OT: Should tires be changed just because of age?
07-02-2004, 03:34 PM
#1
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
OT: Should tires be changed just because of age?
The wife and I have a '97 Suburban that we use to haul horses and for family trips. We bought the truck in '01.
The truck has about 70K miles, and the original owner put aftermarket wheels with Michelin tires on the truck sometime in the first year or two of its existence. The tires have plenty of tread, but the surfaces of the tires have lots of small, shallow cracks.
Should I be considering replacing the tires simply because of their age? These tires are about six years old.
Any advice is appreciated.
The truck has about 70K miles, and the original owner put aftermarket wheels with Michelin tires on the truck sometime in the first year or two of its existence. The tires have plenty of tread, but the surfaces of the tires have lots of small, shallow cracks.
Should I be considering replacing the tires simply because of their age? These tires are about six years old.
Any advice is appreciated.
07-02-2004, 03:46 PM
#2
IF they are dryrotting\cracking, they should be replaced. If the car sits a lot with the tires in the same position, the tires will rot and crack. THis is not good as eventually the tires will crack down to the cords and burts the tire (that takes a long time)
07-02-2004, 06:41 PM
#3
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
If you have to ask, replace them. It's kinda like brakes and shocks, if you find something that causes you to think "Hmm, maybe I should replace them" then you just answered your own question.
What's the cost of tires vs the alternative? I admit when it comes to my cars I'm over paranoid and maybe spend money a bit too soon too often on things like this. I like not having to worry about small things.
Matt H can give you all kinds of details about tires and age.
What's the cost of tires vs the alternative? I admit when it comes to my cars I'm over paranoid and maybe spend money a bit too soon too often on things like this. I like not having to worry about small things.
Matt H can give you all kinds of details about tires and age.
07-02-2004, 06:45 PM
#4
Drifting
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Espoo, Finland
Posts: 2,668
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Replace them. They might be ok on dry ground, but very slippery when it's raining... I've got old tires on my backup ride, and it's totally hopeless in the wet even though there's a decent amount of tread left.
07-02-2004, 07:27 PM
#7
Pro
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From http://www.type2.com/library/tires/tirefaq.htm :
[Q]
All tires are coded to indicate the week of manufacture. Look for a three digit number following the DOT Serial Number. The date code will be stamped rather than molded. The first two digits are the week of the year in which the tire was manufactured (01 thru 52), followed by the final digit from the year of manufacture. A tire stamped "134" was manufactured in the 13th week (the week of April 4th in this case) of 1994.
[/Q]
I believe the rule is seven years from date of manufacture as the limit of a tire's useful life.
[Q]
All tires are coded to indicate the week of manufacture. Look for a three digit number following the DOT Serial Number. The date code will be stamped rather than molded. The first two digits are the week of the year in which the tire was manufactured (01 thru 52), followed by the final digit from the year of manufacture. A tire stamped "134" was manufactured in the 13th week (the week of April 4th in this case) of 1994.
[/Q]
I believe the rule is seven years from date of manufacture as the limit of a tire's useful life.
Trending Topics
07-02-2004, 08:03 PM
#8
Recent advisory from the Feds is six years. This was established in conjunction with the major tire mfg's.
I believe the rule is seven years from date of manufacture as the limit of a tire's useful life.
Both are incorrect. Every manufacturer on earth has lobbied against the NHTSA's aging directive. In fact, it is no longer in effect. RMA (rubber manufacturers association) has been working with NHTSA and tire manufacturers to come up with a way to make an effective aging plan. In fact, however, we all recognize that this is not really possible. Entirely too much relies on how the tires are stored. You will likely see something from RMA and NHTSA in 2007-2009 on this subject.
All tires are coded to indicate the week of manufacture. Look for a three digit number following the DOT Serial Number. The date code will be stamped rather than molded. The first two digits are the week of the year in which the tire was manufactured (01 thru 52), followed by the final digit from the year of manufacture. A tire stamped "134" was manufactured in the 13th week (the week of April 4th in this case) of 1994.
This link is so old it is no longer correct. Tires are marked with a 4 digit code (since 2000, for obvious reasons) and a decade marker that looks like an equillateral triangle pointing to the date code. In fact, 134 would be 13th week of 1994 (depending on whether the tire had a decade marker, it could be 1984!). Same system applies, 3404, would be equal to the 34th week of 2004.
If a tire is rotted or dry cracked it is far more likely to fail. Further, as pointed out, once the carbon black hardens tires are damn worthless in the rain. I have seen plenty of brand new 10 year old spares that went 2 miles before blowing up.
At the end of the day there is no correct answer regarding the age, however, the condition sounds like it warrants replacement. FWIW - Michelin's tend to suffer more than most brands when it comes to dry cracking. Not sure if it is the environment they are produced in or the compounding as I am not privy to that information.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
I believe the rule is seven years from date of manufacture as the limit of a tire's useful life.
Both are incorrect. Every manufacturer on earth has lobbied against the NHTSA's aging directive. In fact, it is no longer in effect. RMA (rubber manufacturers association) has been working with NHTSA and tire manufacturers to come up with a way to make an effective aging plan. In fact, however, we all recognize that this is not really possible. Entirely too much relies on how the tires are stored. You will likely see something from RMA and NHTSA in 2007-2009 on this subject.
All tires are coded to indicate the week of manufacture. Look for a three digit number following the DOT Serial Number. The date code will be stamped rather than molded. The first two digits are the week of the year in which the tire was manufactured (01 thru 52), followed by the final digit from the year of manufacture. A tire stamped "134" was manufactured in the 13th week (the week of April 4th in this case) of 1994.
This link is so old it is no longer correct. Tires are marked with a 4 digit code (since 2000, for obvious reasons) and a decade marker that looks like an equillateral triangle pointing to the date code. In fact, 134 would be 13th week of 1994 (depending on whether the tire had a decade marker, it could be 1984!). Same system applies, 3404, would be equal to the 34th week of 2004.
If a tire is rotted or dry cracked it is far more likely to fail. Further, as pointed out, once the carbon black hardens tires are damn worthless in the rain. I have seen plenty of brand new 10 year old spares that went 2 miles before blowing up.
At the end of the day there is no correct answer regarding the age, however, the condition sounds like it warrants replacement. FWIW - Michelin's tend to suffer more than most brands when it comes to dry cracking. Not sure if it is the environment they are produced in or the compounding as I am not privy to that information.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
