Excerpts from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113158615653093082.html

Bridgestone has broken ranks with the rest of the US rubber industry
in recommending a maximum life span for passenger and light-truck
tires.

In a recent technical bulletin to its dealers, the tire maker said all
tires - including spares - that are more than 10 years old should be
replaced, regardless of their external appearance. The company cited
the same recommendation issued in September by the Japan Automotive
Tire Manufacturers Association.

Many US car makers have pushed ahead with such recommendations,
although their age recommendations vary and generally are shorter.

Earlier this year, Ford started urging consumers to replace tires
after six years. Ford said its research shows that tires degrade over
time, even when they are not being used.

The US tire industry, however, insists there is no science to support
this view.

Bridgestone's technical bulletin notes that although the company is
not aware of technical data that support a specific tire service life,
it believes it is appropriate to follow the Japanese tire industry's
new recommendation.


============================

The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery,
a metaphor for a proof,
a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths,
and oneself for an oracle,
is inborn in us.

....Paul Valery

I have a 91 Corvette , 20500 miles . I'm the only owner , the tires look
good and have a lot of tread left . There are times I take the car on the
expressway and drive it fast . I'm wondering if I'm taking my life in my
hands with 15 year old tires on that vehicle.

-Dana
"Larry J." <usenet2 (AT) DE (DOT) LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote

Interesting issue. I bet that there are many variables including rubber
compounds, atmospheric pollution types and levels, sun exposure, heat
exposure, etc.

Putting an exact replacement interval date on tires is hard, but it is
clear that old rubber gets harder and more likely to fail.

John

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:39:31 GMT, "Dana" <dlkramer (AT) mindspring (DOT) com>
wrote:

You could be - but before you freak and have the car towed to the
tire store, get down on your knees and really inspect the tires.

If you see lots of age cracking and checking, especially cracks that
have opened up to expose fabric belts, you have rotten tires. And
look down between the tread blocks, that's where the stress is
concentrated. If the rubber is as smooth soft and pliable as a baby's
bottom, you should be fine for a while longer...

But with 15-year-old tires, even if the outside looks perfect I'd
still start looking around for a good sale on tires. The tread
compounds change with age, and I'll bet you like the grip and ride of
the car on new tires much better.

--<< Bruce >>--

--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.

Larry J. wrote:
damned right! blaming tires is cheaper than admitting liability for
thousands of deaths through /known/ flawed design. and let's face it,
that strategy was spectacularly successful before.

Dana wrote:
"Do ya feel lucky?" I would put new rubber on 'er.

John

You certainly are entitled to your opinion but a US Senate investigation,
numerous courts cases and admissions by the tire manufacture involved in the
court settlements, have proven that what you believe that led you to that
opinion, is wrong. Do some research on Firestones tires, WBMA

mike hunt


"jim beam" <nospam (AT) example (DOT) net> wrote

"Steve" <amkb (AT) bnd (DOT) inv> wrote

<snip rest>

I was under the impression that 10 years was standard on the life of a tire.
I bought a new spare a few years ago because the one I had (a full-size
spare) was in excess of 10 years old.

Mike Hunter wrote:
excuse me, but when is it ok for a vehicle to roll when a tire blows? i
don't care if it's tread separation, broken bottle or gunshot, NO
VEHICLE SHOULD EVER ROLL AS THE RESULT OF A FLAT. and no amount of
highly expensive lobbying whitewash or out of court settlements can
change that fact. similarly, it's just plain criminal to lobby AGAINST
rollover roof collapse standards for these same vehicles that have a
known rollover propensity "because it would cost too much". have you
ever been behind an suv when it rolls and kills its occupants because
the roof collapses to hood height? i have.

Thank you for the input , I appreicate the information.
-Dana
"Bruce L. Bergman" <blPYTHONbergman (AT) earthlink (DOT) invalid> wrote