|
|
|
tire age
- Thread starter Danimal
- Start date
throw them out, anything more than 5 years is not worth riding on. Since the tires are not new, they've been heat cycled many times. Time + heat cycles will harden a tire. The technology has also improved over time. A crash can be significantly more catastrophic than the cost of a set of new tires. Ask yourself this, if you do crash and the result turns out to be compromised grip/old tires, how sorry will you be that you didn't spend the $350 on a new set? Certain things aren't a big deal, tires, brakes and chains are. Weight the upside benefit on 50% of an old tire that will go to waste vs. the downside of crashing on crappy tires.
this is the same reason I always tell people "don't buy seatbelts at a yardsale"
this is the same reason I always tell people "don't buy seatbelts at a yardsale"
dr_sarcasm
Well-known member
Damned if I could find that study, BUT, there was a show on this very thing a few years back (not sure if it was 60 Minutes, 20/20 or something similar) which was spurred from an incident of a father lending his minivan to his son and friends.
What happened is that they drove this minivan from somewhere in the US and came into Ontario, where the van had a tire failure and the the boy and his group of friends perished (I believe there were no survivors) somewhere on the 401 near Windsor (or London?). The show focused their investigation on the tires and why they failed, including how to tell when a tire was made via what was stamped on the sidewall (a series of numbers that tells you what week of what year the tires was made). What they found is that the tires were original and had failed due to age.
Essentially, as a result of this investigation, the "safe" lifespan of a tire is suggested at 6 years - anything over this you run the risk of catastrophic failure due to drying out of the compound, internal stresses, etc.
I'm in the same boat as the OP here; my 'Stang has her original rubber from 2004 (made in the 42nd week), with a total of 37,000 km on them. I need to change them out or accept the risks that under the right (wrong?) driving circumstances they may blow out as they are not the tires they once were...
In short, throw out those tires and get yourself some new rubber.
slowbird
Well-known member
The bike might still be "safe" to ride on, but the ride, handling, and your piece of mind will benefit greatly from a new set of rubbers.
If I was in your position and I was able to afford it I would get a new set of tire.
dr_sarcasm
Well-known member
If you do a search on the 'Net, you'll see there's a consensus on the 6-year old limitation (this page I found quoted what I think was the original investigation done on ABC News regarding the accident I alluded to: http://gatorgrad2001.hubpages.com/hub/Tire-Age-and-Driving-Safety).
If you go to the link, it gets into more detailed specifics as to why tires fail after a certain age (video at the end does a review as well). Also, it appears as though England has standards for this sort of thing (surprise surprise, North American not willing to take the leap on such mandates...).
If you go to the link, it gets into more detailed specifics as to why tires fail after a certain age (video at the end does a review as well). Also, it appears as though England has standards for this sort of thing (surprise surprise, North American not willing to take the leap on such mandates...).
Agree with all the recommendations above to replace tires. Based on what I've read, the standard recommendation is to
throw out tires if they're more than 5 years old due to outgassing which changes the composition of your tires in the long run.
You can determine their age by looking for a 4 digit date code on the sidewall (3 digits on older tires). The first 2 digits indicate the week of manufacture and the last 2 indicate the year. Here's an example:
Personally, I think the 5 year recommendation is conservative. I'd be willing to stretch my car tires longer if they appeared to be in good condition but, on my bike, I choose to err on the side of caution.
throw out tires if they're more than 5 years old due to outgassing which changes the composition of your tires in the long run.
You can determine their age by looking for a 4 digit date code on the sidewall (3 digits on older tires). The first 2 digits indicate the week of manufacture and the last 2 indicate the year. Here's an example:
Personally, I think the 5 year recommendation is conservative. I'd be willing to stretch my car tires longer if they appeared to be in good condition but, on my bike, I choose to err on the side of caution.
Is that a 999 you're talking about? You're going to want new tires.
Adding to what everyone has said already, take a close look at the sidewall. Even if they look fine now, I can pretty much guarantee you once you put a teeny bit of mileage on the tires the sidewalls will start cracking badly.
Adding to what everyone has said already, take a close look at the sidewall. Even if they look fine now, I can pretty much guarantee you once you put a teeny bit of mileage on the tires the sidewalls will start cracking badly.
Hmmm that's an interesting question. I don't know. 55 would be a taller sidewall but does that necessarily mean increased contact patch? Things I'd question are:
Does this change or affect the tire's profile?
Does the slightly added height give the impression to the rider that he/she is leaning further?
Does the higher sidewall change the flex of the tire and, if so, how does that alter the handling of the bike?
If any of the above are true, are the gains/losses appreciable or negligible?
lol maybe not the response you're looking for... just pondering aloud.
|
|
|
|
|