Date:         Sun, 21 Jun 2015 08:32:57 -0700
Reply-To:     Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Tires.. Again..Insurance reasons...
Comments: To: Stephen Grisanti <bike2vcu@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To:  <154406295.1354648.1434897286411.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Ooops! thanks for the correction.

On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Stephen Grisanti <bike2vcu@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> "...If the vehicle was sold with some understeer (when the rear end loses
> traction
> first)..."
>
> I think you mean "oversteer" here.
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
>   On Sunday, June 21, 2015 9:38 AM, Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
> wrote:
>
>
> Some have deduced that manufacturers recommended tire pressures are meant
> to actually cause vehicles to understeer, withpotential lawsuits as the
> main reason rather than effective traction..  (understeer is when the
> front tires lose  traction first. so the vehicle 'plows' straight ahead
> when the traction limit is exceeded)  This is said to be a decision made
> by lawyers and insurance companies so that they can avoid liability when
> people 'over-drive' their vehicles and crash em....When the crash happens,
> it's can more easily be proven to be the driver's fault if the car goes
> front-first into the ditch...."That car was going too fast!...See, he just
> couldn't make the corner, he went straight off......"  like that.  If the
> the vehicle was sold with some understeer (when the rear end loses traction
> first) the Lawyers can argue that it was the vehicle's manufacturers fault
> ......"The driver was just going round the corner and all of a sudden, the
> car spun out and flew off the road....."
>
>
>