The subject of QRH speeds and personal opinions brings back memories. Many years back I worked for a 737-200 operator in the Pacific. One of the destinations was Tarawa. This was an atoll which saw a short costly battle between Japanese forces that held the atoll and its vital airstrip, and US marines who finally overwhelmed the defenders. Although Tarawa was the name of a series of atolls surrounding a lagoon, Betio was the atoll that held the airstrip. A larger airstrip was built after the war on Bonriki atoll some 10 miles from Betio.
Bonriki in 1979 was 6500 ft long and made of coral. The surface made for a bumpy, teeth rattling take off run. Ops decided that pilots should use full thrust for all takeoffs in order to reduce the the take off roll and thus exposure to severe vibration. The chief pilot refused to countenance flaps 15 or 25 in order to get airborne in a shorter distance - notwithstanding our take off weights allowed these flap settings. Worse still, he directed that the V speeds to be used for take off were for the performance limiting gross weights for the ambient temperature. As the OAT was invariably 30C, and flap was 5, it meant that for bleeds on full thrust the gross weight from the runway analysis chart gave a figure of max structural of 53 tonnes. Most times we were barely 42 tonnes.
So there we were roaring down the bumpy coral runway with frightened locals covering their ears from 2.15 EPR and near limit N1 and a VR of around 132 knots when with a modicum of commonsense the aircraft could have become airborne 20 knots less, if the speeds for the actual gross weight were used. The coral surface caused significant wear on the tyres - made worse by the higher than needed V speeds.
In my experience there are marked differences of opinion between pilots on the subject of V speeds. Some prefer to use lower flap settings in order to give better gradients of climb and in doing so accept the increased risk of tyre failure at high ground speeds or a decreased stopping margin associated with higher V speeds.
On the other hand, others argue for a greater flap setting within performance limitations in order to give lower V speeds and thus more margin for stopping before V1. My preference is for the latter - again assuming all performance limits are met.