Personally, I'd run LTs, simply because of their higher "reserve" capacity; upwards of 30% over the stated load. Given that STs have, at best, 10% (used to be basically 0%), you're still in ST load territory, with a much better tire. Hell, we used to run our old 1/2t trucks with massive loads and just air up to 60-65 psi and go. Yes, it wasn't very far, or very fast, but those tires still lasted 50-60k miles, usually with steel cord showing around the edges. :-) We'd then take them off and put them on a disk or trailer and use them until they sun-rotted.
I think someone miss-informed you about "Reserve Load".
All tires have a stated load capacity for example. "2,340# Max Load" molded on the tire sidewall at a stated inflation level such as "50" psi.
"Reserve
Load" is the difference between the actual applied load and the stated
load capacity and is many times stated as a percentage
Example:
A vehicle is on weight scales and we learn that a tire has 2200# load on the tire. The tire has a load capacity of 2,750#. 2,750 minus 2,200 = 550# which is 20% of 2,750. It doesn't make any difference what type tire we are talking about as the math is still the same.
Now,
it is true that for a given set of dimensions, e.g., 235/75R15, the stated load capacity is different depending on type tire and inflation level. P-type and LT-type and ST-type each have different stated load capacities at their stated inflation pressure. For this discussion, let's keep inflation differences out of the picture.
Let's
look at a P235/75R15 at 35 psi is rated to support 2,028# ( In a trailer
application P-Type must be De-rated by Load/1.1 giving 1,842# capacity.)
An LT235/75R15 is rated for 1,530# @ 35 psi and an ST235/75R15 is rated
to support 1,870#
BUT the "Reserve Load" calculation is still (Tire Load Capacity)/Measured scale Load).
The
10% margin for trailers is the difference between the GAWR and the total capacity of the tires on that axle at their max load. I have
posted in my blog some actual margins showing that many cars have load
margins of 25% to 35% while some RVs made before Nov 2017, when RVIA
changed the "Margin" to 10%, had margins of tire capacity vs GAWR as low
as 1%.
Hope this helps.
##RVT941
##RVT941
“US brand name” stamped on them, leaving the consumer with very few, if any, alternatives.
Now, coïncidentelly, we hear that LT tires are “just the thing” for trailering.
It also appears that a handful of RV manufacturers, like Jayco, have seemingly struck a deal with Goodyear, who now has resumed manufacturing ST tires in North America, to equip their new trailers with “US-made ST tires”. I guess their ST tire prices have dropped again enough to catch the big manufacturer’s attention and make it worth their while.
So I guess the real question should now be, are US-made Goodyear ST tires better, worst or equal quality than their US-made Goodyear LT tires, or why even bother to engineer ST tires at all? We shall see, in time, who wins between; Beta or Vhs, Plasma or Lcd, Android or Apple, etc, etc, etc."
Alain, The biggest issue is, I know of no way to do a direct comparison of ST vs LT tires other than an expensive tire test. We can't depend on the DOT test results. In all probability the tires all pass, simply because the RV industry and ST tire mfg companies were successful in getting ST tires excluded from the significant improvement in testing with updated standards in 2002. There is no question, in my mind, that the tests (FMVSS 571.119) for ST type tires are easier to pass than the tests (FMVSS 571.139) for new Passenger and LT type tires.
I have looked at the construction of a GY Endurance and it certainly looks better than the older Marathon design. Now remember I do not have access to the actual specification or material properties used by GY but in the Endurance tire line, they appear to have added a Nylon cap over the steel belts. You can confirm this by reading the material list molded on a tire sidewall.
"Quality" is a tough call when you have two different specifications to start with. Isn't Quality just a measure of a tire's ability to meet the specification for that product?
You can think of it this way. If I had two pieces of chain. One rated at 500# and another rated at 550#. They both meet a strength test of supporting the rated load and if you tested 100 pieces of each and found that all 100 passes the rates strength test how would you rate the 'Quality"? You can't say the 550# chain is better quality than the 500# chain as they have two different goals, just as you can't say a 1-ton truck is better quality than a 1/2 ton truck because the 1-ton can handle more load.
Your example of Beta vs VHS is a good example of the confusion possible. Beta was judged technically superior to VHS but Sony made a marketing decision to prevent other companies from using the Beta specification in their video players. The result was that VHS units were less expensive so many people bought on price. Eventually, Sony lost out. Not because the "Quality" of that video format wasn't as good as VHS but because the market was "price-sensitive" and too many people selected lower cost over better quality product.
Gene offered
"OK, color me confused! I have always gotten the impression that ST tires and not LT tires are what I should be running on my RV. After reading this article now I’m not sure. Are you suggesting that all things being equal, LT tires of the same size, load rating, etc are better to run on my RV? I don’t mind the cost, just want to put best possible tire on my RV. Thanks for keeping us informed."
to which I replied
Gene, The problem is that "all things are not equal" as there are no LT tires of the same size, load range, and load rating, etc as an ST tire. There is always something that is different.
Sometimes the only option would be to go with larger size LT tires but in some cases, there is no physical room to run the available larger size tires.
IMO, what you "should" be running are tires built to the latest industry test standards (LT) that can offer at least 15 to 25% "Reserve Load " capacity