV4 V rated at $150 and Yokohamas AVS dB at $80. The
> Yokohamas are way superior tires in every aspect but life expectancy.
>
> The manager at a tire store, while my MXV4 were being tested for the nth
> time, mentioned the wet traction problem with the Michelin's he had in
> his car. I had not mentioned it. He added that in his experience,
> Michelin tires were way overpriced and that being good tires, they did
> not justify the added expense. If you want his phone number i will be
> glad to email it to you.

[wolftim]

Just sharing info ,no reason to be rude!

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
news:0750gv4ldio1q8dudn60cc8vi4abhm8q3j@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:23:00 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
> >102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
> >Great Tire!!
>
> Why would we care what a stupid top-poster thinks?
>

[John D.]

wolftim,

No need to even talk (or apologize) to people who flame you for top
posting...they're just anal or gay (probably both, if you think about
the connection) to be hung up on such a petty thing. Also, the way
some of them write suggests that they're probably gay anyway.

Who cares what fags think?

Some newsgroups in fact -- such as alt.os.windows-xp -- are ruined by
gays-with-attitudes who insult everyone and anyone at any time, using
much profanity even. If the group, such as alt.os.windows-xp were
moderated, they wouldn't be allowed to post that crap but because it
isn't, they trash it big time and make it an unpleasant place. So, all
you can do is just ignore the fags and continue posting...top posting
in my case!

Besides, there are NO RULES anymore on the Internet...there haven't
been for a long time now, ever since the Barbarians invaded. People
can post however they want and whatever they want -- unless the group
is moderated of course -- so just don't even bother to respond to the
gayboys (girls)...they're not worth the effort. They're irrelevant and
just human garbage anyway.

It's what you say, not where you post it, but that's lost on them. Who
cares what THEY think?

Frankly, I hate to scroll though lots of cited text just to get to the
current post since I've already read the original questions/problem
and just want the responses, so I prefer top posters. It's much more
efficient.

So to hell with those who whine about top posters...do it anyway!
They're slaves to trifles and the insignificant, and want you to join
them. Don't.

Or maybe they just want to ask you out.

Whatever, it's amusing to see them so upset! ;-)

John D.





"wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message news:<3f004b55$0$49001$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> Just sharing info ,no reason to be rude!
>
> "dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
> news:0750gv4ldio1q8dudn60cc8vi4abhm8q3j@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:23:00 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
> > >102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
> > >Great Tire!!
> >
> > Why would we care what a stupid top-poster thinks?
> >

[wolftim]

I have not been a news groups very much. What is a top poster??

"John D." <jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821bab6.0306300851.4acd328e@posting.google.c om...
> wolftim,
>
> No need to even talk (or apologize) to people who flame you for top
> posting...they're just anal or gay (probably both, if you think about
> the connection) to be hung up on such a petty thing. Also, the way
> some of them write suggests that they're probably gay anyway.
>
> Who cares what fags think?
>
> Some newsgroups in fact -- such as alt.os.windows-xp -- are ruined by
> gays-with-attitudes who insult everyone and anyone at any time, using
> much profanity even. If the group, such as alt.os.windows-xp were
> moderated, they wouldn't be allowed to post that crap but because it
> isn't, they trash it big time and make it an unpleasant place. So, all
> you can do is just ignore the fags and continue posting...top posting
> in my case!
>
> Besides, there are NO RULES anymore on the Internet...there haven't
> been for a long time now, ever since the Barbarians invaded. People
> can post however they want and whatever they want -- unless the group
> is moderated of course -- so just don't even bother to respond to the
> gayboys (girls)...they're not worth the effort. They're irrelevant and
> just human garbage anyway.
>
> It's what you say, not where you post it, but that's lost on them. Who
> cares what THEY think?
>
> Frankly, I hate to scroll though lots of cited text just to get to the
> current post since I've already read the original questions/problem
> and just want the responses, so I prefer top posters. It's much more
> efficient.
>
> So to hell with those who whine about top posters...do it anyway!
> They're slaves to trifles and the insignificant, and want you to join
> them. Don't.
>
> Or maybe they just want to ask you out.
>
> Whatever, it's amusing to see them so upset! ;-)
>
> John D.
>
>
>
>
>
> "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:<3f004b55$0$49001$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> > Just sharing info ,no reason to be rude!
> >
> > "dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
> > news:0750gv4ldio1q8dudn60cc8vi4abhm8q3j@4ax.com...
> > > On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:23:00 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
> > > >102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
> > > >Great Tire!!
> > >
> > > Why would we care what a stupid top-poster thinks?
> > >

[Dan Gates]

wolftim wrote:
> I have not been a news groups very much. What is a top poster??
>
> "John D." <jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e821bab6.0306300851.4acd328e@posting.google.c om...
>
>>wolftim,
>>
>>No need to even talk (or apologize) to people who flame you for top
>>posting...they're just anal or gay (probably both, if you think about
>>the connection) to be hung up on such a petty thing. Also, the way
>>some of them write suggests that they're probably gay anyway.
>>
>>Who cares what fags think?
>>
>>Some newsgroups in fact -- such as alt.os.windows-xp -- are ruined by
>>gays-with-attitudes who insult everyone and anyone at any time, using
>>much profanity even. If the group, such as alt.os.windows-xp were
>>moderated, they wouldn't be allowed to post that crap but because it
>>isn't, they trash it big time and make it an unpleasant place. So, all
>>you can do is just ignore the fags and continue posting...top posting
>>in my case!
>>
>>Besides, there are NO RULES anymore on the Internet...there haven't
>>been for a long time now, ever since the Barbarians invaded. People
>>can post however they want and whatever they want -- unless the group
>>is moderated of course -- so just don't even bother to respond to the
>>gayboys (girls)...they're not worth the effort. They're irrelevant and
>>just human garbage anyway.
>>
>>It's what you say, not where you post it, but that's lost on them. Who
>>cares what THEY think?
>>
>>Frankly, I hate to scroll though lots of cited text just to get to the
>>current post since I've already read the original questions/problem
>>and just want the responses, so I prefer top posters. It's much more
>>efficient.
>>
>>So to hell with those who whine about top posters...do it anyway!
>>They're slaves to trifles and the insignificant, and want you to join
>>them. Don't.
>>
>>Or maybe they just want to ask you out.
>>
>>Whatever, it's amusing to see them so upset! ;-)
>>
>>John D.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message
>
> news:<3f004b55$0$49001$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
>
>>>Just sharing info ,no reason to be rude!
>>>
>>>"dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
>>>news:0750gv4ldio1q8dudn60cc8vi4abhm8q3j@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:23:00 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
>>>>>102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
>>>>>Great Tire!!
>>>>
>>>>Why would we care what a stupid top-poster thinks?
>>>>
>
>
>



You.

Some net nazis insist that all replies to newsgroups be trimmed
appropriately, to include only the relevant information, then replies
appended to the bottom of the original post.

This is a throw-back to bulletin boards and the original inter net
system, where space/time savings were imperative.

It is only a problem for a certain small percentage of purists who
insist on segregating the world into top- and bottom-posters.

The best part is how many people seem to think it is associated with
sexual orientation.


Dan

['nuther Bob]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 21:17:27 GMT, MikeHunt2@mailcity.com wrote:

>You should have said 'in my opinion' or did some research before
>posting.

Thanks for the advice. (not!)

>How come Explorer are not flipping now that they have
>other brand of tires?

SUV's still flip over. Check with the NHTSA.

> Firestone admitted in the court settlement
>the problem was with the tires not the pressure recommendations.

Like I said, let the lawyers argue it.

>No vehicle flip over EASILY anyway.
>circumstances and great force and driver error to flip ANY
>vehicle.

Except SUV's

>Don't you go to the movies or watch TV? They spin
>SUV's 'round corners and in circles all the time without even
>lifting a wheel off the ground. Watch 'Cops' on TV and see all
>the cars and SUV's running from the cops at 80 MPH on three
>tires. ;)

Yeah. I watch TV. I see cars flip over. I see SUV's flip over.
I see semi's tip over. What's your point ?

Bob

['nuther Bob]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 14:48:08 -0400, "SusanR" <sam3r@msn.com> wrote:

>The reason for trimming the previous "X" number of posts is to make it
>easier to find the new post.
>Its very annoying to have to scroll through 20kb of stuff most of us have
>already read x number of times just to read a "lol" reply.

There's nothing wrong with _trimming_. I agree with you about folks
leaving too much of the previous post. You should only leave the
portions that you are responding to. However, you should bottom
post with the previously posted section quoted so that we know
what specific sections/posts/posters you are responding to.

>btw, I ONLY sleep with men.

Yeah, but are you male or female ?
:-)

Bob

['nuther Bob]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 21:28:48 GMT, MikeHunt2@mailcity.com wrote:

>I'll try once more because apparently you are a bit slow,
>I quit

Apparently Mikey, it's you that is a bit slow. You responded
to *my* post concerning the "Bermuda Tax Loophole" with
your rant about "leveling the playing field", then segued
into a rant about jobs moving off shore. Here's the quote:

> Soon they will take the jobs as well. We should all be
>writing to our Congressman and Senators to change the tax code to
>one similar to that in Europe that requires taxes be paid on
>profits earned within the country. In the meantime we can lower
>our own tax load, the extra amount we pay to make up for the
>money lost to Japan, by buying products made by American tax
>paying corporations. The first to take tax advantage by moving
>off shore were the ship owners in the fifties. All American ship
>are registered in counties like Panama and Libya. American
>corporations are moving 'off shore' as we speak, over 250 did so
>in 2001. If American soon don't wise up and buy American products
>the only job skill your children and grand children will need is
>how to say; 'Do you want fries with that?' or 'Welcome to
>WalMart'

Now, as I explained to you before, your post does not match the
point that I originally made. If you'd like to argue your alternate
point, that's fine. However, my post is correct as I was responding
to your miss-read on my post.

As to your alternate point: You're wrong there too.
American companies are not "moving offshore" to level the playing
field with the Japanese. They are moving offshore because they
are greedy gluttons who don't want to pay any taxes on their
profits. It has nothing to do with Japanese or other competition,
it has to do with general greed.

Bob

[Liam Devlin]

noway wrote:
> I've heard the same from a lot of people, and the ratings on tirerack.com
> lean toward the same conclusion. I do have a set of MXV4 (not the plus) on a
> car and they aren't bad, but the plus model is a totally different design.
> I've always bought Michelins, but Bridgestone has a 30 day money back test
> drive, so I ordered a set Turanza LS-H for my 2003 Civic EX. Can't go wrong
> there. I really hope they are as nice as everyone says, cause I don't want
> to deal with changing tires again, and these Firestones my car came with are
> just pounding me to death on the highway. They have to be the worst thing on
> the road, but I planned on getting new tires when I bought the car.

Please post back after you've put a couple of thousand miles on the new
ones.

[LARRY]

red lamborghini vt lic. from hel


http://www.lovefd.org/guestbook/public/img-1056951699.jpg

[John D.]

wolftim,

I'm a "top poster" and I've even been called a "top posting pig" by
one of the anals here, so you can see how upset some people get over
it.

A top poster is someone who posts his/her response at the VERY TOP of
the post they are answering instead of at the BOTTOM after the other
guy's post. Some people can't stand that and so get pretty upset. They
just need to increase their medication I suspect...no big deal.

Post however you want -- top or bottom -- and don't let people
intimidate you.

You need to have a rather thick skin in these newsgroups...I'm a vet
of many flame wars but I really don't like to argue with people --
never did even back then -- so I couldn't care less what they say.

Remember, no matter WHAT you say, SOMEONE won't like it. That's a fact
of life. Be prepared for criticism on some level, consider its merit,
take note if it HAS any merit...if not, to hell with them.

Regards,

John D.




"wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message news:<3f007891$0$88078$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> I have not been a news groups very much. What is a top poster??
>
> "John D." <jcdech@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e821bab6.0306300851.4acd328e@posting.google.c om...
> > wolftim,
> >
> > No need to even talk (or apologize) to people who flame you for top
> > posting...they're just anal or gay (probably both, if you think about
> > the connection) to be hung up on such a petty thing. Also, the way
> > some of them write suggests that they're probably gay anyway.
> >
> > Who cares what fags think?
> >
> > Some newsgroups in fact -- such as alt.os.windows-xp -- are ruined by
> > gays-with-attitudes who insult everyone and anyone at any time, using
> > much profanity even. If the group, such as alt.os.windows-xp were
> > moderated, they wouldn't be allowed to post that crap but because it
> > isn't, they trash it big time and make it an unpleasant place. So, all
> > you can do is just ignore the fags and continue posting...top posting
> > in my case!
> >
> > Besides, there are NO RULES anymore on the Internet...there haven't
> > been for a long time now, ever since the Barbarians invaded. People
> > can post however they want and whatever they want -- unless the group
> > is moderated of course -- so just don't even bother to respond to the
> > gayboys (girls)...they're not worth the effort. They're irrelevant and
> > just human garbage anyway.
> >
> > It's what you say, not where you post it, but that's lost on them. Who
> > cares what THEY think?
> >
> > Frankly, I hate to scroll though lots of cited text just to get to the
> > current post since I've already read the original questions/problem
> > and just want the responses, so I prefer top posters. It's much more
> > efficient.
> >
> > So to hell with those who whine about top posters...do it anyway!
> > They're slaves to trifles and the insignificant, and want you to join
> > them. Don't.
> >
> > Or maybe they just want to ask you out.
> >
> > Whatever, it's amusing to see them so upset! ;-)
> >
> > John D.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:<3f004b55$0$49001$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> > > Just sharing info ,no reason to be rude!
> > >
> > > "dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
> > > news:0750gv4ldio1q8dudn60cc8vi4abhm8q3j@4ax.com...
> > > > On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:23:00 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >I have original M MXV4/s on 99 accord EX v6.
> > > > >102,000 miles. highway miles. still have tread.
> > > > >Great Tire!!
> > > >
> > > > Why would we care what a stupid top-poster thinks?
> > > >

[dizzy]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 14:14:51 -0400, "wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net>
wrote:

>Dan,
>You would think folks would have more important things to be worry about.
>Thanks for net lesson.
>
>Question . How do you properly reply to post?

Like this.

[dizzy]

On 30 Jun 2003 16:40:57 -0700, jcdech@hotmail.com (John D.) wrote:

>Post however you want -- top or bottom -- and don't let people
>intimidate you.

Sure, go ahead and top post. It's rude and selfish, and it's like
walking around with an "I'm an Idiot" sign around your neck, but if
that's what you want...

[dizzy]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:36:26 GMT, Liam Devlin
<LiamD@XXXX.optonline.net> wrote:

>They're irrelevant and just human garbage anyway.

Pretty funny, coming from the lazy, selfish, stupid top-poster. It's
just too much work to trim a post and reply where appropriate, so that
a high-quality discussion can take place. Nope, just a blurb at the
top...

[Philip®]

dizzy wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2003 16:40:57 -0700, jcdech@hotmail.com (John D.) wrote:
>
>> Post however you want -- top or bottom -- and don't let people
>> intimidate you.
>
> Sure, go ahead and top post. It's rude and selfish, and it's like
> walking around with an "I'm an Idiot" sign around your neck, but if
> that's what you want...

Then again, if two posts or more posts are present all in "top poster
format" why not just continue the pattern? I DO side with those who
think top posting is rude when an established pattern has the most
recent reply listed at the bottom and then the person top posts.
--
*Philip

"Children left running and unattended
will be towed at owner's expense"

[SusanR]

My name is Susan and my parents were quite conventional. I'm a woman.

--
SusanR
sam3r@msn.com
"'nuther Bob >" <<none@none.com> wrote in message
news:qf31gvo6s53og0dqkjq5ldd39kk8v7n2f1@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 14:48:08 -0400, "SusanR" <sam3r@msn.com> wrote:
>
> >The reason for trimming the previous "X" number of posts is to make it
> >easier to find the new post.
> >Its very annoying to have to scroll through 20kb of stuff most of us
have
> >already read x number of times just to read a "lol" reply.
>
> There's nothing wrong with _trimming_. I agree with you about folks
> leaving too much of the previous post. You should only leave the
> portions that you are responding to. However, you should bottom
> post with the previously posted section quoted so that we know
> what specific sections/posts/posters you are responding to.
>
> >btw, I ONLY sleep with men.
>
> Yeah, but are you male or female ?
> :-)
>
> Bob
>
>

[FJ40 ®]

On 30 Jun 2003 09:51:07 -0700, jcdech@hotmail.com (John D.) wrote:

>
>Whatever, it's amusing to see them so upset! ;-)

*plonk*



From RFC 1855

If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response
to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps
everyone. But do not include the entire original!

================================================== ================


Further reading:


How do I quote correctly in usenet?
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html

the advantages of usenet's quoting conventions
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.mccaughan/g/remarks/uquote.html

why bottom-posting is better than top-posting
http://fmf.fwn.rug.nl/~anton/topposting.html

"rules" for posting to usenet:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/

Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

zen and the art of the internet (usenet section)
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/docproject/zen/zen-1.0_6.html

What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/

Posting help for newbies
http://www.windfalls.net/ukrm/postinghelp.html

Ken Robbins - Quoting on Usenet
http://members.home.net/krobb7/quoting.html

Here's more:

http://www.pickaxe.demon.co.uk/internet/netiquette.htm

http://fmf.fwn.rug.nl/~anton/topposting.html
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_chr0.htm
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/nquote.html
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting.html
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
http://www.malibutelecom.fi/yucca/usenet/brox.html
http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/
http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/index.htm
http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm
http://www.templetons.com/brad/emily.html
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html
http://www.usenet.org.uk/usenet-information.html
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:59:48 -0400, Dan Gates
<dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote:

>This is a throw-back to bulletin boards and the original inter net
>system, where space/time savings were imperative.
>
>It is only a problem for a certain small percentage of purists who
>insist on segregating the world into top- and bottom-posters.
>
>The best part is how many people seem to think it is associated with
>sexual orientation.


From RFC 1855

If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response
to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps
everyone. But do not include the entire original!

================================================== ================


Further reading:


How do I quote correctly in usenet?
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote2.html

the advantages of usenet's quoting conventions
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.mccaughan/g/remarks/uquote.html

why bottom-posting is better than top-posting
http://fmf.fwn.rug.nl/~anton/topposting.html

"rules" for posting to usenet:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/

Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

zen and the art of the internet (usenet section)
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/docproject/zen/zen-1.0_6.html

What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/

Posting help for newbies
http://www.windfalls.net/ukrm/postinghelp.html

Ken Robbins - Quoting on Usenet
http://members.home.net/krobb7/quoting.html

Here's more:

http://www.pickaxe.demon.co.uk/internet/netiquette.htm

http://fmf.fwn.rug.nl/~anton/topposting.html
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_chr0.htm
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/nquote.html
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting.html
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
http://www.malibutelecom.fi/yucca/usenet/brox.html
http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/
http://www.planefacts.ndirect.co.uk/group/advice/index.htm
http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm
http://www.templetons.com/brad/emily.html
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html
http://www.usenet.org.uk/usenet-information.html
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html


--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 14:48:08 -0400, "SusanR" <sam3r@msn.com> wrote:

>The reason for trimming the previous "X" number of posts is to make it
>easier to find the new post.
>Its very annoying to have to scroll through 20kb of stuff most of us have
>already read x number of times just to read a "lol" reply.

The answer is to quote properly.

Notice that I am bottom posting and yet you still don't have to scroll
at all and never will unless I have a lot to reply to or a lot to
write. That's because i trimmed the stuff I am not replying to.

Improper formatting is not the answer to over-quoting.


--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 21:55:52 -0400, "David L"
<davelieuSPAM@SUCKSyahoo.com> wrote:

>"Remember, no matter WHAT you say, SOMEONE won't like it. That's a fact of
>life. Be prepared for criticism on some level, consider its merit, take note
>if it HAS any merit...if not, to hell with them"

I have never ever been criticized for properly formatting my articles.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[John D.]

I agree. This entertaining diversion should end. Bedtime for Bonzo.

Let's get back to cars only.

John D.





"David L" <davelieuSPAM@SUCKSyahoo.com> wrote in message news:<m8OcnUFPOam3d52iXTWJjQ@comcast.com>...
> I'm fairly 'new' to the newsgroups on the net, but I also come from the old
> school. I've been on BBSs since the 80s. I'll post at the top and
> sometimes at the bottom. I don't have a problem with someone posting either
> way, but if the post is at the bottom it would be more tidy if some of the
> other irrelevant quotes were cut off unless it's relevant.
>
> Either way, IMHO - a high-quality discussion is NOT dependant on a
> "top-poster" or "bottom-poster". It is dependent on the CONTENT of what is
> being said. I side with John's assessment:
> "Remember, no matter WHAT you say, SOMEONE won't like it. That's a fact of
> life. Be prepared for criticism on some level, consider its merit, take note
> if it HAS any merit...if not, to hell with them"
>
> That being said, I propose we let this topic rest and get back on the topic
> of cars. I also say *cars* because it is obvious this topic is going to
> multiple news groups.
>
> Everyone enjoy your day.
> -Dave
>
> btw - This message was purposely put at the top, and the meaning remains the
> same. :-)
>
> "dizzy" <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote in message
> news:rkj1gv0i7n94pt28eli2l1bonorut52p8b@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:36:26 GMT, Liam Devlin
> > <LiamD@XXXX.optonline.net> wrote:
> >
> > >They're irrelevant and just human garbage anyway.
> >
> > Pretty funny, coming from the lazy, selfish, stupid top-poster. It's
> > just too much work to trim a post and reply where appropriate, so that
> > a high-quality discussion can take place. Nope, just a blurb at the
> > top...
> >

[John D.]

Susan,

Don't take offense.

People can claim to be ANYONE on the Internet:

1. Male (when female, sometimes doing this impersonation to put off
unwanted attention from the VAST majority of males who populate this
arena).

2. Female (when male, impersonating a woman in order to get more
repsonses/help as guys naturally want to help women...the "poor little
helpless me" technique).

3. Alien (using its computer to learn more about earthlings, and maybe
touching up invasion plans accordingly).

Who would really know?

Lots of people aren't who they seem to be.

Regards,

John D.



"SusanR" <sam3r@msn.com> wrote in message news:<7g9Ma.1238$IP6.54570@eagle.america.net>...
> My name is Susan and my parents were quite conventional. I'm a woman.
>
> --
> SusanR
> sam3r@msn.com
> "'nuther Bob >" <<none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:qf31gvo6s53og0dqkjq5ldd39kk8v7n2f1@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 14:48:08 -0400, "SusanR" <sam3r@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > >The reason for trimming the previous "X" number of posts is to make it
> > >easier to find the new post.
> > >Its very annoying to have to scroll through 20kb of stuff most of us
> have
> > >already read x number of times just to read a "lol" reply.
> >
> > There's nothing wrong with _trimming_. I agree with you about folks
> > leaving too much of the previous post. You should only leave the
> > portions that you are responding to. However, you should bottom
> > post with the previously posted section quoted so that we know
> > what specific sections/posts/posters you are responding to.
> >
> > >btw, I ONLY sleep with men.
> >
> > Yeah, but are you male or female ?
> > :-)
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >

[Philip®]

John D. wrote:
> Susan,
>
> Don't take offense.
>
> People can claim to be ANYONE on the Internet:
>
> 1. Male (when female, sometimes doing this impersonation to put off
> unwanted attention from the VAST majority of males who populate this
> arena).
>
> 2. Female (when male, impersonating a woman in order to get more
> repsonses/help as guys naturally want to help women...the "poor
little
> helpless me" technique).
>
> 3. Alien (using its computer to learn more about earthlings, and
maybe
> touching up invasion plans accordingly).
>
> Who would really know?
>
> Lots of people aren't who they seem to be.
>
> Regards,
>
> John D.

Hey... I've pretended to be a grape colored, flourescent green slime
drooling space alien roaming around this planet in a saucer for years!
Who knew!
--

*Philip

"Children left running and unattended
will be towed at owner's expense"

[FJ40 ®]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 03:05:59 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Then again, if two posts or more posts are present all in "top poster
>format" why not just continue the pattern?

Because it's not proper form..... better to just plonk top posters on
sight.


--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[Dave Kelsen]

On 7/1/2003 10:36 AM John D. spake these words of knowledge:

> I agree. This entertaining diversion should end. Bedtime for Bonzo.
>
> Let's get back to cars only.
>
> John D.

What an asshole, pretending that he wishes to get back on topic while
being deliberately provocative.

You should run for office, John.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Lately, the only thing keeping me from being a serial killer is my
distaste for manual labor. - Dilbert

[wolftim]

"Dave Kelsen" <kelsen@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:CXjMa.636$Sy1.482@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com...
> On 7/1/2003 10:36 AM John D. spake these words of knowledge:
>
> > I agree. This entertaining diversion should end. Bedtime for Bonzo.
> >
> > Let's get back to cars only.
> >

From wolftim: 7/1/2003
Wow! I never thought a post would generate such feedback.
Now that I know what a top poster is!
What would be a good replacement for my tires??
>

[Liam Devlin]

John D. wrote:
> Susan,
>
> Don't take offense.
>
> People can claim to be ANYONE on the Internet:
>
> 1. Male (when female, sometimes doing this impersonation to put off
> unwanted attention from the VAST majority of males who populate this
> arena).
>
> 2. Female (when male, impersonating a woman in order to get more
> repsonses/help as guys naturally want to help women...the "poor little
> helpless me" technique).
>
> 3. Alien (using its computer to learn more about earthlings, and maybe
> touching up invasion plans accordingly).
>
> Who would really know?
>
> Lots of people aren't who they seem to be.

Right, famous cartoon from the New Yorker shows 2 dogs. One is sitting
at a PC and says to the other: "on the Internet no one knows you're a
dog". ;)

[Peter Schroeder]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 14:45:36 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
wrote:

>:"rules" for posting to usenet:
>:http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/


Perhaps FJ40 ® you should do some reading yourself and figure out why
you should not have more than 4 lines in your .sig !!!

I'll quote some of the reading you have asked others to obey:

"If you have a standard signature you like to append to your articles,
and you are running a form of news software that supports automatic
inclusion of a signature file, it is usually enabled by putting it in
a file called .signature in your home directory. The posting software
you use should automatically append it to your article. Please keep
your signatures concise, as people do not appreciate seeing lengthy
signatures, nor paying the phone bills to repeatedly transmit them. 2
or 3 lines are usually plenty. Sometimes it is also appropriate to
add another line or two for addresses on other major networks where
you can be reached (e.g., CompuServ, Bitnet). Long signatures are
definitely frowned upon. DO NOT include drawings, pictures, maps, or
other graphics in your signature -- it is not the appropriate place
for such material and is viewed as rude by other readers."


It's just poor netiquette to have a 12 line .sig.

Maybe you should be *plonked* for wasting bandwidth.
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others.

Just thought you would like to know.

Signed a 15 year USENET veteran.

[John D.]

I sure would, except for some skeletons in the closet.

Thanks for the vote anyway.

John D.



Dave Kelsen <kelsen@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<CXjMa.636$Sy1.482@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com>...
> On 7/1/2003 10:36 AM John D. spake these words of knowledge:
>
> > I agree. This entertaining diversion should end. Bedtime for Bonzo.
> >
> > Let's get back to cars only.
> >
> > John D.
>
> What an asshole, pretending that he wishes to get back on topic while
> being deliberately provocative.
>
> You should run for office, John.
>
>
> RFT!!!
> Dave Kelsen

[Bruce L. Bergman]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 20:23:24 -0600, someone who calls themselves Peter
Schroeder <petersch@despammed.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 14:45:36 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
>wrote:

>>:"rules" for posting to usenet:
>>:http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/
>
>
>Perhaps FJ40 ® you should do some reading yourself and figure out why
>you should not have more than 4 lines in your .sig !!!
>
>I'll quote some of the reading you have asked others to obey:
>
>"If you have a standard signature you like to append to your articles,
>and you are running a form of news software that supports automatic
>inclusion of a signature file, it is usually enabled by putting it in
>a file called .signature in your home directory. The posting software
>you use should automatically append it to your article. Please keep
>your signatures concise, as people do not appreciate seeing lengthy
>signatures, nor paying the phone bills to repeatedly transmit them. 2
>or 3 lines are usually plenty. Sometimes it is also appropriate to
>add another line or two for addresses on other major networks where
>you can be reached (e.g., CompuServ, Bitnet). Long signatures are
>definitely frowned upon. DO NOT include drawings, pictures, maps, or
>other graphics in your signature -- it is not the appropriate place
>for such material and is viewed as rude by other readers."
>
>
>It's just poor netiquette to have a 12 line .sig.
>
>Maybe you should be *plonked* for wasting bandwidth.
>People who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others.
>
>Just thought you would like to know.
>
>Signed a 15 year USENET veteran.

I've been on the net almost as long - since they had separate The
Source addresses for people with Texas Instruments 99-4A's, and
"Bulletin Board Systems" were on the cutting edge. Since the days
when they metered your access by the minute. When 300-baud was as
good as most people had, and 1200-baud modems were considered blazing
fast - even for the data links between server computers. If you
wanted faster, it cost a ton of money.

Back then, large .sig files were a financial concern - it could add
several minutes to your connect time charges and the long-distance
bills for the data calls between computers, and before deregulation
dropped the long-distance rates that was serious money...

Fast Forward to 2003 - Everybody's got 'unlimited' flat-rate access
to the net and most people have at least one toll-free access number
they can use. And most everyone is running pretty fast 53K dialup, or
paying reasonable rates for DSL or Cable, and the links between
servers and systems have nice fat T1 or T3 megabit data pipes (and not
a 1200 baud modem).

Progress has marched on - the 4-line .sig file is a nice target, but
there's no real need to ream someone out about it anymore.

--<< Bruce >>--

[Bobert]

On 1 Jul 2003 21:13:59 -0700, jcdech@hotmail.com (John D.) wrote:

>I sure would, except for some skeletons in the closet.
>
>Thanks for the vote anyway.

That does not appear to be a problem these days... at least when
you consider our current and previous President.

Bob

[dizzy]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 03:05:59 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Then again, if two posts or more posts are present all in "top poster
>format" why not just continue the pattern?

Because if you do, you endorse the behavior, and give fuel to the
"lots of people do it" morons.

>I DO side with those who
>think top posting is rude when an established pattern has the most
>recent reply listed at the bottom and then the person top posts.

It's never appropriate. I do see your point that, like a lot of
"inappropriate" behavior, a little bit of it really wouldn't hurt
anything. The problem is, this particular inappropriate behavior is
rampant, and, more often than not, reduces the legibility and quality
of discussion.

[John D.]

Well, you've seen another characteristic of newsgroups: They often
depart from the original topic...it's called being OT.

As for your tires, I suggest you go to http://www.tirerack.com/ and
research what specific tire might be best for your car AND within your
budget...read the user-reviews of some of the tires. Some Yokohamas
seem to have consistently positive reviews.

Good luck,

John D.



"wolftim" <wolftim@fuse.net> wrote in message news:<3f021cf9$0$49007$a0465688@nnrp.fuse.net>...
> "Dave Kelsen" <kelsen@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:CXjMa.636$Sy1.482@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com...
> > On 7/1/2003 10:36 AM John D. spake these words of knowledge:
> >
> > > I agree. This entertaining diversion should end. Bedtime for Bonzo.
> > >
> > > Let's get back to cars only.
> > >
>
> From wolftim: 7/1/2003
> Wow! I never thought a post would generate such feedback.
> Now that I know what a top poster is!
> What would be a good replacement for my tires??
> >

[noway]

I've had them for a day, and as we all know they are a whole lot better than
Firestone. I don't have to fight to keep my car running in a straight line
down the highway. My ride is a whole lot smoother, and I'm not getting the
crap pounded out of me. No I didn't have the Firestones overinflated, and
even went underinflated to make it through the few days I had to drive the
car. I was ready to go look for a different car, but now I don't have to. I
think this Civic will work. I was starting to think this car was total crap,
but had to keep telling myself it was just the tires.

I can also take some pretty intense corners with the Turanza's, and they
hang in there real nice. Almost get the feeling the car would roll before
the tires gave.

Don't think I'll need that 30 day test drive.


"Liam Devlin" <LiamD@XXXX.optonline.net> wrote in message
news:3F00BC89.8060500@XXXX.optonline.net...
> noway wrote:
> > I've heard the same from a lot of people, and the ratings on
tirerack.com
> > lean toward the same conclusion. I do have a set of MXV4 (not the plus)
on a
> > car and they aren't bad, but the plus model is a totally different
design.
> > I've always bought Michelins, but Bridgestone has a 30 day money back
test
> > drive, so I ordered a set Turanza LS-H for my 2003 Civic EX. Can't go
wrong
> > there. I really hope they are as nice as everyone says, cause I don't
want
> > to deal with changing tires again, and these Firestones my car came with
are
> > just pounding me to death on the highway. They have to be the worst
thing on
> > the road, but I planned on getting new tires when I bought the car.
>
> Please post back after you've put a couple of thousand miles on the new
> ones.
>

[FJ40 ®]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 00:22:32 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>> Because it's not proper form..... better to just plonk top posters on
>> sight.
>
>
>Well.... then it appears that I am more interested in legibility while
>you are more interested in following convention.

That's why the proper form exists. To promote legibility.

Like I said, best to plonk top posters on sight and I do for the most
part.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 20:23:24 -0600, Peter Schroeder
<petersch@despammed.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 14:45:36 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>:"rules" for posting to usenet:
>>:http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/
>
>
>Perhaps FJ40 ® you should do some reading yourself and figure out why
>you should not have more than 4 lines in your .sig !!!
>
>I'll quote some of the reading you have asked others to obey:
>
>"If you have a standard signature you like to append to your articles,
>and you are running a form of news software that supports automatic
>inclusion of a signature file, it is usually enabled by putting it in
>a file called .signature in your home directory. The posting software
>you use should automatically append it to your article. Please keep
>your signatures concise, as people do not appreciate seeing lengthy
>signatures, nor paying the phone bills to repeatedly transmit them. 2
>or 3 lines are usually plenty. Sometimes it is also appropriate to
>add another line or two for addresses on other major networks where
>you can be reached (e.g., CompuServ, Bitnet). Long signatures are
>definitely frowned upon. DO NOT include drawings, pictures, maps, or
>other graphics in your signature -- it is not the appropriate place
>for such material and is viewed as rude by other readers."
>
>
>It's just poor netiquette to have a 12 line .sig.
>
>Maybe you should be *plonked* for wasting bandwidth.
>People who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others.
>
>Just thought you would like to know.
>
>Signed a 15 year USENET veteran.

Actually if you reduce the sig to standard 80 character lines like
this: (you may have to remove word wrap depending on your reader)

FJ40©"Never again a Ford".....Beware a govt that fears its populace
(gun control
)..."I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their
lane-changes."
- dizz"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS)
about your For
dAerostar or Windstar.CAS has received many complaints from consumers
concerning
peeling paint, ignition switch fires, stalling and brake, transmission
and head
gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostarand Windstar
because neith
er is a star when it comes to quality."

You will then notice that the sig is actually 6.5 lines long, not 12.
Many people don't realize that spaces to the right of the end of line
character don't use bandwidth. If you are such a longtime Usenet user
then you remember the works of art encompassing a couple pages that
were common a few years back.

When I get a complaint that isn't in response to the top poster issue
then I will respond with compliance (and have done so in the past) but
usually the only time I ever do is when I write about a top poster.
Had you made this complaint spontaneously and not as a counter to top
posting then I'd have found a way to reduce it to 4x80 characters
including the non printable ones like linefeeds.

On the other hand you see spontaneous complaints about top posting
wherever you go.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:27:12 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospan.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 21:55:52 -0400, "David L"
><davelieuSPAM@SUCKSyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Either way, IMHO - a high-quality discussion is NOT dependant on a
>>"top-poster" or "bottom-poster".
>
>I beg to differ, unless the topic and thread to trivially short and
>simple.
>
>>It is dependent on the CONTENT of what is
>>being said. I side with John's assessment:
>
>John's "assessment" is illogical.
>
>(P.S. Envision this post of mine as a top post. Wouldn't be NEARLY
>as good, now would it?)

It figures that when you are almost always dealing with someone too
lazy to properly format their articles almost always someone that
cannot quote properly that you are also dealing with someone too lazy
to research or even do much thinking.

In my experience top posters rarely provide more than simple one or
two line answers and almost always with an entire thread quoted below
their articles.

I usually plonk them on sight and find that I don't miss much.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:07:08 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>I respectfully disagree on the basis of readibilty being the goal ....
>not just following some arcane convention. Whether the chronology
>reads consistanty from top to bottom or bottom to top does not really
>matter. It's when you have to scroll up and down and around counting
>the number of darts (>) to make sense of the thread that is irksome.

Two things lead to this "irksome" condition.

Top posting and over-quoting.

Imagine the chaos if some people wanted to drive on the left and some
on the right and everyone followed his own desires.

The convention is there for a reason and it's to avoid "irking"
people.

If readability is the goal then following the convention will bring it
about.


--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 21:42:16 -0600, Peter Schroeder
<petersch@despammed.com> wrote:

>I did not really mean to ream anybody, I just quoted the FAQ that the
>other person was telling all the top posters to read. He obviously has
>not read what he preaches :)

Sure I have. Did you read my response and have you noticed any sig
that creates the sort of confusion that top posting does.

I find it sad that the only argument you can come up with for top
posting is an attack on something that's unrelated.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[Philip®]

FJ40 ® wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:07:08 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I respectfully disagree on the basis of readibilty being the goal
>> .... not just following some arcane convention. Whether the
>> chronology reads consistanty from top to bottom or bottom to top
>> does not really matter. It's when you have to scroll up and down
>> and around counting the number of darts (>) to make sense of the
>> thread that is irksome.
>
> Two things lead to this "irksome" condition.
>
> Top posting and over-quoting.
>
> Imagine the chaos if some people wanted to drive on the left and some
> on the right and everyone followed his own desires.

The analogy is weak simply because there is no physical penalty for top
posting as there is for colliding with other motor vehicles. Top
posting must be made painful! ;^)


> The convention is there for a reason and it's to avoid "irking"
> people.
>
> If readability is the goal then following the convention will bring
it
> about.

Readability *IS* the goal, take that to the bank. As I mentioned
earlier, if the most used newsreaders default to top posting (include
OE's format for emails), then perhaps the old convention of posting at
the bottom is in transition to top posting. I would be ok with that
because ultimately I want a linear chronology.
--

*Philip

"Children left running and unattended
will be towed at owner's expense"

[dizzy]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:07:08 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>Well, I do not have the energy to embark on a crusade to pursuade the
>rebellious and lazy to mend their ways. It's much like teaching a pig
>to sing.

I hear ya. It's dirty job, but someone has to do it, IMO.

[Peter Schroeder]

On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 14:35:59 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
wrote:


>:>I did not really mean to ream anybody, I just quoted the FAQ that the
>:>other person was telling all the top posters to read. He obviously has
>:>not read what he preaches :)
>:
>:Sure I have. Did you read my response and have you noticed any sig
>:that creates the sort of confusion that top posting does.

The purpose of my post was to let you know that you indeed do things
to the contrary of the FAQ you are thumping. I never once flamed you
on top posting ever ....

>:I find it sad that the only argument you can come up with for top
>:posting is an attack on something that's unrelated.

Again, I never questioned your posting habits and what does top
posting have to do with tires?

One must learn to read more carefully before typing ;-)


Peter

[Peter Schroeder]

On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 14:26:56 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
wrote:

>:On the other hand you see spontaneous complaints about top posting
>:wherever you go.

I certainly do !

I hate it myself but I choose to ignore it (just like those nasty
ASCII art .sigs :) and hopefully M$ will not promote top posting
either.

BTW Agent that I use seems to leave the cursor at the top of the
message too! Darn those programmers.

Peter

[Philip®]

Dave Kelsen wrote:
> On 7/3/2003 10:49 AM Philip® spake these words of knowledge:
>> The analogy is weak simply because there is no physical penalty
>> for top posting as there is for colliding with other motor
vehicles.
>> Top posting must be made painful! ;^)
>
> Yes, there is. The reader must traverse a message twice to read
> it; the reader is further obliged to read each paragraph from
top to
> bottom, then move back up to the preceding paragraph, etc.

Well... okay. My thought was top posting needed to become painful
to the poster ... the transgressor ... immediately. Perhaps the
ominous Windows Blue Screen of Death for posting anything before
existing text? Certainly the pain inflicted on the reader is a
given. ;^)

>snip<

> The convention is actually there for a much better reason. In
> English, we read from left to right, and we read from top to
> bottom. To change either of these simply because one is lazy
> shows disregard for the time and patience of the target
audience.

Agreed. Just as "words mean things," so does honoring the
conventions of writing format. But I fear we are dealing with
graduates of "outcome based education" and "esteem firsters."


>>> If readability is the goal then following the convention will
>>> bring it about.
>>
>> Readability *IS* the goal, take that to the bank. As I
>> mentioned earlier, if the most used newsreaders default to top
>> posting (include OE's format for emails), then perhaps the old
>>convention of posting at the bottom is in transition to top
posting.
>> I would be ok with that because ultimately I want a linear
>> chronology.
>
> What you say here would have some merit given the postulate that
> top-to-bottom vs. bottom-to-top was simply a whimsical choice.
>
> That is not the case, however.

Whoops.... not so fast. Might you flesh out why English could not
written bottom to top, left to right? Am curious. :^)


> FWIW, I don't spend a great deal of time trying to convert the
> Philistines; Phil, you seem adroit enough with words and
> meanings to
> grasp this concept better than most. Of course, this is usenet,
> and I
> recognize that we are all empowered (albeit not entitled) to do
> things whatever way suits our fancy.
>
> I notice you've been around long enough to use the two dashes as
> a separator between the body of your text and your sig. If you
> put a space after the two dashes, most newsreaders will leave
the
> lines following out of the quoted text in reply.
>
>
> RFT!!!
> Dave Kelsen

Truth be known, Outlook Express puts in those "--" automatically
when a signature line is present. I node nuthin' 'bout it.
--

*Philip

"Children left running and unattended
will be towed at owner's expense"

[EJK]

> Another reason is that it is not Outlook, which has matured into a good
> mail/news program, but which is the objective of far too many
> virus/trojan/etc. writers.

Name one virus/trojan/etc. that will not be killed by a good! virusscanner.
:-)

EJK

[Philip®]

Dave Kelsen wrote:
> Although it is not the greatest of newsreaders/mail programs, one of
> the reasons I use Netscape is that this particular option exists; the
> user can choose to have the reply start at the top or the bottom.
>
> Another reason is that it is not Outlook, which has matured into a
> good mail/news program, but which is the objective of far too many
> virus/trojan/etc. writers.
>
> Come to think of it, this latest release of Netscape actually *is* one
> of the best newsreaders/mail programs.
>
> I also use Agent (1.93) a great deal.
>
>
> RFT!!!
> Dave Kelsen

I started out on AOL. (ok, I'm still in recovery) I left them for
Earthlink back in February of this year. Naturally I had to relearn
established processes using what Earthlink bundled in and with their
dialup program (TaskPanel, OE & IE). Uggg.... I was spoiled from AOL's
integrated software but soon found many advantages to having these
stand-alones. I'm still learning stuff but the steep learning curve was
during the first two months. Not knowing one newsreader from another,
I tried Agent and Netscape 7 .... somehow ended up ('cuz it was bundled)
with OE. I guess it's the familiar pain vs. an unknown pain. OE is
slow and very blocky in operation compared to AOL's newsreader,
especially when it comes to downloading new posts. But I like having a
spellchecker in OE newsreader (AOL did not). Perhaps now, I should
revisit Netscape. Hmmmm.
--

*Philip

"Children left running and unattended
will be towed at owner's expense"

['nuther Bob]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:50:58 +0200, "EJK" <ejkoeze@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> Another reason is that it is not Outlook, which has matured into a good
>> mail/news program, but which is the objective of far too many
>> virus/trojan/etc. writers.
>
>Name one virus/trojan/etc. that will not be killed by a good! virusscanner.
>:-)


The latest one for the latest discovered hole that has not yet been
plugged.

Bob

[noway]

What does this all have to do with tires.

Can you all move to alt.whiners group?

[Christian]

Yea, I drove from Virginia to Texas in my 1999 Avalon in one long day, on my
new Goodyear Eagle GP-H 92H tires, mostly in the rain at 80 to 90 mph.
The Goodyears were great in the rain no problems at all.

[Lee Rothman]

I do! and I'm NOT a top poster. LOL (Michelins in the rain I mean) :-)

[Philip®]

'nuther Bob wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:54:40 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:55:12 GMT, "noway" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What does this all have to do with tires.
>>
>> Top posters make bad choices and that includes tires.
>
> LOL. At least you're on topic now :-)
>
> I bet all the top posters like Michelins in the rain.
>
> Bob


Can you see the Michelin Man performing "Singing in the Rain?" ;^)
--�

Philip

"If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to be
wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
- John Locke (1632-1704)

[FJ40 ®]

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:57:46 GMT, 'nuther Bob
<not_really@anywhere.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:54:40 GMT, FJ40 ® <FJ-40@canada.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 15:55:12 GMT, "noway" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>What does this all have to do with tires.
>>
>>Top posters make bad choices and that includes tires.
>
>LOL. At least you're on topic now :-)
>
>I bet all the top posters like Michelins in the rain.

Well I have to say that the only time I run on anything else is if I
have to order and wait for the particular Michelin I want.

I buy all my cars used these days and the first thing I do is head for
the tire dealer and a set of Michelins. I just did this with an
all-trac Corolla. I wanted Michelin Harmony tires. The Michelin dealer
had never heard of them and was a little skeptical until he found them
in his catalog.

The car had Kumho tires and the Michelins literally transformed that
car.

Rain or otherwise I am a solid Michelin fan. I even have them on my
bicycle.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[FJ40 ®]

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:58:44 GMT, "Philip®" <chipstate@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>The Michelin Harmony came up in my tire screen but I have not reviewed
>the owner ratings.

It's a new tire so I take the owner ratings with a grain of salt.

However, 95% (the highest I have seen), said that they would buy them
again.

So far they seem to me to be roughly equivalent to the X-ones I had on
the Supra.

Beautiful in the dry and very quiet.

I haven't had them in snow yet but while they don't stand out on the
wet they don't seem to me to be a real disadvantage either.

This is all very preliminary though as I have had the car only a short
time and have spent very little of it in that area where the car talks
to you.

I expect to have a firmer opinion by next spring. The car is old and
high mileage so I am taking it easy on the old girl. I only wish I had
bought one of these all-tracs new.

--

FJ40©

"Never again a Ford".....

Beware a govt that fears its populace (gun control)...

"I would bet that most top-posters do indeed not signal their lane-changes." - dizz

"Thank you for contacting the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) about your Ford Aerostar or Windstar.
CAS has received many complaints from consumers concerning peeling paint, ignition switch fires,
stalling and brake, transmission and head gasket failures. Ford should drop "star" from Aerostar
and Windstar because neither is a star when it comes to quality."

[Restic]

I thought this was about Tires.