• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How old are your tires? Aging tires spark new safety concern

Analog

Lifer
Major U.S. tire manufacturers have a new warning for consumers and dealers: Any tire made before 1996 should be swinging from a tree.

Michelin USA and Continental Tire North America Inc. have become the latest manufacturers to issue technical bulletins to dealers calling for the replacement of all tires 10 years or older.

Some automakers -- including Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG -- advise owners that tires be replaced after six years.

Industry and safety experts agree that most tires are replaced long before any unofficial expiration date.

But some tire and safety experts say there is no concrete evidence showing tires aren't safe after a certain age.

Safety advocates, however, contend that tires degrade over time and can become dangerous even if they look new.

"It's an invisible hazard," said Sean Kane, president of Safety Research and Strategies, which tracks auto safety issues.

The latest warnings -- Bridgestone Firestone issued a service bulletin in October, while Michelin and Continental sent advisories this month -- suggest a turning point for the tire makers, Kane said.

"The manufacturers signify that there is an issue and they have to address it," Kane said. "It's just the beginning. Consumers still don't know."

But are they at risk?

Seasonal and recreational vehicles, as well as their trailers, may hit the highways only a few weeks a year, allowing tires to age long past the time it could be safe, experts said.

Spare tires, in particular, pose a problem because they may still appear new six years after they were manufactured.

However, the latest service bulletins issued by the tire makers do not address tire degradation.

All of the warnings echo Bridgestone Firestone's inspection guidelines: "Although (Bridgestone Firestone) is not aware of technical data that supports a specific tire service life, the replacement of tires 10 years after the date of production is an important consideration," the company told dealers in a bulletin last October.http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060223/AUTO01/602230368/1148
 
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
 
look under the bonnet of any old car and you'll see that rubber deteriorates over time. Old tyres crack and become stiffer. The timescale, however, surely depends on the model of tyre and a blanket statement saying X years is unreliable. You can pay anything from £20 to >£80 for a single tyre that is exactly the same size. Cheap tyres are very hard and plastic-based, but whether this makes them last less time is debatable...

I'd change my tyres every four or five years. Much less on my motorbike.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛

The only danager is to their profits.
 
I have a car in the garage with some Bridgestone Radial TA's (Z Series) on it. I purchased them quite a few years back, 1996 may be about right,and have little (but semi-regular) mileage on them. That said, I've noticed that the treads have some cracks appearing. I assume that the rubber is becoming brittle over time and the tires probably should be replaced.



 
I wonder how long it will take the Nitwitness News Live At 5 folks to start running ominous bumpers for their news programs along the lines of "Is unexpected danger lurking in your driveway?!?!?! Tune in at 11:00 for our special report" all based on one this new release?
 
Originally posted by: loic2003
look under the bonnet of any old car and you'll see that rubber deteriorates over time. Old tyres crack and become stiffer. The timescale, however, surely depends on the model of tyre and a blanket statement saying X years is unreliable. You can pay anything from £20 to >£80 for a single tyre that is exactly the same size. Cheap tyres are very hard and plastic-based, but whether this makes them last less time is debatable...

I'd change my tyres every four or five years. Much less on my motorbike.

Bonnet? 😕

Man, you brits got stupid names for everything...
 
My tires are only a few months old and I find myself skidding a lot in the rain. Car came with two new BFGoodrich Touring T/A's at 81k miles, ended up replacing the other two with the same tires a few thousand miles later.

Sucks when you gotta replace new tires with new tires.
 
Originally posted by: skimple
Originally posted by: loic2003
look under the bonnet of any old car and you'll see that rubber deteriorates over time. Old tyres crack and become stiffer. The timescale, however, surely depends on the model of tyre and a blanket statement saying X years is unreliable. You can pay anything from £20 to >£80 for a single tyre that is exactly the same size. Cheap tyres are very hard and plastic-based, but whether this makes them last less time is debatable...

I'd change my tyres every four or five years. Much less on my motorbike.

Bonnet? 😕

Man, you brits got stupid names for everything...


I just started laughing out loud at work...thanks! Could be because I support an account based in the UK.
 
I had an old Plymouth Duster with old bias ply tires on it. The Duster was made in 1975. I owned it in 1998. The tires were from the early 1980s. They were OK until I had an emergency stop, which was more like landing an aircraft than stopping a car.
I put on new radials after that.
 
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛

Actually, I tend to side with the tire manufacturers on this. Not that I've ever had tires last 10 years on any car I've ever owned but when buying a low mileage used sports car for example. If the car is an early 90s model and it is capable of doing over 150mph and is still rolling on original rubber I'd replace them.

Edit-They're probably just covering their asses so they don't get sued if it comes up in the future.
 
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.

Well, you're wrong. It's not suspicious.
 
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.

Well, you're wrong. It's not suspicious.

Any time a manufacturer puts out warnings to replace their products regularly or expiration dates I am suspicious. Much like the oil and oil change industries pushing the 3000 mile oil change, which is simply an absurd waste of time, money and oil in todays cars.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.

Well, you're wrong. It's not suspicious.

Any time a manufacturer puts out warnings to replace their products regularly or expiration dates I am suspicious. Much like the oil and oil change industries pushing the 3000 mile oil change, which is simply an absurd waste of time, money and oil in todays cars.

Just can't admit it can you? :laugh:
 
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: Amused
Well, you have to admit it is a bit suspicious when the people telling you to regularly replace your barely, or unworn tires are the very people who stand to profit from it. 😛
The only danager is to their profits.
Wrong. The rubber deteriorates with age and hardens. Old tires lose significant grip and traction in rain, snow, and other inclement conditions decreases to dangerous levels. Anyone who has been around people who have a "weekend" car should have known for years that tires have an age limit as well as a mileage limit. The Porsche Club of America has recommended for years that any tire older than 6 years is unsafe for a track day. It's part of the inspection.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the companies are recommending 10 years. Every statistic I've seen before has agreed with the 6 years recommended by Ford and Daimler Chrysler.

ZV

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.

Well, you're wrong. It's not suspicious.

Any time a manufacturer puts out warnings to replace their products regularly or expiration dates I am suspicious. Much like the oil and oil change industries pushing the 3000 mile oil change, which is simply an absurd waste of time, money and oil in todays cars.

Just can't admit it can you? :laugh:

Admit what? That I am automatically suspicious when companies put out expiration dates or replacement guidelines? Sure, I'll admit that.

I NEVER said they were wrong, did I? Only that such recommendations are suspicious... and rightly so.
 
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused

I didn't say they were wrong, I said it was suspicious.

Well, you're wrong. It's not suspicious.

Any time a manufacturer puts out warnings to replace their products regularly or expiration dates I am suspicious. Much like the oil and oil change industries pushing the 3000 mile oil change, which is simply an absurd waste of time, money and oil in todays cars.

Just can't admit it can you? :laugh:
😕 Anyone who is not automatically suspicious of a Company who announces that it is in the consumers' best interest to engage in activities that would be advantageous to that Company is a fool.

Also, you should probably buy some more Microsoft products in the near future (And my saying that has absolutely *no* relation to the minor fact that I may own some MSFT stocks.)
 
Back
Top