Below is an article from today’s Wall Street Journal about tires and how Ford and other manufacturers are pushing expirations dates. While I think the 6 years they are pushing is short (there are so many variables, such as storage, brand, etc.), I think about this from time to time, especially at car shows.

I used to be in the tire business, and because of that, I always look at tires. Make, model, size. It’s a weird complex. :clonk: I am amazed at some of the real nice cars I see riding on mid 70s-80s tires, like of BFG T/A Radials. I just see the tread pattern and know they are old. Old tires do deteriorate, and that deterioration can be hard to see. Plus, they are often lathered in Armour All or other silicone (i.e. oil) based product that harms rubber. I’d hate to lose my ride over a tire issue.

I also wonder when I see real nice old cars on bargain basement tires. I mean tires are the only part of the car that touches the road, right? But that is another conversation, I suppose.

Anyway, I thought this might make for a good read for many of you and perhaps an interesting discussion.

************************************************** **

Tires Get An Expiration Date
In Shift, Ford Urges Drivers to Replace Them After Six Years, Regardless of Wear
By TIMOTHY AEPPEL Staff Reporter
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL May 31, 2005; Page D1

Drivers who know to check tires for worn treads and low air pressure now have something else to worry about: vintage.

Ford Motor Co., in a move roiling the tire industry, has started urging consumers to replace tires after six years. The car maker says its research shows that tires "degrade over time, even when they are not being used." That means even pristine-looking spares that have never left the trunk should be pitched after a half-dozen years.

That's a radical concept in the staid U.S. tire business, which insists there's no scientific evidence to support a "use by" date for tires. It would also surprise most motorists, who are taught that a tire's lifespan is measured mainly by tread depth. The tire industry says that tires are safe as long as the tread depth is a minimum of 1/16th of an inch, no matter what the age, and there are no visible cuts, signs of uneven wear, bulges or excessive cracking. Other trouble signs are if tires create vibration or excessive noise.

"Tires are not milk," says Daniel Zielinski, a spokesman for the Rubber Manufacturers Association, the tire industry's main trade group.

For many consumers, the issue never comes up, since passenger-car tires last an average of 44,000 miles -- meaning they are usually replaced before hitting the six-year mark. But many people simply assume that unused spare tires -- even those that are a decade old -- are as durable as brand-new tires, and sometimes use those spares as full-time replacements for the regular tires. Classic-car buffs and others who drive only infrequently could also be affected by the latest research.

END OF THE ROAD

Drivers are being advised to start paying attention to the age of their tires.

• Ford has begun urging drivers to replace tires after six years, regardless of wear.
• The tire industry says it's more important to monitor tread depth than age and recommends that treads be at least 1/16 of an inch thick.
• Some European car makers as well as Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. have long warned drivers that tires are perishable.

In its new stance on tire safety, Ford is getting some support from other researchers. Sean Kane, president of Safety Research & Strategies Inc., an auto-safety research firm working with lawyers who are preparing lawsuits arising from accidents thought to be linked to aging tires, says older tires are a road hazard. Mr. Kane's group has collected a list of 70 accidents involving older tires, which resulted in 52 deaths and 50 serious injuries.

In a sense, the U.S. car industry is just catching up to global standards. Many European car makers as well as Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. have long warned drivers, including those who buy their cars in the U.S., that tires are perishable. Many of them also use a six-year threshold for the age of a tire.

DaimlerChrysler AG has already adopted a position parallel to Ford. The car maker's Mercedes division had been telling drivers that tires last only six years. But starting last fall, the Chrysler group began including such a warning in 2005 owner's manuals. "We did do some research and we found that's just a pretty safe and steady guideline," says Curtrise Garner, a Chrysler spokeswoman, adding that "it's a recommendation, not a must-do."

Other car makers are also taking up this question, and some are reaching a different conclusion than Ford. General Motors Corp. spokesman Alan Adler says GM has discussed the aging issue, but doesn't have any research that supports a move to such a guideline. "We're not joining in the six-years-is-the-magic-number thing right now," he says.

The age of tires already appears on tires, but as part of a lengthy code that is difficult for average consumers to decipher. To find the age of a tire, look for the letters DOT on the sidewall (indicating compliance with applicable safety standards set by the U.S. Department of Transportation). Adjacent to these letters is the tire's serial number, which is a combination of up to 12 numbers and letters. The last characters are numbers that identify the week and year of manufacture. For example, 1504 means the fifteenth week of the year 2004.

Not only are the numbers difficult to interpret, but they can be hard to locate: The numbers are printed on only one side of the tire, which sometimes is the one facing inward when the tire is mounted on a wheel.

Ford's new stance on tire aging is a direct outgrowth of the Firestone tire recall that began in August 2000. That episode involved Firestone tires failing suddenly, mostly on Ford Explorers, leading to a wave of deadly crashes. The crashes sparked a series of lawsuits, including monetary and personal-injury claims, some of which are pending.

Ford's new position won't affect those lawsuits. But it could play a role in future legal action. Some attorneys who have sued over the Firestone case are now mounting cases that focus on tire age.

John Baldwin, a Ford materials scientist who studied the root cause of the Firestone problems and has spearheaded the car maker's continuing research on tire aging, says Ford's intention is to develop a test to help prevent another Firestone-type debacle. He says Ford's research into the Firestone problem showed that as tires age, the chemistry of the rubber changes as oxygen migrates through the carcass of the tire. This leads to a weakening of the internal structure that can result in tire failures. Driving in hot climates or frequent heavy loading of vehicles speeds this aging process, he says.

In April, Ford posted a warning on its Web site saying that "tires generally should be replaced after six years of normal service." The company also plans to include similar wording in owner's manuals starting with the 2006 model year.

Firestone spokeswoman Christine Karbowiak says the company can't comment on Ford's new recommendation, because it hasn't seen Ford's research.

Tire makers certainly don't want to see the six-year rule become any more deeply ingrained. While it might seem that putting a limit on the lifespan of tires would be a boon to tire makers, who would presumably sell more tires, the costs and complications it could create are considerable. Among other things, the industry is worried about the logistical problems that would arise if customers suddenly started demanding only the "freshest" tires. In some cases, tires take months to move through distribution channels from factories -- through wholesalers, and then on to retail outlets.

"We don't have any data to support an expiration date [for tires]," says Mr. Zielinski of the RMA. He agrees that age can be a factor in tire performance, but says it shouldn't be used as the sole reason to determine that a tire is no longer usable.

Mr. Zielinski says Ford went public with its position without sharing its research with the tire association or individual tire makers. Ford, in turn, says that it presented its research in trade publications and at a series of public forums, including a technical meeting of the rubber division of the American Chemical Society in San Antonio, Texas, two weeks ago. Ford has also given its research to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is developing a test to simulate the effects of aging on tires.

Ford's test involves putting inflated tires into an oven for weeks at a time. The tires are then taken out and studied to see, among other things, how well the layers of rubber hold together.

Strategic Research wants tires to be labeled more clearly with the date they were produced, so consumers can better identify older tires and, ultimately, an explicit expiration date.

so, if a tire lasts 6 years under "normal" usage, how long do they last on a Ford product when they recommend only 25psi inflation pressures- which leads to tires over heating and breaking apart, which leads to crappy handling, which in turn leads to SUV's upside down in the ditch?

Hmm...interesting.

Well, I agree tires do have a "lifespan" in regards to time, but this has so many factors. UV degredation, specific compound, etc. I've driven on 30 year old tires that were weather checked and so on, and while I don't recommend it, makes 6 years seem like nothing.

And I'll keep my unused 6 year old spare tire in trunk, thank you. A man's spare tire is his own business!:D

so, if a tire lasts 6 years under "normal" usage, how long do they last on a Ford product when they recommend only 25psi inflation pressures- which leads to tires over heating and breaking apart, which leads to crappy handling, which in turn leads to SUV's upside down in the ditch?I agree. Ford is ass-covering with this for future issues.

Car & Driver did a blowout simulation on Explorers. I saw it on C&D TV. They had a testing contraption that would blow out a tire. The vehicle lost no control when they did it. I read elsewhere it was estimated that driver panic caused most of those issues. Go figure.

I think tires should be dated at the least. I once bought a performance motorcycle tire that was on sale (clearance). I took it to two different tire shops before someone could even get it on the rim. The tire was old and VERY stiff. Me being young and not getting the clue ended up on my head not more than two block from home. Thank goodness I was wearing leathers, back protection and a helmet. Still bruised my shoulder, dis located a toe and chipped a bone in my foot. Moral of the story is tires to get old and lose flex-a-bility, this can be dangerous.

Storage, air pressure and use (or lack of use) plays a large roll. Hard to say how many years is right, I don't know if you can. I do know this will drive the tire prices through the roof.

This will get interesting, do you get 6 years from the date of manufacture or the date you placed the tires on the vehicle? The tires could be a year or more old the day you buy and install them... I agree tires will breakdown over time but it's one of the worst kinds of rubber you can add to a land fill because it doesn't break down well. Other than the ford explorer issues in 2000, has there been a rash of accidents caused by bad old tires? I haven't heard of any, maybe fords push is still movated by trying to lighten their roll in the past problems they had.

Royce, your bike tires are a good example of the need to be cautious and is maybe a good indication of the first place they should think about tire expire dates. Without taking away from the safety issue of car tires I think it's much more of a critical thing on bikes...

I've seen too many classic's pulled out of the garage for the first time in years that have never had a problem with old tires to just accept the 6 year date as the safety line not to be crossed. Will be interesting to see where this goes...

Good point about the landfills, I didn't even think of that. Hopefully there will be a lot of testing to actually figure out a reasonable amount of time, I agree 6 years is not long enough.

Lots of variables. Fords problems were not because the tires were old. GM had/used the same tires and didn't have the same issues.

You know, most automotive manufacturer's make their vehicles with too high a roll center/CG in the first place AND then try to use lower pressured tires to soften up the ride AND when the tires fail from being under-inflated, they try to screw the tire maker!!

But you know GM has just about convinced the WORLD that all of them can expand their market by making vehicles this way b/c of the numbers that get rolled every year AND then have to be replaced!!!

DON'T get me started b/c all you have to do is take a walk in a Boneyard and check out how MOST front wheel high-centered cars roll!!

They pivot about the frontend and flip such that the rearend goes air-borne AND causes the roll!!

AND I'm not even going to get into the SUV thing here........ PLUS, we can't even get a mandatory NATIONAL seatbelt use law passed, but Missouri can ditch their Motorcycle helmut law for riders over 21 years old!! GO figure???????????

Bad, bad, bad!!! Is all I'm going to say...

Tire shelf life indeed!!!!! Bull-sh-t!!! You keep your tires inflated properly, rotated AND then periodically check the wear indicators and your tires won't need a shelf life!

BUT then the car owner/driver just MIGHT be responsible for something AND we sure can't have that, now can we???

What did the tire pressure monitor radio's cost per new car??? $400, maybe $500 per car???? AND I bet some people are still too sorry to check their tire pressures..................

They have road checks for drunks AND I will bet that statistically, blowed out, under-inflated, tires have killed more people then drunks so let's road check tire pressures and throw stupid people in jail overnight that are running low pressured tires!

You know, I bet a $400 low pressure tire fine would get everybody's attention real fast!!!!

Sorry, BUT I can see I'm on another rant....

pdq67

PDQ, I'm right there with you on the monitors. I have read that because of the costs of the stupid tire pressure monitors, ABS is going back to be an option with some cars. :clonk:

We keep adding more costs and weight to cars. And when stuff like ABS and stability control are cut out of low end models, well, you can see the "demographic" issues that leads too (only the rich get safety).

Plus these are just something else for a crappy tire tech to break. I remember when the 17" vettes were like the only car on the road with that (I can't remember seeing another). A little monitor secured to the rim with a giant band clamp. Many a know-nothing tech broke one of those.

You are also dead on about design and only Ford having issues with those hoops. You "old-timers" might remember the F/S 500 recall in the late 70's (or early 80s?). That was really GM's fault. But F/S went along with the bad GM specs (TPC specs). I have been told by many that replacement 500s had no issues. But that was before my time.

Rant man --> :angry:

tires will breakdown over time but it's one of the worst kinds of rubber you can add to a land fill

Good point about the landfills

While slightly off topic, almost nothing but the garbage breaks down in a landfill, and garbage should be turned into fertilizer, everything else should be recycled .... including tires.


.

I'm know a whole bunch about recycling tires AND one of the best places to do it is in the combustion zone mid-kiln in a rotary cement kiln!! You just drop them through a trap-door as the kiln goes around and they burn up and are incorporated into the cemwent clinker!! AND funny thing is that cement clinker needs to have the iron/steel that is in the tires added b/c there isn't usually enough iron in most cement raw materials!!

Another good place is in the cement kilns preheater towers preheater combustion chamber too!!! But it's on the tower up in the air....

AND another little known fact is that Holcim now owns about 35 percent of our cement production capacity AND they are also Safety-Klean's main HAZWASTE incinerator b/c they are permitted to burn the crap in their cement kilns as an alternative fuel source!!

ANd the big wet process cement kiln at Clarksville, Mo owned by them is, (I THINK), the second largest wet-kiln process in the world!! it's only like 750' long by 25' necked down to 23' or so AND about fifty feet off the ground!!

If I remember right the Jap. came over, saw it and went home and made a copy of it that is ten feet longer???

I worked in the sucker one for a short time a long time ago when they plastic gunned the great big/huge firing hood...

Holcim is now in the process of building the largest capacity cement kiln in the US right south of St. Louis by St. Genevieve, MO and everybody is worried about the St. Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area passing muster in the future b/c of it!!!

Big sucker is supposed to make something like 11,000 tons of cement clinker a day or is it an hour(???)

pdq67

But I think, IMO, its the gov't once again getting on this wagon of protecting myself from myself.

I agree with all of you. Another added expense, let alone this new fangled TPM system.

I know, the car companies can't please everybody all the time.

Had a heck of a business idea awhile back. Guy was making bulkhead lumber from tires, paying 50 ct./lb. for tires, $3 per board foot for the lumber. Bad marketing, never got off the ground, so to speak.

They are now using asphalt with ground up tires here in NJ. They say it is smoother (less noise for communities), better traction and better wear, just more expensive. Tires are considered toxic waste, so any use they can come up with is fine by me!

Don't most tires have a Mfg. date or date code now?
I guess we need to take a tire durometer<sp> with us now when tire shopping to check against the Mfg. listed numbers ?

I think tires should be dated at the least. I once bought a performance motorcycle tire that was on sale (clearance). I took it to two different tire shops before someone could even get it on the rim. The tire was old and VERY stiff. Me being young and not getting the clue ended up on my head not more than two block from home. Thank goodness I was wearing leathers, back protection and a helmet. Still bruised my shoulder, dis located a toe and chipped a bone in my foot. Moral of the story is tires to get old and lose flex-a-bility, this can be dangerous.

Storage, air pressure and use (or lack of use) plays a large roll. Hard to say how many years is right, I don't know if you can. I do know this will drive the tire prices through the roof.

All performance motorcycle tires do have a fabrication date and you should not buy one that is over a year or two old. Not that it will be dangerous at that age, but it will have less grip on the road. Racing tires are even more prone to loose grip with age. I have seen plenty of slicks for sale that no racer would buy because they are over two years old. This applies to car tires as wel. The higher the performance rating of the tire the quicker they loose grip with age.

check out this: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=11

Don't most tires have a Mfg. date or date code now?
I guess we need to take a tire durometer<sp> with us now when tire shopping to check against the Mfg. listed numbers ?

All DOT approved tires have date codes, I think it started about 15 years ago.

I would hope tires would have a date if beer has a "born on date". The motorcycle tire I brought up was a long time ago ~ 13-14 years ago. I learned a very good lesson and never made that mistake again. I would bet that tire was at least 8 years old when I bought it (if not older), is was like a rock. I was young and thought I got a good deal.

I agree 100% with Everett, at some point common sense has to come into effect here. Tires have been around for many years and why is it just now becoming an issue? Cars are driven more miles these days than ever before (due to long commutes, etc..).

I say as long as there is a "born on date" that is easy to read(for common people) then I say that's good enough. I honestly never looked to see if there was a date.

Like the quoted article stated there is a date, it's week of year (1-52) and year (05) which can be found at the end of the tires serial number next to the DOT lettering. If your tirea are mounted and on the vehicle you may not see this as it's only on one side of the tire...

Like the quoted article stated there is a date, it's week of year (1-52) and year (05) which can be found at the end of the tires serial number next to the DOT lettering. If your tirea are mounted and on the vehicle you may not see this as it's only on one side of the tire...

Like camaroman said, that is cryptic. The average Joe would never know that.

One side of the tire is no good either.

I agree. Joe Blow wont be able to figure that out.

Not arguing with you Bronzo, it's just a very common way of date stamping in the automotive world. Gotta watch out for what we wish for or they could end up putting it on both sides of the tire in 1" raised white letters to insure all see and understand it.

I think in all reality the avg consumer isn't going to care a doodle about the date stamp on a tire. They expect them fresh when bought and installed and expect them to last until the tread is gone...

Oh no, no argument at all sir. I think this is all knee-jerk bunk.

I looked DOT code up to refresh my memory. It has changed since I got out. The old version, as I remember it, was 3 digits and could lead to confusion. I always thought that only on one side was silly too.

From http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/TireSafety/ridesonit/brochure.html
U.S. DOT Tire Identification Number
This begins with the letters "DOT" and indicates that the tire meets all federal standards. The next two numbers or letters are the plant code where it was manufactured, and the last four numbers represent the week and year the tire was built. For example, the numbers 3197 means the 31st week of 1997. The other numbers are marketing codes used at the manufacturer's discretion. This information is used to contact consumers if a tire defect requires a recall.

If I remember right, (now out of the business for 7 years), it was a 3 digit code at the end of the DOT number: WWY, with WW=week and Y the last digit of the year. I think they put an arrow after the DOT for the 90s. So 157< was the 15th week of 1997, while 157 would have been the 15th week of 1987. I guess they assumed tires didn’t stick around long enough to care more. At least the old computer guys gave us 2 digit years. :D

You know, most automotive manufacturer's make their vehicles with too high a roll center/CG in the first place AND then try to use lower pressured tires to soften up the ride AND when the tires fail from being under-inflated, they try to screw the tire maker!!

But you know GM has just about convinced the WORLD that all of them can expand their market by making vehicles this way b/c of the numbers that get rolled every year AND then have to be replaced!!!

DON'T get me started b/c all you have to do is take a walk in a Boneyard and check out how MOST front wheel high-centered cars roll!!

They pivot about the frontend and flip such that the rearend goes air-borne AND causes the roll!!

AND I'm not even going to get into the SUV thing here........ PLUS, we can't even get a mandatory NATIONAL seatbelt use law passed, but Missouri can ditch their Motorcycle helmut law for riders over 21 years old!! GO figure???????????

Bad, bad, bad!!! Is all I'm going to say...

Tire shelf life indeed!!!!! Bull-sh-t!!! You keep your tires inflated properly, rotated AND then periodically check the wear indicators and your tires won't need a shelf life!

BUT then the car owner/driver just MIGHT be responsible for something AND we sure can't have that, now can we???

What did the tire pressure monitor radio's cost per new car??? $400, maybe $500 per car???? AND I bet some people are still too sorry to check their tire pressures..................

They have road checks for drunks AND I will bet that statistically, blowed out, under-inflated, tires have killed more people then drunks so let's road check tire pressures and throw stupid people in jail overnight that are running low pressured tires!

You know, I bet a $400 low pressure tire fine would get everybody's attention real fast!!!!

Sorry, BUT I can see I'm on another rant....

pdq67

Good thing that people besides Helmut can ride Motorcycles in MO.

I mis-spelled Helmet!!! So what??????????????????????

ANYWAY, I bet nobody has heard that they are thinking of using NOS to inflate tires with from the start b/c it's molecule is bigger then regular air molecules that also has smaller O2 molecules in it and thus, doesn't diffuse through the tires sidewalls as fast, therefore hold's it's pressure a LOT longer!!

BUT it just costs more!!!

pdq67

N2O to inflate tires ? I would hate to see that specially on a big rig if the brakes caught fire. Also now if that was to happen no one would be able to drive through a toll tunnel due to carrying a compressed accelerant ?

N2O to inflate tires ? I would hate to see that specially on a big rig if the brakes caught fire. Also now if that was to happen no one would be able to drive through a toll tunnel due to carrying a compressed accelerant ?

Not Nitrous Oxide ............. just plain Nitrogen. Doesnt support combustion. Racers have been using it for years. Its the largest component of air, the expansion rate is less than air, it has larger molecules than oxygen and wont leak out or your tire as easily.

I understand tire places are selling Nitrogen as an upgrade of sorts.

Here are a couple tidbits I just found on it:
Nitrogen is a dry, inert gas that leaks through a tire’s rubber walls three times more slowly than oxygen, says the company. Thus tires stay inflated longer, grip the road better and provide greater control in all weather conditions than tires filled with ordinary compressed air.

Another advantage that nitrogen has over oxygen is the fact that as oxygen leaks out through a tire’s rubber walls, it oxidizes the rubber compounds in the tire, causing the tire to deteriorate, says the company. In contrast, nitrogen is a clean, moisture-free gas that slows down the tire aging process.

While I see the use of nitrogen in race cars (ie... Indy or NASCAR), you would have to be pretty ummmm "trusting" to pay extra for it in any street car. There really is no advantage to using it on the street or even on a drag car. You need to keep an eye on your tire pressures anyway. Modern tires (radials) do not lose air anywhere near as fast as slicks or bias ply tires.

Doug N2O is not flamable, so hot brakes wouldn't be an issue (if they were talking about N2O).

Royce makes a good point. Air is only composed of about 16% oxygen, so who cares if such a small proportion of air is leaking past the tires? Most of my tires will hold their pressure for months.

The expansion does hold true for HP handling, though.

I mis-spelled Helmet!!! So what??????????????????????

ANYWAY, I bet nobody has heard that they are thinking of using NOS to inflate tires with from the start b/c it's molecule is bigger then regular air molecules that also has smaller O2 molecules in it and thus, doesn't diffuse through the tires sidewalls as fast, therefore hold's it's pressure a LOT longer!!

BUT it just costs more!!!

pdq67


Its called a joke. Helmut is a name, get it?

The biggest problem with the latest tires is they are not made with as good of rubber as they were made with 20 yrs ago. I was told this by someone who has a tire store. I think we all know the reason why, It's cheaper and you have to buy tires alot sooner.

He said the biggest thing that happens to them is they dry rot way faster than they use to. So my guess is they don't dry rot fast enough yet for tire Co. so this is another way for them to get us to buy new tires. Or make us buy new tires if Gov. jumps in.

I dont know, I have Coker red line radials on my 66 Nova ss, they are about 6 1/2 years old. Last month I took a 550 mile road trip and 2 of them came apart while driving at 70mph. (not at the same time, about 200 miles apart).

The worst part was that my spare tire was too big to fit up in the rear fenderwell so I had to limp to a tire store.
Ron

The biggest problem with the latest tires is they are not made with as good of rubber as they were made with 20 yrs ago. I was told this by someone who has a tire store. I think we all know the reason why, It's cheaper and you have to buy tires alot sooner.

He said the biggest thing that happens to them is they dry rot way faster than they use to. So my guess is they don't dry rot fast enough yet for tire Co. so this is another way for them to get us to buy new tires. Or make us buy new tires if Gov. jumps in.

I have to respectfully disagree, based on my experience. The tires today are 100% better than tires 25 years ago. And compounding has a lot to do with it. Tires are not pure rubber; they are a combination of various materials. There are design tradeoffs, like with any thing that is built. Tire compounding needs to deal with temperature changes, especially with the advent of all season tires, and despite what Goodyear might want you to believe, the compounding has a lot to do wet weather performance. And the increased levels of dry road handling have a lot to do with modern compounding. Do these changes reduce tire shelf life? Perhaps. But then again, normal use is not a few thousand miles a year. I would design something to last within the window of normal usage, meaning I would not design a tire to last 15 years sitting in the sun; that is abnormal usage. In the old days, when tires went 20k, you never kept them long enough to crack.

I never saw widespread issues with cracking of tires. Some brands, with Bridgestone and Pirelli coming immediately to mind, do crack sooner than others. Some never crack. I don’t think I ever saw a Michelin that was less than 10 years old with cracking. The Bridgestones that came on my wife’s truck, which are now on my old Chevy pickup, are cracking in the tread area. But they have 80k+ miles on them, and the tread is down to about 4/32”, so they are pretty much wiped.

The use of silicon-based products (Armour All) by people also contributes to cracking. And if you believe in holes I the ozone and all that (that’s another whole topic), UV kill tires too. As does the overheating that comes from driving at 80 MPH in an under inflated tire.

And the tire industry does not want this expiration date thing. It is going to cost them more to improve control inventory. Plus having to discount or even get dispose of old tires. My guess is 90% of all tires are just about wiped out in 6 years anyway, so the costs versus the potential upside is probably a wash at best. If they were so worried about turnover, they would have never invented the 80,000-mile tire. People today are spoiled in regards to tire quality.

I agree with Bonzo. The old tires do not even compare to the newer tires. Technology and manufacturing has improved a lot since way back when. The newer tire out perform the old tires in all aspects (handling, braking, traction, tread life).

I also agree that "most" tires are worn out well before they "expire".

An expiration date is only going to cost us (the consumer) more. I think we should leave well enough alone.

It's kinda like the oil change debate. Personally I think 3000 miles between changes is totally rediculous, but that's just me. 6 years for tires? Complete farse in my opinion. I agree that it's a way for Ford to cover it's butt. Whoever convinced them of it must have some serious pull.

As far as old tires, regardless of their tread condition, I still wouldn't run them. There is a set of mixed tires on my Camaro, which has never rolled under it's own power in over 6 years. They all held air when I pulled the wheels off 6 years ago and sat outside uncovered all that time. I put them on the car last year and they all still held air. I added some to bring them to 32lbs or something like that and they've held it ever since. BUT, even though a couple of them have 30,000 miles more treadlife left in them, there's no way in hell I'd drive on them. Paranoia, common sense.... whatever. If I see cracking, checking, hardness anywhere on a tire and I KNOW that it's an old tire, I consider it spent.

Re: The quality then vs now.

I remember when 20k was all you could get on a front tire, and lucky to get 5k from a back one. Had a friend with a Mercedes in 1972, who wore out a set of Michelin radials in just over 40k miles, and no one believed he went that far. Nowadays, a Walmart or Sears bottom priced radial is good for 50k.

In re: Helmet (Achtung Helmut!) and seat belt laws, wearing safety gear is important not only for the operator, but also protects society as well, as most people who suffer broken backs or devastating injuries become a burden to taxpayers. However, I agree with the troopers and sheriff deputies here in Arkansas, who refuse to write a ticket to someone who doesn't strap into a steel cage when they can't write a ticket to a bike rider on a rocket without a helmet.

I know I wouldn't use the spare off my 99 Blazer for anything but a trip to the tire store though. And I always wear my seatbelt.

Jim

Nitrogen, eh, er -- OK...

Helmut is a name?? Learn something everday but I don't speak German..

pdq67

I have 2 Radial tires on the back of my 68 SS that have less then 200 miles on them and they have big lumps in them from tread separation the tires are about 15 years old because the car has been in storage since about 1990 and I just noticed this condition recently but I am glad I noticed now before I test drove the car after I finish building it this month. Tires to dry out over time and I think some sort of simple Dating system is needed.

I agree and most do, that tires do dry out, crack, become hard, etc.. over time. The question is, What is the magic number? I think that's the problem. If they are stored properly they can last a long time before they "expire". If they sit outside they will not last as long. Tempature and the environment play a large role too. So do you date them for worse case and end up "throwing away" good tires? In the end it will cost us more, no matter how you look at it. I think a good "born on" date is enough but, most non car minded people wouldn't know or care when the tires were made, nor would they know how old is too old. Much like we are discussing, How old is to old?

My Mom's trailer tires were kept under my sister's basement stairs for like 25 years and then spent a couple of years in Mom's out shed until I got them and put them in my basement AND they were fine when I sold them at Auction two years ago after her leaving us!!

She bought her trailer about 8/1/66!!!

pdq67

Boy, it was hard selling those suckers b/c that trailer was my Mom's nest... And mine too when I went home... I'm glad my nephew ended up with it AND he has NO desire to move it!!

I do believe that old tires do have a longer shelf life... but it's also correct that they didn't last as long on the pavement, and are nowhere near as good in most situations. I have some tires from the '50's stored very well (controlled eviroment, no UV, low humdity etc), they work fine when called upon...but they aren't practical for daily use... I replace tires from the early 80's all the time that are finally giving up now...and many from the 90's that were actually stored better, built heavier and are completely rotted today. The performance difference between the two were night and day (when new) and I'd grab the newer units (if both were offered today) without question.

As far as how old is too old? I had some Pro Tracs mounted on Cragars I tossed on an old parts hauler, they were mounted in '75 or so (new never driven, used to hold up a '73 Camaro, different story, don't try this at home kids!). One tire lasted 140 miles(KA-Boom!), the other? Nearly 15,000 miles before I took it off (including a trip to Houston, loaded with a trailer) and it's still holding up a junk truck today... No it wasn't wise but it does show that perhaps the date code isn't all that's important, it's just a good guide...

6 years on a sparingly but somewhat frequently driven (to bring the UV protection to the surface) and garaged (dry garage) probably is fine. Stored (with weight) or left outdoors for 6 years? Replace them without a thought... Also exposure to UV or ozone will also warrant replacement or age much more quickly...

A little common sense goes a long way!

I agree tires should have a date on them of when they are manuf. I just don't want it to be regulated.

Above I am stating what I was told by someone who should know what he's talking about. The reason he said that to me was because I had him mount my old BFG T/A's on my old/new rallyes on my camaro. The tires were bought around 1983. My car is garage kept and I told him that. They've been on my camaro all this time. There was pretty many years when I didn't drive it much.

When he was mounting them (in 2003) I asked him how they looked, he checked them good to. He said they look real good. That's when he told me about newer tires dry rotting. He said if I bought new T/A's I'd never have them this long they would dry rot at around 5-6 yrs.

I am glad this was brought up though because it really has me thinking maybe I should get new ones now. The only reason I'm debating it is because of what he told me and the fact that I don't drive it more than a 30 mile radius of my home.

Ok, Anybody going to say anything about my last post. I was really expecting to hear something. :)

You can only see so much by "looking" at them real good. He can't tell if the belts are seperating. I would suggest you replace them. Is your car and life worth more than a couple hundred dollars? I think so. My good friend has a 69 Vette that he has owned for years, he has T/A's on it too and they "looked" good, until they got a bubble. he keeps the car in the garage and drives it rarely. He had to replace the tires and the tread still "looked" like new even though the tires were probably 15 years old. Imagine if he was buzzing down the highway and never saw the bubble and the tire blew out. After a closer inspection you could see the tires were getting tiny cracks.

All I'm gonna say is that next, they will want to put a date stamp on an old fart like me!!

Not good at all...

He, He!!

pdq67

All I'm gonna say is that next, they will want to put a date stamp on an old fart like me!!

Not good at all...

He, He!!

pdq67Let's hope it's a born on date and not an expiration date. :waving:

OK, here it goes...tires do have a shelf life. If you buy your tires from a busy store you can pretty much ensure that the tires will be fresh. I run a tire store in east Texas and I sell about 900 tires per month. I tell my customers that the tires have a life of five years, I have personally seen putting a old spare from under a pickup blow out within 20 miles...ruber breaks down. Most tire manufactures stand behind their tires for 5-6 years. Bridgestone/Firestone will stand behind their's for 5 years from date of amnufacture or six years from date of purchase. They also come with three years free replacement.

D.O.T codes will give you the date of manufaction. AN example of a D.O.T code---hyhl p15 1705. The only thing that is date related is the last four digits, in this case the 17th week of 2005. If the last four look like this 1705<, the make buy the 5 is a decade marker. Used everyother decade. current D.O.T. do not have them, so, it would be 17th week of 1995. I replace alot for age, after all, better safe then sorry...right?