Well I bought my ‘98 C5 3 weeks ago (my 5th Corvette) from our local Chevrolet dealership- I’ve bought 5 different cars from them in the last 7 years so I know them pretty well. So I thought I checked this car out pretty well - only has 37000 miles on it and the tires are BF Goodrich plenty of thread showing plus the fronts were put on at the dealership in 2018. Imagine to my surprise when I discovered the manufacturer date on the front tires are 2009 and the backs are 2006! They did a “safety inspection” before putting it out on the lot - wouldn’t be required to replace all 4 tires or because it’s a 22 year old car they can blow it off as buy it “as is” ?

 

As a GM dealer, I sold tens of thousands of used cars. I also did a couple million a year in tire sales. I must admit, I never once remember checking on or discussing the tire manufacturing date on a used car. We checked the tread depth and examined the tire carcass for any potential problems. When I replaced my tires on my own C5, because of age, I never looked at the manufacturing date. Tires stored in a warehouse unmounted and not exposed to sunlight age completely differently than those driven regularly.

 

It’s certainly not going to be required of a dealer to put fresh tires on a 22 year old car.

 

I don't know about your state laws but I live in Ontario, Canada, and unfortunately here a car can pass a safety regardless of tire age. As long as the tread depth meets min requirements and there's no damage to the tire.

It's complete bullshit in my opinion as tires older than 5-6 years are not going to perform nearly as well.

 

It's not BS!.. Dated tires stored, sitting in some warehouse for that long is a big no-no....on a performance car for sure!

 

That's what I'm saying. It's bullshit that dealers are allowed to sell cars with tires older than 5 years, regardless of tread depth.

 

Show me one article with scientific proof that automobile tires should be destroyed at five years under any circumstances. Many, if not most, manufacturers will tell you they should be inspected annually after six or seven years of use for cracks and damage. No credible source tells you they are useless five years after manufacturer except some lunatic on forums somewhere.

 

I'm too lazy to go look for articles prove my point.
I've read many.
But I will tell you from personal experience, when I bought my C5Z 3 years ago it had Michelin Pilot Sports on it that looked new. They were, however, 12 ears old and they were garbage to drive on.

Sure, they were quiet and comfortable but I had to hit the brakes hard once when a guy cut me off and it was frightening how far the car slid.
I was also able to get them to spin at the top of 3rd gear on full throttle.

Two things that don't happen now that I have new Michelins on the car.

I wouldn't have driven on the old tires except that all the tires I wanted were backordered.

Feel free to be cheap and drive your old tires. What's an accident claim worth to you on your car, or an injury or death.

Just to save a few bucks every 5-6 years. Not worth it to me.

More power to you and I hope nothing bad happens to you on the road due to your negligence.

Also, what's the point of a sports car if your tires aren't good??? Makes no sense to me at all. Big HP, great suspension, good brakes, none of that means dick if your tires don't perform.

 

This is not my first rodeo and I do know a little about tires. When I bought my 4,000 mile '02 Z06 with fifteen year old tires...I replaced them. The difference was they were fifteen years old...not five. They had also been mounted that entire time...not for just a couple of years. Tires are exposed to different conditions and exposures. Some are mounted and the car stored outside. Some are stock in a tire store, still wrapped, and on a rack in a dark room. I am far from being cheap and accepting of your cheap shots. I spent 40 years as a dealer and know a little more about it than the average guy!

 

You do what you feel comfortable doing, for me, the cost of a new set of tires every 5-6 summers is an acceptable cost for running a car.

Especially when talking about high performance sports cars.

 

Many tire shops will not touch tires that are over six years old.

 

New tires were ordered this morning -

 

If people want to change tires yearly, I'm in. I made a lot of money replacing things people wanted replaced before their time. Any shop that refuses to touch tires that are six years old is acting in a self serving manner. They don't know how long the tire has been on the car and in many cases by date the tire could be six years old and have less than three years use and however low mileage might have happened.

I would think most of us would agree, Michelin has one of the best reputations in the business. If you go to their website, they will tell you that once the tire is "IN USE" for five years, it should be inspected yearly by a tire dealer and should be USED for no more than ten years.

That is a far different story than some of the B.S. you see people spewing simply because they listened to a tire salesman trying to convince people of potential death. Change them daily and it makes me happy. The only point I am making is know what you are actually talking about before trying to convince others no car should be sold with five year old tires!

 

Normally, I tend to agree with your posts, more often than not, but you're coming across as kinda arrogant in this thread. No one said a damned thing about changing tires yearly so why the smart remark? All the bigger tire shops in my area will not repair a flat or install someones tires, if they are over six years old. Maybe the poorboy shops in the lesser part of town might but most will not. You can disagree all you want, that's your prerogative.

edit: one of our members here had a older tire take out a rear fender, not long ago, when it blew out. He told us he had planned to buy new rubber but waited too long.
Maybe he will see this thread and comment.

 

Here is some good reading from the Tire Rack:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiret...jsp?techid=138

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiret...jsp?techid=183

 

I have a question........I bought a 50AE with 39k on the clock. Its my understanding that Goodyear Run Flats were installed at the factory. Fast foward to my purchase , with 39K on the car , there are Run Flats on it now, Do any of think these are the second set of "Goodyears", and do think the DOT shows 37th week of 2011. They are knee deep in tread, but they noise as hell. Does run flats fall under a different set of Rule OF Thumb, and should I as a owner, be looking into replacing them ? FYI, I purchased the car from Classic Car Dealer, who i would guess that they brought this car out of Virginia at an Auction.

Thanks
Max

 

If I am coming across as arrogant on this topic then I apologize as that is not my purpose. It is though a "hot-topic" for me as it is surrounded by so much misrepresentation and myth.

There is no question tire aging is a serious topic but it is not a simple one and there are no rules that truly apply to having any drop dead expiration dates from date of manufacture. There are a number of very informative articles written by the manufacturers themselves such as the Michelin article I referred to. The Tire Rack articles Vetteman Jack referenced are another source of real information.

My experience in the tire business showed many concerns about how passenger tires are treated and items that were much more egregious than simply aging. One would be surprised how few cars are actually running around with the proper air pressure which is a tire killer. A lack of proper balance and alignment are also very common things you see daily in a tire shop.

As far as tire shops refusing to "touch" older tires...that is simple from a tire retailers perspective. Fixing an old tire is a lose-lose proposition for a tire shop. People are not going to pay very much for the service, are trying to avoid buying a replacement which is why you are there, and the potential liability of an old tire failing after your repair is something you don't want to deal with.

 

If they were manufactured in 2011 obviously it has to be the second set. In my experience, run flats have always been extremely noisy on a C5. I bought three new C5s when they were current and replaced all three car's tires with non-run flats the first week I owned them. There are those who claim the new run-flats are now much less noisy but someone else will have to attest to that.

 

Max, at that age they should probably be replaced even if they are EMT. And yes- they are quite noisy as compared to conventional tires. Those things aside- if you DO decide to replace them, please contact me. I’d be interested in buying the rear tires to use on my set of stock rims for NCRS judging purposes only.

 

It's specifically UV radiation that "ages" the tires (and destroys plastic, but that's another story), that's why you see RV's long term parked with tire covers installed. I've owned old and new cars and trucks for more years than I care to remember and have never, ever experienced tire failure other than due to punctures or potholes - and that goes back way into the cross ply era. So, unless I was going racing with the C5, I would rely on inspections and regular pressure checks.

Changing tires every 5 years just puts money in the tire shop's pocket - and they probably sell the take offs as well.