The agreement by major tire manufacturers to adopt a series of uniform tire testing standards is a step in the right direction, but it is not enough.

I believe that the move toward standard laboratory tests on the part of the tire companies is a noble gesture, but it is not the one that is really needed. Fleet administrators are not really confused about safety standards. They are confused about pricing standards. Because of the highly competitive nature of the tire business-including discounting and price advertising-there is a great deal of misunderstanding about tire quality in relationship to tire line. When a tire is offered as a "premium" or "first-line" tire, the question is often asked by whose standards? Under present marketing standards any tire manufacturer can label any new tire he wants as "premium." "first-line," "second-line" or third-line" and sell it at any price he chooses. This price competition has resulted in a great deal of confusion. And it is as bad for the industry as it is for the public.

I strongly urge that the tire companies put their collective heads together and come up with a solution to this perplexing problem. I realize that such a solution probably will require the wisdom of Solomon, but it would benefit the manufacturers in the long run.

I am not naïve enough to believe that the tire companies came up with their uniform test standards out of the goodness of their hearts. They did it because they were threatened with state and federal legislation on tire standards. Such legislation would have been chaotic. It would have meant the possibility of 50 different set of standards.

I contend that there are enough bureaucratic doles on the public payroll to cause the tire industry-and any other sector of private enterprises for that matter-trouble unless said industries develop a self-policing policy. In this day when an ever-increasing sector of the populace looks to Washington for handouts and aid, it is essential that private industry take the voluntary action necessary to protect their rights.

Thus, while I am delighted to see the tire industry take this initial step-on a voluntary basis.---I would like to see the industry go further ---and on their own.

Despite voluntary action by tire makers, it may not be enough to ward-off compulsory legislation. State Senator Edward J. Speno, a Democrat from New York, said recently that he has enough votes to "assure passage" of a "safe tire" bill in the next session of the New York General Assembly. A similar bill introduced by Speno died in the last session after being passed by the Senate. Speno accused the tire companies of opposing his bill.

While on the subject of tires, I would like to solicit your comments on the tire survey in this issue of AUTOMOTIVE FLEET. We are pretty proud of it because it represents something that has never before been undertaken in the passenger car fleet field. It should prove to be of invaluable assistance to fleet operators. So many of our readers are becoming accustomed to expecting "firsts" from AUTOMOTIVE FLEET that they have stopped commenting on our actions. Let's hear from you-it tells us if we are keeping our hands on the pulse of the industry. We think we are.