Winter Tyres

Dangerous Dave · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:22

TRNC said:
10mm new, 5mm part worn = half by my calcs. They do not NEED replacing at 3-4mm, it is only recommended for optimum performance which i've already explained why this isnt so important in the UK.

Do you run your tyres down to 0mm ? They are on the wear blocks at 3-4mm and need replaced as the performance drops off quickly. If you run them under this you may aswell stick with summer tyres.

[TW]Fox · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:26

TRNC said:
10mm new, 5mm part worn = half by my calcs.

Yea, thats not actually how tyres work.

Kenai · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:29

TRNC said:
10mm new, 5mm part worn = half by my calcs.

Yes, lets all run our tyres until they're completely bald, that's clearly a good idea.

s0ck · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:34

As if the 'shall I put part-worns on my M3' thread wasn't bad enough

TRNC · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:34

[TW]Fox;20114818 said:
Yea, thats not actually how tyres work.

Er, yes it is. Performance from 10mm to 5mm of tread in the UK, not in deep snow is not going to be affected. In fact it may be better because of the large slip angles created by the overly tall tread blocks in new winter tyres, thus part worn will have increased stability. Its simple Engineering.

Kenai said:
Yes, lets all run our tyres until they're completely bald, that's clearly a good idea.

Thats so far from what I said i'd almost be inclined to think you cant ******* read :rolleyes:

Kenai · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:39

TRNC said:
Thats so far from what I said i'd almost be inclined to think you cant ******* read

Well if you think a 10mm tread that's worn to 5mm is only half worn, that would imply you think it's only fully worn at 0mm. This is clearly completely stupid.

Perhaps you ought to think before you speak in future, lest you make yourself look even more retarded.

[TW]Fox · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:39

TRNC said:
Er, yes it is.

No, it's not. For 5mm to be 'half worn' on a tyre that begins at 10mm, you'd have to run it to 0mm. This is, of course, illegal.

bledd · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:40

Say the wear mark is 4mm, a tyre with 5mm is 83% worn from 10mm

Dave85 · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:44

From what I found it came originally with 8.73 millimetres not 10mm. However to put this in perspective im currently running summer bridgestones with 3.5mm of tread and these were bad enough last year when they had more tread.
So surely for the price they are worth a go even for the better grip and so on in light snow slush etc

Obviously for deep snow it would be better to have the full tread but we are talking about £140 vs £600

TRNC · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:46

[TW]Fox;20114929 said:
No, it's not. For 5mm to be 'half worn' on a tyre that begins at 10mm, you'd have to run it to 0mm. This is, of course, illegal.

But we are looking at tread depth. Simple maths dictates tha 5mm is half of 10mm.

I like the way you idiots overlook the engineering facts that I also posted. Way to go you retards.

Kenai · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:48

TRNC said:
But we are looking at tread depth. Simple maths dictates tha 5mm is half of 10mm.

Half depth isn't the same as half worn.

Your simple maths is missing the point entirely.

[TW]Fox · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:50

TRNC said:
But we are looking at tread depth. Simple maths dictates tha 5mm is half of 10mm.

I like the way you idiots overlook the engineering facts that I also posted.

But the service limit of the tyre isn't 0mm. It's illegal before that. Therefore 5mm is not half, because you can't run it with 1mm!

Way to go you retards.

Err yes, quite.

panthro · 20 Sep 2011 at 21:57

I'd say go for them, especially if you know the source and its £140 for all 4.

sloth · 20 Sep 2011 at 22:27

£140 + fitting for 4 tyres is likely to total at least £180. Michelin state:

http://www.michelin.co.uk/tyres/learn-share/driving-guide/winter-tyre-guide said:
*********-shaped shoulder markings on MICHELIN winter tyres indicate the position of winter tread wear indicators—which are in addition to the standard 1.6 mm tread wear indicators. The winter tread wear indicators are set at 4 mm of remaining tread depth. For optimum performance in snow, change your winter tyres when the tread wears down to the 4 mm tread wear indicator.

£180 for tyres with 1mm of useful life doesn't seem great to me. That's £45 per mm.

If a new set is £500 fitted and gives 7mm of useful life, that works out at ~£18 per mm. That's for new tyres with a known history, aren't perished and will be more effective than part worns.

Alternatively, replace your summer tyres sooner rather than later for something that offers good wet performance.

MarkDavis · 20 Sep 2011 at 22:47

What about some Autosocks?

http://www.autosock.co.uk/

BinnsY · 20 Sep 2011 at 22:56

TRNC said:
But we are looking at tread depth. Simple maths dictates tha 5mm is half of 10mm.

I like the way you idiots overlook the engineering facts that I also posted. Way to go you retards.

Are you actually serious?

The legal limit for tread is 1.6mm if I remember correctly. If new tyres start at 10mm this means you only have 8.4mm of useable tread. Therefore the tires would be half worn at 10-4.2mm. Ie 5.8mm total.

Having said that why anyone would run tyres to the legal limit is beyond me, I'm not sure how you say its not relevant in this country given the amount of rain we have.

This video sums it up pretty well. The new tyre stops the car in the wet in 195ft, by 3mm this distance is already up to 290 feet. Once you go to the legal limit of 1.6mm this is up to a frankly massive 380 feet. How can you think this is not relevant?

Dave85 · 20 Sep 2011 at 23:24

That vid is pretty damn scary when you think about it

MarkDavis · 21 Sep 2011 at 00:02

BinnsY said:

That's shocking.