Tyre shoulder cracking

Associate
Joined
20 Jul 2016
Posts
122
The OH car both rear tyres are cracking on the shoulder and her MOT is due end of next month which I doubt will pass so looking to change them, the fronts are fine with around 3mm tread should I just replace the rears or all 4 at the same time?

She will be happy getting rid of these Potenza S001 as they are noisy and not the best

BMEyqnM.jpeg
 
They'll pass an MOT with cracking on them unless they are cracked so bad that cords are visible, which is unlikely.
 
I took a Bridgestone off my current car which was from the rear and had roughly 5-6MM tread left over, less than 3 years old it had cracking/perishing within the tread groves.

Alarming but the car had only covered 11,000 from new so perhaps being stood for lengths of time could have contributed?
 
Last edited:
I took a Bridgestone off my current car which was from the rear and had roughly 5-6MM tread left over, less than 3 years old it had cracking/perishing within the tread groves.

Alarming but the car had only covered 11,000 from new so perhaps being stood for lengths of time could have contributed?

I had the same with my t005s - less than 3 years old and in the 10K mile range had cracks within the groves like they were 10 years old - not sure if due to being used on heavier cars but I saw someone posted similar recently with a Mini.
 
I had the same with my t005s - less than 3 years old and in the 10K mile range had cracks within the groves like they were 10 years old - not sure if due to being used on heavier cars but I saw someone posted similar recently with a Mini.

It was that exact tyre (T005) from a Polo.
 
I had the same with my t005s - less than 3 years old and in the 10K mile range had cracks within the groves like they were 10 years old - not sure if due to being used on heavier cars but I saw someone posted similar recently with a Mini.

I took a Bridgestone off my current car which was from the rear and had roughly 5-6MM tread left over, less than 3 years old it had cracking/perishing within the tread groves.

Alarming but the car had only covered 11,000 from new so perhaps being stood for lengths of time could have contributed?

This thread made me think about why this is more common now than it used to be. From a brief Google it appears that one of the common factors is standing still/covering low miles.
 
Last edited:
This thread made me think about why this is more common now than it used to be. From a brief Google it appears that one of the common factors is standing still/covering low miles.

My pickup was doing dozens of miles 3-4 days a week at the time, some of my other vehicles can sit around a bit.
 
Goodyear efficient grips have had cracking in base of grooves @3/4 years - mechanic/MOTguy told me to explore a claim,
said it's not uncommon on premium tyres, other added ingrediants for grip/wear have degraded the longevity, and suggested some of the less esoteric brands may fair better,
have lost about a tyre every 18months due to unreperable road debris punctures, so haven't been able to replace a pair though.

are the cracks on the shoulders vertically into the tyre as opposed to horizontal - it's not the tread blocks breaking away.
 
Last edited:
Why? 3mm of tread is absolutely fine?

Wet weather performance has been proven to start dropping off at 3mm (4/32") until it becomes illegal at 1.6mm.


See 1:50 mark.
 
Last edited:
Wet weather performance has been proven to start dropping off at 3mm (4/32") until it becomes illegal at 1.6mm.


See 1:50 mark.
Unfortunately the internet is littered with these sorts of pseudo scientific videos, often posted by tyre retailers, which forget the basics of year 8 physics. They usually show a non descript car, with non descript tyres, driving at a non descript speed, on a non descript depth of water - similar to when they try and push winter tyres.

Whilst aquaplaning resistance (*not* "wet weather performance") will likely decrease as tyre depth reduces, the type/model of tyre is equally or more important than the tread depth. I actually dug into this in depth a few years ago and did a post on it after finding what was seemingly the only scientifically sound test on the internet! IIRC if you have budget or midrange tyres on 3mm, a top UHP tyre at 1.6mm will often match straight line braking distances. This is part of the reason why Michelin are pushing for their customers to keep using their tyres until they reach the 1.6mm range. Of course, the caveat with that is that a 3mm UHP tyre will beat the same 1.6mm UHP tyre in aquaplaning resistance. In otherwords, if you're removing you Michelin Pilot Sport 5's because they're at 3mm and you're replacing them with some Linglong's - you're probably going to get a worse experience all round

I'll see if I can find the post again.
 
Last edited:
Michelin are pushing no such thing. Michelin are saying the drop off from 8mm to 3mm is a lot less for them than others.

They are not saying their tyres, dont drop off dramatically from 3mm to 1.6mm.

The video you are talking about is done by tyrereviews.
 
Last edited:
Michelin are pushing no such thing. Michelin are saying the drop off from 8mm to 3mm is a lot less for them than others.

They are not saying their tyres, dont drop off dramatically from 3mm to 1.6mm.

The video you are talking about is done by tyrereviews.

Enjoy. As per my points in my original post, not by your paraphrased inaccurate quotes of what I said.
 
From another article:

Michelin tests at Ladoux have shown that on wet roads, some worn tyres can perform as well as some new tyres, and that although the remaining tread depth is a factor in wet braking, the performance of the tyre, at all stages of its life, is more important.

Tyre performance is affected by many factors; casing design, materials, rubber compounds, tread design, shape of grooves and sipes etc. and these all affect how the tyre performs throughout the tyre’s life – right down to the legal tread wear limit. All tyres do not perform the same when new – and the differences in performance are more accentuated when that tyre is worn, according to their design.

Tyre labelling and European regulations have brought in minimum standards for tyre performance, and particularly for wet braking – one of the criteria measured by tyre labelling. Whilst all tyres legally sold in Europe meet this minimum standard when new, Michelin tests have shown that the wet braking capabilities of some tyres reduce quickly when worn, and may fall below this ‘minimum standard’ requirement. However, some premium products not only meet the criteria when new, they do so when worn to the legal tread wear limit.

Michelin workshops at Ladoux have shown that a premium tyre, worn to the tread wear limit can perform as well as a brand new lower performing tyre.

With these findings that wet braking distances and lateral wet grip depend on the performance of a tyre and not solely the tread depth, Michelin is calling on industry test bodies, and consumer organisations to start comparing and testing tyres when they are worn to the legal limit; then consumers will start to discover the truth about worn tyres.
 

Enjoy. As per my points in my original post, not by your paraphrased inaccurate quotes of what I said.

Why would you compare michelin tyres at 3mm to some new ditchfinders. Of course Michelin will say that.

Michelin are saying the harm to the environment is not worth it. The person you replied to isn't balancing environmental concerns.

All proper like for like tests, show a non-linear drop after 3mm.

Let's see Michelin publish their data, rather than marketing spiel.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom