5mm tread wear =10mm loss of diameter=31.4mm (1.24") loss of circumference
~1.75%
Small, but not totally insignificant. I'll have to factor that into my fuel economy logs ;)
One thing i always wonder about when people report their amazing fuel economy's, if they run sat nav they probably realise their car speedo is inaccurate and can read up to 10% slow without taking the valid point of tyre wear* into account.
But aggressively insist their mileometer is accurate and believe the on board fuel display is teardrop accurate too.
It doesn't take the most cynical person to realise that a car maker isn't going to have their cars showing figures that put their car in a bad light when others appear 10% better, most people go by the dash display.
I used to work with a bloke who was convinced his Golf 2.0litre Diesel returned between 70 and 80 mpg in normal use, and went like the wind simultaneously..
*truck tyre wear is significant, on new tyres my regular truck from my last job was travelling at a true 55mph as shown on the calibrated speedo and by satnav, by the time the tyres were recut and getting close to replacement it would be travelling at a true 53mph satnav whilst obviously still showing 55 on the speedo...most drivers would try and time their recalibration date to coincide with worn tyres..:).
Probably find car tyres are similar, they may not have the depth of tread difference quite so much (increased by truck tyres being regroovable) but given the proportionately smaller rolling radius there's more than likely a similar result.
Edited by gordonbennet on 10/12/2011 at 10:57
|