<p>Can someone explain to me why you have to use 'were' instead of had been? These two seem the same and I can't seem to distinguish between them. Thanks in advance.</p>
<p>It seems strange to realize that, when Harvey Firestone organized the Firestone tire and Rubber company in 1900, rubber tires had been a novelty.</p>
<p>had been == past perfect tense
were past == tense</p>
<p>Past perfect use: Two reference points are clearly identified in the sentence and both are in the past – for example one is 1850 and the other is 1900.</p>
<p>“Train travel had been popular for 50 years when Union Pacific decided to add a new west to northwest train line in 1900.”</p>
<p>Note that the point in the far past is often implicit. Prepositions such as “before” and adverbs such as “when” often imply the time of the event in the far past.</p>
<p>There are numerous examples of past perfect use on the web.</p>
<p>In your example the point in the far past (before 1900) is not present. So the simple past is the better tense choice.</p>
<p>When Harvey Firestone organized the Firestone tire and Rubber company in 1900 rubber tires were a novelty. </p>
<p>Consider however:</p>
<p>When Harvey Firestone organized the Firestone tire and Rubber company in 1900 rubber tires had already been in use in England for 20 years.</p>