**Unofficial Tyre Thread**
- Thread starter rossk26
- Start date
You can't compare charts...only the different results on one chart.
As has been pointed out there are a number of changed variables in the testing between the two charts making comparison between one and the other impossible and meaningless.
As has been pointed out there are a number of changed variables in the testing between the two charts making comparison between one and the other impossible and meaningless.
BS - that's not what was said, auto bild is meant to be a credible organisation - you expect consistancy - STEM
if the speed evolved 100->80 kph , that's fine, but, if 5 series, used now, is nonetheless, 30% more distance, that says something.
( increase trye effective diameter 15->18" you do increase wheel kinetic energy some 40%, which is some 1/4 of the cars mv^2 )
There's, simply way, too many, commas, in that, sentence for me, to, understand it.
Surely you really cant compare the two at all. For a start, different days, so different temperatures, different weather conditions, potentially different road surfaces (even if tested at the same location) etc...
Then you have different tyre sizes.
Then you have different cars. I mean, who would have thought the heavier 5 series might be more difficult to stop than the lighter 3 series.
Different starting speeds too.
Potentially different drivers.
Basically, nothing about these tests are consistent enough to compare them against each other. They are no doubt consistent enough to compare tyre performance within in each test. But certainly not against each other.
The only way you can realistically "measure" the improvement of tyre technology over time, is to accumulate percentage increases when new and old models of tyres are tested back to back on release of the newer tyre. Then when that tyre is tested against it's predecessor and so forth. Very rarely is the new tyre outperformed by the old tyre. And so adding up the accumulated improvements per generation might be the only real way to get any meaningful evidence of improvement.
As has been said before, tyres degrade over time, regardless of use, and so finding a "mint" set of well preserved 20 year old tyres and comparing them to current tyres simply wont work. However these 20 year old tyres were likely tested against their predecessor, and it against its own predecessor, until you get to the current tyre. And so the accumulated improvements over each test would be the only real indication. So adding up improvements from PS1 to PS2 to PS3 to PS4 to get the improvement from PS1 to PS4.
Of course, you can go beyond that too. Tyre technology has improved such that there are now "higher performance models" on the market. So do you compare the original Goodyear Eagle F1 to the Asy 5? Or the SuperSport / Supersport R / Supersport RS? I mean, they all represent the "ultimate" road tyre of their time, to some extent at least.
Then you have different tyre sizes.
Then you have different cars. I mean, who would have thought the heavier 5 series might be more difficult to stop than the lighter 3 series.
Different starting speeds too.
Potentially different drivers.
Basically, nothing about these tests are consistent enough to compare them against each other. They are no doubt consistent enough to compare tyre performance within in each test. But certainly not against each other.
The only way you can realistically "measure" the improvement of tyre technology over time, is to accumulate percentage increases when new and old models of tyres are tested back to back on release of the newer tyre. Then when that tyre is tested against it's predecessor and so forth. Very rarely is the new tyre outperformed by the old tyre. And so adding up the accumulated improvements per generation might be the only real way to get any meaningful evidence of improvement.
As has been said before, tyres degrade over time, regardless of use, and so finding a "mint" set of well preserved 20 year old tyres and comparing them to current tyres simply wont work. However these 20 year old tyres were likely tested against their predecessor, and it against its own predecessor, until you get to the current tyre. And so the accumulated improvements over each test would be the only real indication. So adding up improvements from PS1 to PS2 to PS3 to PS4 to get the improvement from PS1 to PS4.
Of course, you can go beyond that too. Tyre technology has improved such that there are now "higher performance models" on the market. So do you compare the original Goodyear Eagle F1 to the Asy 5? Or the SuperSport / Supersport R / Supersport RS? I mean, they all represent the "ultimate" road tyre of their time, to some extent at least.
What?
25 years ago the best 'normal' fast road tyre was the Bridgestone S-02. I went through quite a few of them on my Saab 900, especially as they would only last 8000 miles or so of road use, and that dropped dramatically when the car was used on track (one set which had a couple of track days of use barely lasted 4500miles). A modern UHP tyre has better wet grip, dry grip and massively better damp road performance (where the compound is important), and on my 9-5 they will last around 15000 miles of use. And that is comparing a 1300kg car with 240bhp to one that's closer to 1600kg and 300bhp.
Just got an advisory warning on my MOT for low tyre tread, using a cheap and cheerful digital meter it shows ~4mm across both tyres, they are only a couple of months old. Fairly sure it's 1.6mm? assuming the warning has no impact on anything? also can I ask for it to be removed as there is loads of tread left?
/edit they are cup2's (295/30/20)
/edit they are cup2's (295/30/20)
Last edited:
I think Cup2's only have 6mm to begin with don't they?
Legal minimum is 1.6mm, and even the recommendation is to have them changed at 3mm for optimum performance/longevity, so I think it's a bit cheeky for the MOT centre to list 4mm as "low", especially with Cup2...they're not even half used!
Legal minimum is 1.6mm, and even the recommendation is to have them changed at 3mm for optimum performance/longevity, so I think it's a bit cheeky for the MOT centre to list 4mm as "low", especially with Cup2...they're not even half used!
...and about 50% more expensive...nearly £300 for a rear tyre I think vs ~£200 for the 4S last I looked! I imagine they'd be great on track but for me on the road the 4S are amazing.
As far as I remember, not without having the test done again.
I can't remember that specifics so probably best to give it a Google.
"not without having the test done again" MIGHT mean they could take it off next year, but again I'm not sure.
I just skimmed a Pistonheads thread on the subject and I'm still unsure.
Probably the same one I was reading
Yes you can't have advisories removed unless it went to DVSA to appeal it. Otherwise the only way is a fresh MOT.
Not great to be advising them on 4mm. Personally I only advise if below 3mm and usually closer to 2.5mm.
Not great to be advising them on 4mm. Personally I only advise if below 3mm and usually closer to 2.5mm.