>>> Assuming mileage accumulates at 3,000 miles per year, how often should
>>> one replace tires. Houston environment.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>The reason why is that the chemicals in the tires break down over time.
>This sounds like a reasonable recommendation.
It is reasonable, but of course they are going to set that time-
based limit rather low - after all, they want to sell tires. I'd say
after 6 years inspect them very carefully for signs of checking or
cracking. If you see signs of aging, you have some time to start
looking for the tires you want on sale.
Of course, nobody brought up the other rule - "change them when they
are worn out..." ;-P
Seriously, the wear bars showing on two adjacent tread strips are
the absolute "gotta do it" level for the summer - but if they are
getting close to the wear-bars as you head into the rainy season you
probably want to get new tires a bit early.
Tires can be above the wear bars and technically still "good" and
legal to drive on, but hit deep water at speed and they'll hydroplane
like crazy. You start floating over the pavement because the tread
block grooves aren't deep enough to get rid of the water.
--<< Bruce >>--
Max Tindell - 03 Oct 2006 00:21 GMT
>>>> Assuming mileage accumulates at 3,000 miles per year, how often should
>>>> one replace tires. Houston environment.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>like crazy. You start floating over the pavement because the tread
>block grooves aren't deep enough to get rid of the water.
Thanks, guys. I actually posted that kinda tongue-in-cheek, ala the
lengthy thread on oil analysis.
This car is 5 1/2 years old and has 25K on it. We bought it 4 1/2
years ago with 10.5K miles on it. Not anywhere near the wear bars.
BTW, it has OE Michelins.
I fully expect to replace them next year or so because of aging. I do
check them over carefully when I rotate them.
Bruce L. Bergman - 03 Oct 2006 03:53 GMT
>I fully expect to replace them next year or so because of aging. I do
>check them over carefully when I rotate them.
And if they still look pristine down in the crevices between the
tread blocks, let them go another year and check again. Be observant.
You don't want to throw tires away with 25,000 miles of tread life
left on them based solely on an overly cautious time guideline from
the tire maker - because I can GUARANTEE that the Tire Shop will take
those "Totally Unsafe, too old to drive on" tires and sell them out
the back door as "Used", and someone else will get the last bits of
mileage out of them.
You'll look at your gardener's work truck next month, and those
tires will look very familiar....
--<< Bruce >>--
C. E. White - 04 Oct 2006 13:18 GMT
>>I fully expect to replace them next year or so because of aging. I do
>>check them over carefully when I rotate them.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> You'll look at your gardener's work truck next month, and those
> tires will look very familiar....
Maybe so, but it has been my experience that many tires are toast even
though they have plenty of tread left. In fact on the last two Expeditions I
owned, I never actually wore a set down to the wear bars even though all the
tires had well over 50k miles when replaced. When the tires got older they
became noisy, or bumpy, or both. I just sold my 2003 Expedition. It had a
set of Cross Terrains with plenty of tread left. The tires had a tad over
40k miles on them. If I had kept the truck, I was going to replace them
because they were so noisy. I replaced the OE tires that came on the vehicle
(Continentals) at 50k miles because they would not stay balanced. Even at
50k miles they had lots of tread left. It seem to me that the tire carcass
can go bad (belts break, shift, etc) before the tread is actually worn out.
And I think this is particularly true in my area because of the crumbling
roads (thank you Gov. Mike Easley).
Ed White