Budget tyres conclusively bad?

[Malc1]

12 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Dunlop brands owned by dodgy Mike

hence the brand new leaky welly boots no doubt !

Malc

[Shahpor]

Another thing that I hadn't considered before is would you fit a different tyre based on the performance of the car?  Now, I am not talking supercars or anything, but, for example, my Stinger comes with Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S's.  Personally, based on how I drive mine, I think the S's are overkill but the manufacturer obviously didn't think so.

When it comes to stopping distances, the performance of the car should be largely irrelevant given the speeds involved, however, when it comes to handling, it is much easier for my rear tyres to lose traction than on my previous cars, so levels of grip might be important.

So, in my instances, I will probably be 'downgrading' my tyres to the Pilot Sport 4's or something similar because the S's seem to be primarily for maximum performance and handling characteristics.

[Sundance]

15 minutes ago, Shahpor said:

Another thing that I hadn't considered before is would you fit a different tyre based on the performance of the car?

Every time. Why do racehorses have aluminium shoes? Then a farrier would never fit a gold shoe on a cart horse. 😉

[Shahpor]

2 minutes ago, Sundance said:

Every time. Why do racehorses have aluminium shoes? Then a farrier would never fit a gold shoe on a cart horse. 😉

🙂

I guess what I am getting at is that with 'hot hatches' now pushing 400hp in some cases, the lines of what a performance car is can sometimes get a little blurred.

[Malc1]

reading another post heading that MOTs can be picky on the tyre ratings for these now zippy over / super powered cars  ..  so make sure any new treads you buy comply with the outpouring of MOT tyre rules and regs

You don't want to be spending lots ££££ on summat that might fail the MOT on " tyre strength " so as to speak 

Malc

[Hear no evil]

Agreed, I consider good tyres (providing one regularly checks pressures) and well maintained brakes are by far the most important thing for me. I've always found asymmetric tyres better all round, and definitely better than directional for wet weather. My most recent tyres are Firestone Roadhawk (owned by Bridgestone) a step up from the Bridgestone Turanzas that were on it before, but nowhere near as good as the Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta I had on a car previous to that. I've also learned that often there's very little difference between a mid range and premium tyre, but there's worlds apart between a budget and a mid range. As far as a mid range tyre offering great VFM is concerned, GT Radial are very good indeed, eight of ten across the board and incredibly hard wearing. Can usually be bought, fitted for approx £75-80 (225x50x17) 

[Hear no evil]

7 hours ago, Shahpor said:

Another thing that I hadn't considered before is would you fit a different tyre based on the performance of the car?

100% I used to have a road legal track car (MK5 Golf Gti. 340/440 bhp/lbft FWD 😂) It had five switchable maps on it and if on the rare occasion I was brave enough to have map 5 on, or if I was doing track days, it would only stay on the tarmac if it had Toyo R888s bolted to each corner, anything else forget it. These were the only tyres that could handle fast cornering without falling away and the only tyres that could hold traction under acceleration. For any other map and daily driving, it'd have Yokohama Advans or Avon ZZ3s. 

[Linas.P]

8 hours ago, Shahpor said:

Another thing that I hadn't considered before is would you fit a different tyre based on the performance of the car?  Now, I am not talking supercars or anything, but, for example, my Stinger comes with Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S's.  Personally, based on how I drive mine, I think the S's are overkill but the manufacturer obviously didn't think so.

When it comes to stopping distances, the performance of the car should be largely irrelevant given the speeds involved, however, when it comes to handling, it is much easier for my rear tyres to lose traction than on my previous cars, so levels of grip might be important.

So, in my instances, I will probably be 'downgrading' my tyres to the Pilot Sport 4's or something similar because the S's seem to be primarily for maximum performance and handling characteristics.

I find it strange that people do not consider it, and I don't mean you... I mean how often one can see expensive cars with 500HP being fitted with budget tyres! I can go now on Autotrader and every second premium car with a lot of power are sitting of some horrible chinesium ditchfinders. What is the logic there? I guess the goal is flipping the cars for cheap and fitting what is barely legal... I have argued about this with sellers few times and they think it is me who is unreasonable... "mate these are nearly new 'road legal' tyres, what do you wants?!"... (in this case the car was 550HP Supercharged Jaguar XKR-S). That is why I was arguing they probably should be "road-illegal". I think they need to change testing methodology and really tighten what passes as "road legal" tyre.  But what I am talking about - in UK you can even fit different tyres on the same axle, which is death-wish regardless what tyres we are talking about.

That said, I can look past budget tyres on literal shoe box for £500 and 1.1L engine... There are still concerns, because even the smallest car can still reach motorway speeds (eventually), so they still might find themselves in the situation where good grip is required, but at least I can see the owners perspective... if they only drive locally, never go past 40MPH, are really really careful and do 2000miles per year, then perhaps premium tyres for £500 would be overkill. I would still insist that at least mid-range tyres should be fitted and they are probably available for £10 per tyre more, but overall it is less of a crime. Now - I would not do it myself, but at least I can see rational reasoning here.

The way I personally adjust the tyres for the car... UUHP like Pilot Sport Super (Super is what S stands for) and similar are for very powerful and fast cars, say 300HP+ and for people who planning to drive very fast on dry roads. So I see them as optional. The UHP like Pilot Sport (non-S)- that is for most other cars and drivers who like spirited driving and occasionally drive fast, I kind of see them as requirement for any car 200HP+ and they are more universal, better for wet roads etc. Touring tyres like Primacy are for rest of the cars and maybe occasionally acceptable on more powerful/faster cars if driver is not planning to be going fast e.g. I see them perfect fine fit for 500HP MB S-Class which is probably being driven by chauffeur and just cruises around. But that is only "tyre type", I don't even consider anything outside of premium brands, or occasionally very good mid-range tyre (well reviewed and performing well in tests). At no point I consider budgets acceptable... and if not for their handling, then simply because they likely do not save any money over their lifetime.

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

tyre ratings

Tyre ratings (speed and load) has no relevance to the handling... and it is seems like all the budget chinesium tyres have correct ratings... they claim they can go 300KMH 😄 These ratings have to be met by law, but one needs to be careful interpreting them... For example load rating of 100 means tyre can handle weight of 800kg... on a stationary car. The speed rating likewise only means that tyre marked as Y should not disintegrate spinning at speed equivalent to 300KMH. The test methodology - they spin the tyre in 10KMH increments for 10 minutes each, at the last increment where tyre didn't explode they mark that it is rated at that speed. Spoiler alert - most modern tyres can exceed 300KMH free spin, so instead manufacturers simply test up-to desired rating. Usually UUHP and UHP get's full test, but cheaper, Touring tyres, winter or off-road tyres are not tested past desired speed, so they just mark them as Z, V or W, when they reach 240 or 270KMH. But then again - I trust that Michelin, Continental, Goodyear, Toyo, Yokohama, Avon etc. do these tests... I am not so sure I trust DoubleCoin testing methodology when they claim their tyre is rated as 100Y - who is there checking what they testing and how?

But here is the kicker - tyre ratings (including fuel economy, noise, wet and dry grip) are all self-claimed. Basically, tyre companies don't need to go trough some sort of centralised laboratory test to prove it, sure there are standards and expectations set, but they are no enforced... pretty much what so called "EU label" says is "trust me bro" type of stuff. Now sure Premium and maybe even mid-range tyre brands have incentive to do their own internal testing to make sure the tyres meet or exceed the specifications, because they care about their brand image, but do you think brand which calls itself "hit-pis" cares about bad publicity?!

[Hear no evil]

10 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

But here is the kicker - tyre ratings (including fuel economy, noise, wet and dry grip) are all self-claimed. Basically, tyre companies don't need to go trough some sort of centralised laboratory test to prove it, sure there are standards and expectations set, but they are no enforced... pretty much what so called "EU label" says is "trust me bro" type of stuff. Now sure Premium and maybe even mid-range tyre brands have incentive to do their own internal testing to make sure the tyres meet or exceed the specifications, because they care about their brand image, but do you think brand which calls itself "hit-pis" cares about bad publicity?!

This is where I've found sites like https://www.tyrereviews.com/ incredibly helpful. I'd much rather have user data and well documented anecdotal evidence to go than some spiel from a manufacturer. 

[Linas.P]

41 minutes ago, Hear no evil said:

This is where I've found sites like https://www.tyrereviews.com/ incredibly helpful. I'd much rather have user data and well documented anecdotal evidence to go than some spiel from a manufacturer. 

Yes, it is same site as per video I have posted. That said sometimes it is worth reading what people have to say, because sometimes rating all over the place. I have seen guy giving 1 start review because he run over the nail near the side of the tyre and was told he have to replace the tyre... how is that tyre fault?!

Likewise there are loads of good reviews for budget tyres...  Davanti DX640 - "im well impressed stick like glue even in the wet top marks" ahahm... yeah sure, sticks like a glue in wet... and we have seen how it sticks... stops 10 meters behind Premium tyre! So I find people perspective is always based on their own experiences... if one is coming from bald mismatched budgets, then set of brand new tyres may be improvement, but if one is coming from set of premium tyres they would rate them differently.

I think most valuable are review where they say "I had this and I moved to this, and now that is better and that is worse"... so then it is easy to follow how it compares with other tyres on sale.

[Hear no evil]

1 minute ago, Linas.P said:

Yes, it is same site as per video I have posted. That said sometimes it is worth reading what people have to say, because sometimes rating all over the place. I have seen guy giving 1 start review because he run over the nail near the side of the tyre and was told he have to replace the tyre... how is that tyre fault?!

Of course, you can't just rely on the scoring. I've seen the same type of thing, 'one star - side wall exploded just because I nicked a rocky outcrop on country road' 😂

[Malc1]

does the average punter just wanting to replace tyres have any chance of understanding wot on earth it is he/she should be buying .........  Average Punter, 20 million or so in the UK is it !   I'm talking about 

Not a hope in hell's chance methinks ......  just go with whatever the tyre sales place advises eh !

Just walk / drive in to KwikFit, Halfords whatever and say .  do i need new tyres, well, yes sir for sure and these are what you could be buying sir.... .  or madam

Now which card do i use today 😉

Malc

[Sundance]

15 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

does the average punter just wanting to replace tyres have any chance of understanding wot on earth it is he/she should be buying .........  Average Punter, 20 million or so in the UK is it !   I'm talking about 

Not a hope in hell's chance methinks ......  just go with whatever the tyre sales place advises eh !

Just walk / drive in to KwikFit, Halfords whatever and say .  do i need new tyres, well, yes sir for sure and these are what you could be buying sir.... .  or madam

Now which card do i use today 😉

Malc

That'll be it Malc, and they'll get the boots with the fattest mark up for the retailer carefully camouflaged as "best deal of the week". 🤥

Thank you Sir (or Madam), do come again ... and they probably will. 😉

[Mr Vlad]

Actually places like kick fit are owned by tyre manufacturers. They'll recommend the brand the shop is owned by.

It's not just 'cheap' tyres that are bad but some so called premium ones too. I hate Michelin as my experience some years back proved.

When I bought my is250 3 years ago it came with a cheap tyre on the front. Eurovis. They were good to a point but with easy over 5mm tread on them they've been scared and replaced with Bridgestone turanza t005 like my rear tyres. And boy oh boy the suspension gives up before the tyre now lol.

[serbarry]

On 4/3/2023 at 7:46 PM, Linas.P said:

 

Actually surprisingly expensive tyres considering Prius runs R16/195/55... and more difference then I expected:

 

My Prius had 185/R15. Maybe the only Prius in Ireland with this size.

[Linas.P]

2 hours ago, Malc1 said:

does the average punter just wanting to replace tyres have any chance of understanding wot on earth it is he/she should be buying .........  Average Punter, 20 million or so in the UK is it !   I'm talking about 

Not a hope in hell's chance methinks ......  just go with whatever the tyre sales place advises eh !

Just walk / drive in to KwikFit, Halfords whatever and say .  do i need new tyres, well, yes sir for sure and these are what you could be buying sir.... .  or madam

Now which card do i use today 😉

Absolutely NO CHANCE! That is why I would argue the testing methodology should be significantly tightened and testing should be centralised and run by government. This would at very least ensure that all tyres are tested equally.

Now obviously, If punters come with an attitude and demand "the cheapest tyre", that doesn’t help either! But even if they ask for a recommendation, it doesn’t improve their chances much. I don’t want to delve into conspiracy theories, but tyre shops don’t have an incentive to recommend good tyres... they just don’t! I’ve heard of shops pushing Avons and Falkens, which are decent tyres. But they’re not being pushed because they’re decent, they’re being pushed because the shop has a larger stock of them or because they got a discount from the sales manager and have a higher profit margin on that brand for a period of time.

I realised this when I was maybe 22 and had to replace the first set of tyres on my then new IS250 (at around 12,000 miles rears were giving-up). I went to the tyre shop and asked for a recommendation and they recommended Nexen N6000 or N1000. At the time, Nexen was considered a budget tyre and now they’re more "mid-range". But to be honest, I still don’t trust them. I can’t remember the exact model, but they were horrible. So horrible that I nearly spun out three times in three miles. I went back to the shop and told them to take them back. They obviously weren’t keen on it, so we reached a compromise: I paid around £120 and they upgraded me to a set of nearly new Pirelli P-Zeros (they had them for display or something). Since then, I’ve thought that if you want tyres, you have to do your own research and tell them what to fit. Never ask - they’re just not on your side!

20 minutes ago, serbarry said:

My Prius had 185/R15. Maybe the only Prius in Ireland with this size.

Only makes ~£3 difference, but in principle the same applies. Cheapest tyre is £36 instead of £39, but at £53 one can already get Kuhmo. So total extra cost £68/set. And if one would buy such tyres today on blackcircles, they could get £10 off for 2 and £25 off for 4... making the difference of mere £43 between death wish and decent set of tyre.

Mark my words - one day chinese will put "DeathWish - QuickDeath 1000 Turbo" tyres on sale and people still going to buy them 😄 

[Linas.P]

Just been looking for tyres myself and realised one thing... which I kind of knew, but never thought about it much and wanted to kind of correct myself. Long post warning! 😄  

Previously I said "if you can't afford premium tyres, it is better to get used premium than new budgets". The second part of sentence still stands, I still believe there is never good reason to get budget tyres... ever. But first part is what I realised is not really true... at least not at the moment.

Looking at used premium tyre prices, many tyres listed and priced based on thread depth remaining, but there is a catch! As it is hopefully surprise to no one - there is minimum thread depth required by the law in UK (1.6mm across central 75%)... so let's say brand new tyre comes with 8.6mm thread... well it's thread isn't 8.6mm, as far as we concerned by the law it is 7mm of wearable thread. So if you looking to buy used tyre with 4.3mm thread life it is not "50% worn", it is actually 62% worn. And to be fair I would say it get's even worse, because no reasonable person drives all the way to 1.6mm. I personally start looking for replacement when tyre get's to ~3mm (this is by the way the point where manufacturers advise tyre start losing most of it's grip anyway) and I replace them at some point when it get's below 2.5mm, allowed for some uneven wear it may be the case that on side of the tyre is 2.2mm, but other is already at 1.8mm. Anyhow... my point - whatever is thread depth on the tyre, take away at least 2mm from it for legal reason and another 0.5mm for uneven wear. 

So where is the problem then... well the problem is that used tyres just works out more expensive, which clearly makes no sense. We can divide the tyre cost per mm of thread, obviously this cannot be compared across the different tyres, but let's take real example - Pirelli Citurato P7 C2 comes with 8.8mm of thread new and it cost £79.99 for 225/45R17. Using logic above if we take away ~2.5mm, then we will end-up with 6.3mm usable thread or cost of ~£12.70/mm. The used Citurato P7 often sells on eBay with 5-6mm of thread and at the cost of ~£50 per tyre, or at £14.30/mm because only 3.5 mm is really usable (I have averaged 27 offers and they work out at 5.6mm and £52). Now sure... it seems like I am penny pinching £2 and counting mm, but let's not forget the context - people buy "hit-pis 2000" so save £8 per tyre... and here we would be losing £2/mm, if we convert used tyre price into new tyre thread depth it would work out £11 more (£90 instead of £79). And by the way - buying used it is not only the tyre depth that you losing... used tyres don't seal as well (so there is risk of slow leaks), they will be older rubber, so harder, less grippy etc. and we don't even know how long they were stored and in what conditions, as well about 0.5mm is shawled of the tyre after refitting/rebalancing - basically tyres/wheels are not perfectly round, so they "worn-in" to the shape of wheel overtime, so once you refit it, the tyre has to "worn-in" to the new wheel (and I don't mean bent wheels, basically the only reason wheels needs balancing is that tyre/wheel combo is never perfectly balanced or round). Anyway - I am sure you bored by now but the point is that "used mm" is not equal "new mm". 

But that is not even the end - in my example I used Citurato P2, but the tyres that are sold used are actually older model which was replaced twice (P2 > P2 Blue > P2 C2), so it isn't even fair to compare it to the tyre of £79.99, because we are talking about 8 years older tyre model which wasn't as good to begin with. And this is true across the board - any premium tyre will be worn for years until it gets to the point where ~40% of thread is left, so very often you will be looking in 1-2 generation old tyres. All these things considered I cannot see how used tyre could be any more than 50% of the cost of new tyre per mm i.e. that 6mm Citurato should cost no more than £20 to be worth it. To be honest this used to be the case in the past, I remember driving into Europe in winter and buying 4 Pirelli Winter tyres for something like £90 delivered and they were 8mm and when new costed ~£150 each. Perhaps it is current living standard crisis that forces people to buy used and hence the prices are ridiculous. 

So what is conclusion - I still think buying premium is most economical option, not only they are better, but they as well going to outlast budgets and most mid-rangers on mileage, so they will work out cheaper overall and maybe about the same as mid-rangers after considering the initial price difference. But the worst thing to do when trying to save money is to waste it and buy something that works out more expensive in long run... budgets works out more expensive in long run, but it seems that used premium are the same as well. So in the end I consider that the only reasonable justification for buying used premium tyre is to replace maybe the tyre you have punctured... maybe you have set of 6mm Michelin PS4s all around and one needs replacing... yes getting used PS4s with 6mm thread for £90 probably makes sense in such circumstances, but apart of that I would say just ignore used tyres unless prices! There are no saving to be made buying used!

[LenT]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

So what is conclusion - I still think buying premium is most economical option, not only they are better, but they as well going to outlast budgets and most mid-rangers on mileage, so they will work out cheaper overall and maybe about the same as mid-rangers after considering the initial price difference.

A very well argued case, Linus, and my feelings exactly.  I have always bought ‘Premium’ brands and a minimum of 3mm tread depth has been my replacement point.

However…there are Premium brands that also make budget tyres in order not to miss out on a major chunk of the market.  Chosen wisely - and used as intended - they can be a aafe and sensible purchase.

For example, when I worked on Esso they launched a range of Esso branded tyres, batteries and accessories.  The tyres were aimed squarely at the budget market.

They were actually made by Pirelli- I recall going to watch the process - using the same carcasses and compounds as on a regular Pirelli production line, but using a different mould.

The reason why they could be offered as a ‘Budget’ tyre - apart from being sold to Esso in the first instance- is that they were produced in a very limited range of the most popular sizes.

I do recall seeing a list of Premium tyre brands that also make a budget range under a different name.  Provided the differences are  mainly cosmetic then I expect they would be an acceptable alternative for many motorists.

[Linas.P]

9 hours ago, LenT said:

I do recall seeing a list of Premium tyre brands that also make a budget range under a different name

Are you referring to this:

On 4/3/2023 at 7:02 PM, Linas.P said:

Goodyear owns - <> Sava, Debica, Cooper and few more brands... (including Avon now).

Same can be said about Uniroyal - it is owned by Michelin and will be similar with last gen Michelin Products. So let's say Rainsport 5 I would expect to perform like Pilot Sport 3, and Rainsport 3, like Pilot Sport 2. (Apparently Uniroyals sold in EU are made by Continental and sold in US by Michelin)

Same for Gislaved - owned by Continental. I guess you get the point by now...

Oh... and if it wasn't confusing enough, then Goodyear and Sumitomo has a deal which allows them to use each other brands... so some of Dunlops in Asia are made by Sumitomo, whereas Sumitomo and Falken could be made by Goodyear in US... and Europe from time to time can get tyres from both!

Yes - with some research savings can be made 

[Mr Vlad]

Sorry Linas I have to disagree with you regarding how used tyres fit the rim etc. In the 80's and 90's part worn tyres were the only ones I bought. Yes premium brands and never below 6mm tread. I never had issues with tyre pressure loss because of poor rim fit. The tyres were like new and the cars they went on were the sports variants and back then I drove like I stole it, oh happy days. Back then part worns were less than half the price of brand new. Nowadays I'd hazard a guess they're 60-75% the price of brand new. I've been buying brand new since the noughties. 

Excellent, is it, synopsis regarding getting what you pay for re the actual tread depth that's usable. 

[Linas.P]

36 minutes ago, Mr Vlad said:

Sorry Linas I have to disagree with you regarding how used tyres fit the rim etc. In the 80's and 90's part worn tyres were the only ones I bought. Yes premium brands and never below 6mm tread. I never had issues with tyre pressure loss because of poor rim fit. The tyres were like new and the cars they went on were the sports variants and back then I drove like I stole it, oh happy days. Back then part worns were less than half the price of brand new. Nowadays I'd hazard a guess they're 60-75% the price of brand new. I've been buying brand new since the noughties. 

Excellent, is it, synopsis regarding getting what you pay for re the actual tread depth that's usable. 

Not much of disagreement then - I said there is risk they not going to seal as well, not that they will leak. I had used tyres in the past and had no issues with them either, but it all comes down to bead being cleaned properly, not damaged when tyre was removed etc. and let's face it - whoever was replacing those tyres probably didn't care much for protecting what was effectively £2 of environmental liability. When you get new tyre you can be sure the bead is not damaged and it is clean, but with used tyres you just don't have such guarantee.

On second point we agree - as long as the price is right and reflects properly the remaining thread and the risks associated with the used nature of the item they are fine. And if new tyre is £12/mm, then I would happily pay £6/mm for same used tyre and take the risk. But when it works out actually more expensive than new... no thanks... prices are ridiculous now. 

I just wanted to correct myself, because previously I said "go and buy used", but it turns out prices nowadays just doesn't make sense.

[Malc1]

16 hours ago, Linas.P said:

budgets works out more expensive in long run,

But one has to consider that many tyres are replaced by car owners that  have to replace them, MOT time for instance and  just before off-loading the car to the next owner AND won't care a monkey's about longevity on-going  .....  and the lowest price factor comes into play whatever the merits of the new or even used replacement tyre

Malc

[Linas.P]

31 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

But one has to consider that many tyres are replaced by car owners that  have to replace them, MOT time for instance and  just before off-loading the car to the next owner AND won't care a monkey's about longevity on-going  .....  and the lowest price factor comes into play whatever the merits of the new or even used replacement tyre

For MOT this argument doesn't work, because then presumably after passing MOT you use the car, so what difference does it make? Unless we are talking about real beaters where valid MOT is worth as much as the car itself. 

As for selling the car - sadly that is the truth, many people don't know/don't care, but I for example always consider what tyres are on the car and have several times refused to buy car or negotiated sizeable discount. Even if they are premium tyres, but say word down to 2mm, it would reasonable to say "well car is good, but rear tyres needs replacement" - right? So it is same with budget tyres - because as far as I am concerned if car has budget tyres on it then they will go into trash immediately. I may drive back home on them, but they will be replaced as the first thing next day. So in such case I would say "decent car, but tyres are trash and will have to be replaced". There have been cases where we could not agree on that with the seller and seller considered me "unreasonable", because "mate these are nearly new road legal tyres"... NOPE... don't care, they are trash not worth the rubber they are made off, so I want discount to the value of decent tyre, which usually works out at say £80-£120 per tyre depending on the size. This is in no way different from any other defects on the car, if wheels are scratched they will need to be refurbished, that costs £400, if the seat is ripped that will need to be fixed, this will be £300... if Battery is dying that will cost £100. So same for the tyres. I would argue they are not fooling anyone by saving 2 pennies on the tyres... at least not people who knows what they are doing. Now again - sad truth is that people are ignorant, lazy, do not negotiate, do not research, do not inspect what they buying and don't even know what they buying. Then obviously next day they come to the respective forum and start asking the questions after the purchase and it turns out their new vehicle is costly mistake with a lot of thing wrong about it. And sure with 80% of people being ignorant why wouldn't the sellers take advantage of them?

That said I still think in long run it is not beneficial... I have long said as one of advise looking for cars to check the tyres. If the tyres are premium it meant previous owner cared about the maintenance overall... and after several dozen cars that I and my friends bought this almost always the true. Every time you see car listed with premium tyres and you go to inspect, it always have folders and folders with previous invoices, service history etc. Anytime you go to look at the car on budgets... usually there is no history, or history missing and various red flags everywhere. I know exceptions definitely exists, but what I found is that tyre brand often is just a visual representation of how much care the owner put into the maintenance of the car. And there is one interesting caveat - some cars on good mid-range tyres, like specific models which are well reviewed are probably the best maintained, because it shows that owner was paying attention and doing research, are likely mechanically minded and not just blindly paying the money. But again - if you see the car with budgets, walk away, owner was economical with the tyres, was economical with the maintenance and probably is economical with the truth. Again - exceptions exists and not everyone are passionate about the cars, not everyone knows what they doing and they might not even know what tyres are on their cars, so this certainly don't mean they are liars... although it could be still argued that person who does not care and does not know, just couldn't have maintained the car well, not maliciously, but just from ignorance. 

When selling I as well have used this argument quite a few times - I point out that tyres are premium, that they are good and buyers often have more trust in the rest of the car, again they see I didn't try to sell them car with black round death traps on the wheels, so by association "probably rest of the car is also okey". What this works out at - people negotiate less and you have less "tyre kickers" (literally), saves time, saves money and you sell car quicker. So even from seller perspective I doubt budget tyres really saves that much money.