Findings Regarding Tire Life Relative to Time

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
989
Location
Iowa
So I've recently been in the market for some snow tires. These would be mounted on separate rims and only bolted on to the vehicle when inclement weather arrives. Aside from those instances, they will be stored in my garage away from UV light and any ozone producing electric motors. Given that they will likely see less than 1,500 miles each year, I decided to contact manufacturers to see what their maximum expected life is of their tires.

Bridgestone/Firestone warrants their tires up to five years and says to absolutely not run any of their tires if they are older than five years from the date of manufacture (note the manufacture date and not the purchase date). Their tech support line told me that their tires are compromised after that whether or not there are visible cracks.

Goodyear says to start inspecting them annually around year 4 for cracks and such. If no cracks are found (inside or out), continue to run them until they are about 7-10 years old depending on how and where they are stored. They typically have a 12 month warranty from date of purchase regardless of manufacture date. The bulk of their warranties are mileage-focused and are silent with regards to time.

Michelin warrants their tires for six years and says to start annually inspecting the tires around year 5 for cracks and signs of degradation. If no cracks are found (inside or out), continue to run them until they are about 10 years old. They typically have a six year warranty. They are also the only manufacturer that I've found that actually puts a mileage warranty on their winter tires. In the case of the X-Ice XI3, it is 6 years or 40,000 miles.

General and Continental mirror Michelin with regards to inspections and time. Their techs seemed very confident that their tires would last 10 years with minimal road time so long as they are away from UV light and ozone.
 
Firestone translation: We had problems with tire blowouts and now we are very conservative with our recommendations. The information I am reading to you was prepared by our legal department.
grin.gif
 
No, Firestone had problems with their manufacturing processes... that's what led to the tire failures.
 
I had some very slightly used Blizzaks I wanted mounted. They had been stored indoors in plastic bags and were still in pretty much brand new condition. The first shop I went to checked the date code and refused to mount them because they were 4 years old. Second place I went to had no problem mounting them.
 
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
No, Firestone had problems with their manufacturing processes... that's what led to the tire failures.


Thanks for clarifying.
 
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
No, Firestone had problems with their manufacturing processes... that's what led to the tire failures.


Doesn't seem in any way incompatible with the above statement.

IIRC this was a combination of dodgy tyres and dodgy recomendations from Ford over the minimum tyre pressures to be used in the Explorer, leading to rollovers and litigation.
 
snow tires aren't suddenly going to turn into pumpkins on a magical date. Over the years in storage and use they will get harder and harder and give up their cold weather effectiveness.
This is far different than the it becomes unsafe to drive as it is still technically safe.
But if the performance of your 6 season old snow tires is now worse than the allseason regular tires you are switching out whats the point in switching them at all.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nyquist
Given that they will likely see less than 1,500 miles each year, I decided to contact manufacturers to see what their maximum expected life is of their tires.

While you're doing your research, it is important to differentiate between "lasting" X number of years vs "performing well" X number of years.

My current example is General Altimax Arctic. They are now 8 years old, and despite looking great (visually) and having majority of their tread still left, their winter/snow performance isn't anywhere as good as it was the first few seasons. And my usage is very similar to yours... no more than about 2K miles put on them each season, stored in a cool/dry place the rest of the time.

Also, see this recent thread:
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4625189/Snow_Tire_Life_Span#Post4625189
 
Just to be pedantic, what you have here are finding regarding tire manufacturer recommendations, not actual tire life relative to time.
 
When snow tires still look fine but are 5 or 6 years old....is the general consensus to just leave them on (after winter is over) and wear them out (rather than discard them)??
 
I think it depends how much they suck in summer. I try to do this but if summer is wet then winter tires are completely out of its element and it may not be prudent to use them up, unluckily.

Krzys
 
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
No, Firestone had problems with their manufacturing processes... that's what led to the tire failures.


Doesn't seem in any way incompatible with the above statement.

IIRC this was a combination of dodgy tyres and dodgy recomendations from Ford over the minimum tyre pressures to be used in the Explorer, leading to rollovers and litigation.


Corporate lawyer caution is probably why my Bridgestones (Uniquely, AFAIK) don't have a maximum pressure rating moulded into the sidewall. Not a VERY big deal, but I don't like it. Seems evasive to me.
 
I keep the snow tires on our Tuscon year round. Mainly drive it only in Lincoln with maybe 2-3 hiway trips during the summer of 100 miles max. Probably put about 5K on it each year. Mostly has been a school car for our HS daughter. Snows have been on for about 4 years so far. I swap out snows for all season on my other 2 but do not have spare wheels( our 1 car garage is small enough without storing 8 mounted tires. Cost about $20.00 per tire to have tires swapped out every fall and spring for our Sonata and Forester. I will likely keep the snow tires (all General arctic) for 7-8 years max.
 
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
No, Firestone had problems with their manufacturing processes... that's what led to the tire failures.


Doesn't seem in any way incompatible with the above statement.

IIRC this was a combination of dodgy tyres and dodgy recomendations from Ford over the minimum tyre pressures to be used in the Explorer, leading to rollovers and litigation.


Not all of Firestone's tire problems were linked to the Explorer.... the Explorer fiasco was likely the highest profile one.
 
I am going to address a couple of issues raised in this thread:

1) Firestone's issue on the Ford Explorer: Here's my take: Barry's Tire Tech: The Ford/Firestone Controversy

Short version: Firestone had a problem in the design of the tire that was aggravated by the way the Decatur plant processed rubber. The Ford pressure spec wasn't cited by NHTSA, but it could be argued that it had a minor contribution. (Note: Ford later raised the placard pressure from 26 to 30 psi. I don't think that was an admission of guilt, although some folks do.)

2) Tires are required to have the max load and pressure listed on the sidewall - BUT - the regulation is worded just the way I worded the first part of the sentence. So it is unclear if the max pressure needs to be delineated or if the pressure at the max load needs to be delineated. In the 40 years that the regulation has been on the books, this has never been clarified.

So, you will see it both ways, but not both ways on a given tire. It will either take the form: Max Load XXXX at YY psi - OR - Max Load XXXX, Max pressure YY psi.
 
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer


2) Tires are required to have the max load and pressure listed on the sidewall - BUT - the regulation is worded just the way I worded the first part of the sentence. So it is unclear if the max pressure needs to be delineated or if the pressure at the max load needs to be delineated. In the 40 years that the regulation has been on the books, this has never been clarified.



Well I must be missing it then, or this regulation is not obligatory in Taiwan. Some links to pictures of the tyres here. I've had another look and I still can't see a max pressure. (I know the tyres, made in 2005. are old enough to be considered potentially unsafe)/

http://tw.forumosa.com/t/tyre-treatment/71110
 
Last edited:
On the original topic....

I have a classic car that is stored inside, and it sees ~1500 miles per year, and only on dry roads. The current tires were made in 2009, and it really pains me to replace these, as they still appear to be in great shape. I guess a set of tires cost less than fixing damage if the tread delaminates, but given the use over the life of the tires, I can't help but wonder if this is REALLY a concern.
 
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: CapriRacer


2) Tires are required to have the max load and pressure listed on the sidewall - BUT - the regulation is worded just the way I worded the first part of the sentence. So it is unclear if the max pressure needs to be delineated or if the pressure at the max load needs to be delineated. In the 40 years that the regulation has been on the books, this has never been clarified.



Well I must be missing it then, or this regulation is not obligatory in Taiwan. Some links to pictures of the tyres here. I've had another look and I still can't see a max pressure. (I know the tyres, made in 2005. are old enough to be considered potentially unsafe)/

http://tw.forumosa.com/t/tyre-treatment/71110



Ducked,

I should have been more specific that the regulation I was quoting was a US regulation. Sorry. That regulation is not always followed by other countries, plus in many places there is no conflict with the US regulation, so those words will appear so the tires can be sold in many places.

A further indication that Taiwan is different is that the serial number doesn't have the letters "DOT" in front of them.
 
Originally Posted By: novadude
On the original topic....

I have a classic car that is stored inside, and it sees ~1500 miles per year, and only on dry roads. The current tires were made in 2009, and it really pains me to replace these, as they still appear to be in great shape. I guess a set of tires cost less than fixing damage if the tread delaminates, but given the use over the life of the tires, I can't help but wonder if this is REALLY a concern.


Think of it as a risk. Are the odds such that a failure (and subsequent damage) would result in something so bad that you can't risk it. In your case, I would say the risk is too high to ignore.

Plus, you live in an area that you could likely go 10 years between tire changes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top