Tyre shoulder cracking

No, what they're saying is that a UHP tyre at 1.6mm can perform better than a brand new tyre of a lesser quality. Just read what I've written before you start disputing points because I'm pretty confident that if you slow down and take the time to actually read what I've said, it's more or less exactly as Michelin have said.

They're saying it's wasteful and *unnecessary* to replace tyres at 3mm and that tyre performance in wet or aquaplane conditions is more than just about tread depths. They're comparing premium tyres with lesser performance ones because millions of people a year take off their high quality Michelin/Goodyear/Conti tyres that the car came with from factory, some at 3mm, and replace them with China's finest. That's why it's relevant.

Also by changing tyres early, you're losing out on increased dry braking performance (a worn tyre performs better in the dry than a brand new tyre) and if you're in southern England where you're driving on dry roads 75% of the time, this is a consideration also
 
I swear tyres do this far earlier than they used to.
Some brands and models had real issues with it

I remember the CSC 5P had bad issues with this, as did the CSC3 IIRC. I've known the Bridgestone RE050A to do this also. It's really not good and so difficult to claim on any warranty
 
No, what they're saying is that a UHP tyre at 1.6mm can perform better than a brand new tyre of a lesser quality. Just read what I've written before you start disputing points because I'm pretty confident that if you slow down and take the time to actually read what I've said, it's more or less exactly as Michelin have said.

They're saying it's wasteful and *unnecessary* to replace tyres at 3mm and that tyre performance in wet or aquaplane conditions is more than just about tread depths. They're comparing premium tyres with lesser performance ones because millions of people a year take off their high quality Michelin/Goodyear/Conti tyres that the car came with from factory, some at 3mm, and replace them with China's finest. That's why it's relevant.

Also by changing tyres early, you're losing out on increased dry braking performance (a worn tyre performs better in the dry than a brand new tyre) and if you're in southern England where you're driving on dry roads 75% of the time, this is a consideration also

Unless the person you were replying to, was going to do that, they weren't, you've built a strawman.

You think people posting on a tech forum, and motor section, where they are asking about some shoulder cracking, is proposing switching to some barely legal chinese tyres?

Also millions are switching from well known brands to rubbish ones every year? These rubbish brands must be some very large companies with high market share.
 
Last edited:
Unless the person you were replying to, was going to do that, they weren't, you've built a strawman.
Since you didn't bother to address any of the points I'd raised about Michelin's view on tyre tech down to 1.6mm, with me evidencing examples of direct quotes from them - and instead just went to accusing me of making a strawman arguement, I'll assume this debate is officially over. :)
 
Would anyone here be happy to buy a used car from a dealer and the tyres only had 3mm of tread left? Perfectly legal, the dealer refuses to change them as they ‘perform just as well as a new set’ they say. I wouldn’t.
 
Would anyone here be happy to buy a used car from a dealer and the tyres only had 3mm of tread left? Perfectly legal, the dealer refuses to change them as they ‘perform just as well as a new set’ they say. I wouldn’t.

Apparently you are forced to change to rubbish tyres otherwise. So based on that strawman, they are better.
 
Last edited:
Since you didn't bother to address any of the points I'd raised about Michelin's view on tyre tech down to 1.6mm, with me evidencing examples of direct quotes from them - and instead just went to accusing me of making a strawman arguement, I'll assume this debate is officially over. :)

Michelin have built a strawman, to sell their tyres, which you are parroting. Why would we compare to some cheap chinese tyres.

They are welcome to show their own tyres not dropping off significantly from 3mm to 1.6mm. Which they haven't but we have independent tests for, which you dismiss with marketing spiel.
 
Last edited:
Apparently you are forced to change to rubbish tyres otherwise. So based on that strawman, they are better.
Ah sarcasm. So we've had "strawman!!" and sarcasm now - both traits of a good debate.

The ironic thing is that is could be the *exact* scenario Michelin and I were talking about. If there are 3mm Michelin Pilot Sport 5/other UHP tyres on this car at the moment and the car trader agrees to replace them with brand new ones - you better believe the trader will be replacing them with Chinese wonders. And hence leaving Misschief with tyres that are worse in all situations.
 

Jeez, watch the video in full.

This is basically what Michelin are claiming. Yet their tyres drop off significantly when compared to itself.
 
Last edited:
Michelin have built a strawman, to sell their tyres, which you are parroting. Why would we compare to some cheap chinese tyres.

They are welcome to show their own tyres not dropping off significantly from 3mm to 1.6mm. Which they haven't but we have independent tests for, which you dismiss with marketing spiel.
I...I genuinely haven't got time to debate some of the nonsense in this post. But your first point that you think Michelin are telling people to hold onto their tyres longer and not replace them prematurely is a strategy for them trying to sell more tyres (as opposed to them doing what other manufacturers do and tell people to buy new tyres at 3mm because they'd be dangerous otherwise) - made me stop reading tbh.

I'm guessing you don't work in marketing...
 
I...I genuinely haven't got time to debate some of the nonsense in this post. But your first point that you think Michelin are telling people to hold onto their tyres longer and not replace them prematurely is a strategy for them trying to sell more tyres (as opposed to them doing what other manufacturers do and tell people to buy new tyres at 3mm because they'd be dangerous otherwise) - made me stop reading tbh.

I'm guessing you don't work in marketing...

They would rather people buy Michelin tyres in the first place, rather than switch to cheap brands. That's the entire argument. Buy Michelin tyres, they might be more expensive, but they last longer and are better long term value!

That's their argument.

However, people in this forum won't be switching away from premium brands anyway.
 
Last edited:

Jeez, watch the video in full.

This is basically what Michelin are claiming. Yet their tyres drop off significantly when compared to itself.
Good job, you posted a video about all season tyres. A tyre which is completely different in construction from a UHP summer tyre.

Seriously give up man
 
Good job, you posted a video about all season tyres. A tyre which is completely different in construction from a UHP summer tyre.

Seriously give up man

Lol, thats a Michelin sponsored video, with the exact marketing spiel you posted.

That is their top selling tyre in Europe. It's funny you think they are talking about their top end tyres. People are switching from PS4S to cheap chinese brands? Is that what they are talking about.

Your link doesn't say it is talking about summer uhp tyres.
 
Last edited:
They would rather people buy Michelin tyres in the first place, rather than switch to cheap brands. That's the entire argument. Buy Michelin tyres, they might be more expensive, but they last longer and are better long term value!
seems Michelin were trying to defend themselves against autobild comparison with other makes/peers) long life performance analysis
Another thing the Auto Bild test showed is that the Goodyear and Continental tyres demonstrated the LLP strategy a tad better than Michelin itself. At a tread depth of 1.6mm, both had slightly shorter stopping distances from 80km/h and 120km/h. Pierre Robert views this as a positive result: “The article supports our LLP argument that tyre performance at decreasing tread depths is a decision made by manufacturers. We are pleased that other premium manufacturers are also considering the findings of Long Lasting Performance during the (tyre) development process.”
https://tiresvote.com/articles/auto-bild-used-summer-tire-test-2019/ - 2019 tyres lol
 
seems Michelin were trying to defend themselves against autobild comparison with other makes/peers) long life performance analysis

https://tiresvote.com/articles/auto-bild-used-summer-tire-test-2019/ - 2019 tyres lol

Thanks for finding that article and autobild results. The conclusion in the article is exactly what everyone says. Running your tyres down to 1.6mm is downright dangerous. Even 3mm starts struggling, but as a rule its a pretty good cut off.


Drive on the M25 in the rain, which is basically a continuous turn at 70mph, and you'll appreciate tyres which won't aquaplane at any moment, especially in deeper puddles.
 
Last edited:
Don't think I've ever ran a tyre below 4mm - I tend to get bored of them and switch by that point or change cars or whatever.

The work vans scare me though, 4 different tyres, 4 different pressure levels and always atleast one which is down to minimums on tread. I would not want to be driving those around all day.
 
I always think there is more road noise in cabin with tyres worn down too - but the auto-bild experiment is scary,
if you have a lease with tyres, when do they allow you to replace them.

e: https://www.lexautolease.co.uk/business/maintenance/tyre-maintenance
Before Kwik Fit can replace a tyre as part of the maintenance package the tread depth must be no greater than 2mm, 0.4mm above the legal minimum requirement of 1.6mm per tyre. For those leasing directly through their employer certain criteria may differ from the above, for more information please contact your employer.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom