I drive my Split window coupe about 2000 miles a year. The tires on it are absolutely fine in terms of tread and holding pressure. But the date code on the tires indicates that they are 11 years old. I have owned the car for about 4 years. Should I replace them anyway because of age?

 

My take on the "60 Minutes" video is that they are trying to force a bill that prevents dealers from selling tires that are older than 6 years. I figure at 10-15k miles a year, most tires would be worn out in 4-5 years. That would make a tire at the end of it's life around 10-11 years.

I think I would be looking for new rubber pretty soon. Some people don't think these tires are dangerous, but with the amount of money these cars are worth, it would be silly to push your luck.

 

Tires are the only thing that keep you in touch with the road. I think 10 years is about the end on the line for safety reason in my mind.

Joe

 

Tires are affected by how they are stored (or used and parked) on a vehicle by temperature and if they see a lot of ozone and UV. If garage kept, in a relatively low temp condition (under 100F at worst), I expect tires to last a lot longer than if the vehicle sees higher temps, or sits outside.

In other words, tires in Alaska, stored or on a vehicle kept mostly in a garage will last much longer than tires in southern Arizona, especially if the vehicle sits outside or in a hot garage.

Examples: I had 4 (almost) new BF Goodrich Comp TA tires stored in garage above the ceiling in Chicago area (they saw max temperatures during summer) for about 8 years, and were trashed due to dry rot cracking. At the same time, I had 2 used (and a couple years older) versions of the same tire in the basement, that looked like I had just put them there.

Tires on my boat trailer (always stored outside, but low mileage) needed replacement every 10 years due to cracking on sidewalls (I assume due to ozone and UV exposure.

Tires on my 87 Vette (also BF Goodrich Comp TA) purchased in 1993 had the be replaced last year only because the tread rubber had changed and had become much harder, and was a liability from a traction standpoint (including dry weather). Tread depth was still acceptable, and sidewalls looked great, and I certainly got my use out of them (about 65K miles).

In other words, you can change them at a prescribed year interval (probably wasteful in my view), or you can watch for the signs that the tires have reached "end of useful life".

Plasticman

 

I agree that storage conditions can have a lot to do with it.

The Goodrich Radial T/As on my '65 were twenty-five years old, but still looked brand new when I replaced them last Spring. They never went far from town, the car was garaged all of the time and stored in Illinois every winter.

However, when it came time to do a cross-country trip (Route 66 tour with Sting Ray Registry), I just didn't trust them anymore. Who knew what was going on inside after 25 years?

 

Even if they still look good and are properly stored, tires gain 2 points of durometer (they get harder) every year. So besides the structural risk (blow out), there is also a loss of traction risk. I agree with others, while its not cheap, the cost is relatively small to protect your life and your investment
Harry

 

I am in a similar situation. My Coker tires have about 5,000 miles on them and have been on my '65 Vert for about 3 years. BUT...

The date code indicated 2 of the tires were 3899, or built on the 38th week of 1999, & the other 2 were 4400, or the 44th week of 2000.
They look almost new with even the little nubs still on them and they show little signs of wear.

BUT...(This is the BIG BUT)

They're probably OK, and I haven't had any problems with them to date, but I just don't feel comfortable with 8-9 year old tires, especially not knowing their storage history etc, and with driving on hot summer asphalt.

So, I recently ordered a new set of Diamondback Firestone Indy 500's, which should be here shortly, mainly just for GP'S and...

Safety first, then all the other stuff.

 

I bought the tries that are on my 69 Plymouth Road Runner, in 1989. The tread is good, no cracking, i'll be running them a few more years.

 

I checked my date code about a month ago. My BF Goodrich"s were made in May of 1996.They look fine. I may put 3 to 4 K mile per year. Better safe than sorry. My Diamondbacks are being delivered tomorrow.

 

There is evidence to suggest that miles, time, ozone, heat and temperature will shorten the life of a tire. There is also evidence to suggest that the assembly process of the tire will also affect the life of a tire. There is evidence to suggest that certain tire cord materials are more prone to deterioration than others. There is MUCH evidence that only a few tire manufacturers have more than minor problems with tire failures.

I don't believe there is any industry concensus as to when a tire is deemed too old to be safe and no manufacturer to my knowledge has put that recommendation in writing. I do know there is some research going on.

I believe Ford is the only auto manufacturer to recommend 6 years as the limit but they are not in the tire business.

I am in agreement with Plasticman's theory on tires. I've probably had more tires a year or two old suddenly deflate as I have those that were past ten years old.

PS. When is the last time you heard of a Michelin passenger tire blowing out? When is the last time you heard of a bias ply tire doing likewise? I'm curious to what the answers might be.

 

Mike, I wondered the same thing because Michelin seems synonymous with quality. So I ran a check at Consumer Affairs and was surprised at what I found. Check it out:


http://www.consumeraffairs.com/tires/michelin.html

- Pat

 

On Saturday I was at Discount Tire having 5 old tires removed from a set of Ralley wheels. I asked if they could take one of them and mount it on my 5th KO and the guy took a look at the date code and said NO. They are not allowed to mount anything older than 10 years old. My tires were manufactured in '84 or '94 (three digit date code). The guy said it was likely '84.

This ten year limit tells me the average tire will last longer than 10 years. If discount tire is willing to accept the liability of mounting a 10 year old tire, I would say that a 15 year old tire IN GOOD CONDITION is relatively safe.

I think common sense needs to prevail here - if the tire shows no signs of cracking or dry rot or bulges/indents and it is 10 years old, I wouldn't replace it. Now -- that being said if I pulled a set of 20 year old tires out of storage and they looked great - I don't know that I'd put them on the car.

Brian

 

Well, the key word here is "liability". This is what worries me. The "common sense" that you are asking for here will likely not prevail, not because of "liability" but because of the "threat of liability".

Tire shops know how to mount tires. They know how to inflate, balance and install tires. So where's the liability? It's in the drumroll you hear about tires that are X number of years old that are unsafe. No proof. Just mouthpieces jawboning that older tires are unsafe and the Lawyers will prove in court that old tires are unsafe. The jury award will not be based on facts, just on how the case is presented. So some of you guys that are buying $2-$400 ea. tires for your sporty little car will someday be forced to replace them whether they need if or not. The snowball is already rolling downhill.




[QUOTE=Allcoupedup;

If discount tire is willing to accept the liability of mounting a 10 year old tire, I would say that a 15 year old tire IN GOOD CONDITION is relatively safe.

I think common sense needs to prevail here - if the tire shows no signs of cracking or dry rot or bulges/indents and it is 10 years old, I wouldn't replace it.Brian[/QUOTE]

 

Well, I read down quite a ways. I'm skeptical of your source here. It's mostly advertising. It solicits complaints about everything, cites examples that defy logic/common sense and it appears the same author wrote every complaint.

If you noticed, it didn't have ANY examples of old tires giving out. Something fishy here.

 

Mike, I'm not sure that you could find a better souce for consumer complaints than Consumer Affairs, so I'm a bit puzzled why you are skeptical of the source. The advertising is a bit extreme, but that's how websites pay their bills. You asked the question: and I merely tried to answer it. Certainly, there were a great many complaints lodged about Michelin tires at the Consumer Affairs website link provided. An old adage comes to mind - 'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.' The link I provided had many examples of Michelin passenger tires blowing out. But you can certainly choose not to believe it.

- Pat