|
Hello
I Read an interesting article the other day about new EU regulations coming into force to extend the capable life of tyres down to their minimum tread depths.
www.autoexpress.co.uk/features/364971/drivers-chan...t.
As someone who usually changes their tyres around the 3mm mark (particularly if it's getting close to autumn) this gave me some food for thought. I appreciate that as per the article, Michelin and probably some other premium brands are leading the way in this full tyre life technology. There was a great video a couple of years ago on the excellent Tyre reviews website where an almost completely worn Crossclimate was tested against a brand new budget tyre and performed at least if not better in most catagories.
However I just wonder how these regulations will extend to the plethora of budget brands available, many of which simply have not invested in the same level of R&D and rely on reusing older patterns and compounds.
So my questions are; At what depth do you replace your tyres and would you feel confident running them to the legal limit if they were certified for that? Do you think we will now see many budget brands disappear from the market as they won't be able meet the required grade , or do you think these new regulations will simply be as vague and self regulating as the current EU tyre labeling system?
|
|
I start keeping a close eye on them when down to 3mm and replace when a bit lower, about 2.5mm. I only do 1000 miles a year so 1 mm is quite a long time. As for running right down to the legal limit on a certified tyre, probably not as I prefer a margin for error if only in case I've measured the depth wrong.
|
I prefer a margin for error if only in case I've measured the depth wrong.
Difficult I would think, as tread wear indicators (TWI) have been standard for many years.
|
I view 3mm as a warning and 2mm the absolute minimum. I run Michelin CCs due to mud on roads and verges(passing spaces)when I am on country roads. They are on 4mms now and ok.
|
|
|
|
I only do 1000 miles a year so 1 mm is quite a long time.
If you only do 1000 miles a year, and most tyres last for anything up to 30K miles (like mine), you will never need to worry about tread depth before the tyres are too old to use ! :-)
|
|
Very true, although my low mileage has only been since I no longer commute. When I retire next year I plan on doing UK travels so the mileage will increase. Old Focus willing!
|
|
|
|
|
www.autoexpress.co.uk/features/364971/drivers-chan...t.
Excellent article.
'.........According to Michelin’s global vice president of brands, Gary Guthrie, around half the tyres fitted to the cars on the road today will be removed and discarded with more than 3mm of tread left. That equates to 25 per cent of their potential useful life, and is a horrendous statistic when looked at from an environmental perspective. ......
......and a complete waste of money.
So my questions are; At what depth do you replace your tyres .......
Around the legal limit - 1.6mm in Europe. Similar in USA although most states don't police it.
and would you feel confident running them to the legal limit if they were certified for that?
Yes - whatever 'certified' means.
Do you think we will now see many budget brands disappear from the market as they won't be able meet the required grade , or do you think these new regulations will simply be as vague and self regulating as the current EU tyre labeling system?
I neither know nor particularly care. You pays your money and takes your choice.
|
|
Not a hope in hell i'm running them down to legal limit, my work shifts start early, early enough to still be dark in summer, on our third world standard A roads you can come across seriously deep standing water.
As long i've been able to drive cars and trucks, the difference between hitting standing water with deep treads and more than half worn treads tells me all i need to know, obviously the wider the tyre the more water needs to be shifted rapidly.
I'm a 3mm and no less chap and have no intention of changing because of some sales waffle, i also look for car tyres with a genuine 8mm or more of new tread, not the 7mm and just over 6mm new tread some of the premium makes now provide...Goodyear out of the premium makes is an exception to that, their Efficient Grip tyres come with a good 8mm new tread.
|
|
With my mileage the walls crack before the depth goes. My two rear tyres are original have done 35,000 in 5 years and despite 3-4mm are now cracking quite badly and picked up at MOT.
Once winter snow comes a brand new summer tyre with 8mm is better in snow than an all season or winter with 2mm.
|
|
One of the biggest issues with a tyre having just 1.6mm of tread depth left is the amount of water it can disperse and the subsequent stopping distance. Below 3mm the stopping distance for a car will greatly increase, at 1.6mm the stopping distance can be up to 44 meters longer (about 10 car lengths) than a similar car with a minimum of 3mm of tread remaining. That 44 meters (or 144 feet and a bit if you use old money) could be the difference between suffering a nasty incident - and avoiding one!
|
That 44 meters (or 144 feet and a bit if you use old money) could be the difference between suffering a nasty incident - and avoiding one!
Yes, well. That is one of several pseudo-statistical mantras trotted out to justify buying new tyres when required. What-just-might-happen in unlucky circumstances could be a convincing reason never to drive a car anywhere.
If one drives carefully, with one's mind on the road ahead, and taking note of the prevailing conditions (which may be tricky just now) the 1.6mm recommended limit should be good for most of us. We throw away about 98% of a tyre even then !
Edited by Andrew-T on 18/11/2024 at 23:15
|
We’ve recently moved company car provider and at the same time, restricted choice to PHEV and full EV only.
Previous provider allowed tyre changes at 3mm. New provider won’t budge on 2mm which is, for me, a safety concern, especially given the substantial weight and performance of many EVs.
Also challenging to accurately measure the difference between 2mm and 1.6mm.
How long before an employee is involved in or causes a serious accident where tread depth is investigated and deemed to be a contributory factor?
|
|
Once at 3mm its doughnut time in the local car park. It won't take long to get to 2mm!
|
|
|
Also challenging to accurately measure the difference between 2mm and 1.6mm.
That's why tyres have TWI's (tyre wear indicators). There are several around the tread area, some should always be visible if you look. I would guess that is what MoT testers look for ?
|
|
|
We’ve recently moved company car provider and at the same time, restricted choice to PHEV and full EV only. Previous provider allowed tyre changes at 3mm. New provider won’t budge on 2mm which is, for me, a safety concern, especially given the substantial weight and performance of many EVs. Also challenging to accurately measure the difference between 2mm and 1.6mm. How long before an employee is involved in or causes a serious accident where tread depth is investigated and deemed to be a contributory factor?
Motability cars have the 2mm tyre changes on all their cars so don't imagine that it's likely to cause any issues - also if your employee was investigated then as long as they tyre is 1.6mm or more then I can't see how they can be in any trouble for that?
|
|
|
|
That 44 meters (or 144 feet and a bit if you use old money) could be the difference between suffering a nasty incident - and avoiding one!
Yes, well. That is one of several pseudo-statistical mantras trotted out to justify buying new tyres when required. What-just-might-happen in unlucky circumstances could be a convincing reason never to drive a car anywhere.
It's interesting how the measure of safety has changed over the years. I have been driving cars from the 70's onwards where live axles, leaf sprung suspension, tyre technology and no electronics had many people having all sorts of mishaps or worse, often at low speeds, despite having decent tread depth. No doubt the earlier cars before my time were even more of a challenge.
The recklessness with which people drive now is just a reminder of how far we've come, even with tyres of sub standard depth. The fact that cars are so sophisticated means that people are getting away with it all the time.
|
That 44 meters (or 144 feet and a bit if you use old money) could be the difference between suffering a nasty incident - and avoiding one!
Yes, well. That is one of several pseudo-statistical mantras trotted out to justify buying new tyres when required. What-just-might-happen in unlucky circumstances could be a convincing reason never to drive a car anywhere.
It's interesting how the measure of safety has changed over the years. I have been driving cars from the 70's onwards where live axles, leaf sprung suspension, tyre technology and no electronics had many people having all sorts of mishaps or worse, often at low speeds, despite having decent tread depth. No doubt the earlier cars before my time were even more of a challenge.
The recklessness with which people drive now is just a reminder of how far we've come, even with tyres of sub standard depth. The fact that cars are so sophisticated means that people are getting away with it all the timeI remember the days before minimum tread was required. In the snowy winters common in the 1960s I had a Mk 3 Zephyr 6 which was interesting to say the least, like most owners I put 2 bags of cement in the boot to improve adhesion and 'Town and Country' tyres on the rear. When I changed to a Hillman Imp that would drive in 3 or 4 inches of snow better than the Zephyr, thanks to rear engine layout.
|
|
<< In the snowy winters common in the 1960s I had a Mk 3 Zephyr 6 which was interesting to say the least, like most owners I put 2 bags of cement in the boot to improve adhesion and 'Town and Country' tyres on the rear. When I changed to a Hillman Imp that would drive in 3 or 4 inches of snow better than the Zephyr, thanks to rear engine layout. >>
I spent three winters in the 1960s driving in Canada, two of them in Alberta, one in Ontario. As snow usually came in late October and remained until about Easter (at least in the west) there was plenty of time to learn what happens on glazed ice or freezing rain. It was odd that even the 'locals' needed a few days to remember what to do at the end of next autumn (fall).
|
|
|
I remember the days before minimum tread was required. In the snowy winters common in the 1960s I had a Mk 3 Zephyr 6 which was interesting to say the least, like most owners I put 2 bags of cement in the boot to improve adhesion and 'Town and Country' tyres on the rear. When I changed to a Hillman Imp that would drive in 3 or 4 inches of snow better than the Zephyr, thanks to rear engine layout.
I used to get a lift to work from someone in a Volkswagen Beetle. It was good in the snow, but the heating was virtually non-existent. The other work colleague who sat in the front would get a small sc***er out of his pocket in a dejected fashion and sc***e the inside of the windscreen. I'm sure that the air channels for the heating had rusted away.
|
I used to get a lift to work from someone in a Volkswagen Beetle. It was good in the snow, but the heating was virtually non-existent. The other work colleague who sat in the front would get a small sc***er out of his pocket in a dejected fashion and sc***e the inside of the windscreen. I'm sure that the air channels for the heating had rusted away.
I had two VW Beetles (1300 and 1303), both of them had heat vents .The warm air exited through floor vents near the front footwells and additional vents for windscreen defrosting. I also bought a 'hair dryer-type' heater that stuck to the dashboard and blew hot air to the windscreen to help defrost/demist it.
They were both cold to be in and were eventually overcome by rust.
|
|
|
|
In the snowy winters common in the 1960s I had a Mk 3 Zephyr 6 which was interesting to say the least,
My Dad's mkIV Zodiac 3,0 was more or less undriveable in icy weather.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
