Tire date code

You think we may be getting a family of Troll’s?

1 Like

You know what they say “ let one troll in there goes the forum”.


Especially if the OP is from Europe, land of 15k to 20k oil change intervals.

Goldmort is from Australia according to one of his posts claiming what a great vehicle a Saab 9000 is ( of the very few left ) .


Bridgestone’s Australian web site recommends 10 years max, and shows how to check the manufactured date on the ‘tyre’. Nothing about a ‘use by’ date, or a 3 year limit.


It couldn’t have been a great vehicle, simply because it didn’t have “superior” drum brakes!


Wrong troll LOLOLOL

1 Like

If you’ve seen one internet troll, you’ve seen them all.

I’m OCD about tires (tyres) and even I wouldn’t toss tires after 3 years!

1 Like

“tyre” spelling indicates GM is likely outside the USA, guessing in the UK, where vehicles must pass a MOT safety inspection. Not sure if that’s required yearly or a longer time interval. Differing rules country to country. Perhaps @goldmort_181203 is referring to the MOT safety inspector .

1 Like

George, he’s from Australia. But Great Britain has a 10 year max tire life, too. Not 3 year.


Ok, GM is not UK, British Commonwealth instead. Modern tires seem like they would remain viable for at least 10 years in any event.

1 Like

There is not, nor did I say there is, an expiry date marked on tyres. There is a production date…perhaps not in USA as “Volvo” indicated USA is ‘different’. Protesting against safety is a mantra for a lot of people, I have no doubt, have been well advised, that there is a diminishing-safety period in the use of tyres. My arguments are based on risk. My interest is not in ‘how long’ tyres can last but how long they maintain the performance of fresh tyres. Notwithstanding my views it’s up to a vehicle owner to establish his vehicle is sound and fit or purpose. Tyres brakes and sterring are the major factors.

Some car companies suggest long periods, very possibly to reduce potential buyers thinking that their marque is ‘hard on tyres’. Others recommend 5 or 6 years. I say three is a good target as I deal with experts in steering and suspension who advise 3 years for optimum use, but we are working with high performance cars…as well road conditions are changing.

As climates heat and tar melts more often tyres are subjected to greater deterioration. There’s no argument from me that harder tyres may hold tread longer than softer compounds which adhere better to roadways…and so on however complaining about replacing tyres doesn’t change any fact that they continue to harden and perhaps get more damage as time passes. There’s no point in arguing that tyres do not deteriorate with age…that’s a ‘the world is flat’ argument.Things may be different in USA from the rest of the world…That may however be a delusion.

There seems to be a misunderstanding of insurance indemnity commonly arising in US forums more than others. Paying insurance is not a ‘do as you like threafter’. Premiums are calculated on risks, circumstances, repair costs first and third party. Presumably even in USA questions are asked in policies and assurers demand to be notified if circumstances change…?

Generally Insurance policies have some or even a litany of exclusions to a claim irrespective of whether a policy has been paid or not. Motor vehicle policies commonly exclude indemnity for any modification over the factory model and mod’s not approved by the assurer. The undewriters may approve indemnity for a mod which has law-accredited auto-engineer’s examination and approval, or it may reject some or all mods. That can be wider wheels. suspension changes, engine and transmission mods,…and others. A refusing to indemnify a vehicle with tyres not fit for purpose when an incident occurs may lose a court challenge if the tyre condition is irrelevant to the incident… however if tyre condition is a component cause and the assurer has a policy stipulating care of vehicle vehicle condition in part or all then it might be a Janus outcome for the laughing boy (or girl)…

I don’t know whether USA has requirements for minumum tread depth on tyres…presumably it does…and if tyres have less tread-depth that may be cause of police action, so also should tyres with bulges, tears, other damage or obvious under-pressure.

What police might ignore a competent assessor may not, in case of damage or in examination of a vehicle for an ‘agreed value’ as opposed to book value. If the assessor is slack he or she may not be the one assessing the situation when a claim is made. A claim may be denied.
Capriracer makes several observations, which have merit…In reply, tyres condition is very important in claim assessing in vehicle damage…so also brakes, steering and so on. Most would just look at tread depth and maybe any obvious damage but where death is involved a forensic examination would be more particular. My own work in insurance investigation and assessment was major fraud, explosives,arson and public liaility in which astuteness and evidence are exacting…I did however do some motor vehicle claims in which ‘big dollars’ were involved and tyres…when not burned beyond recognition were evidence which had to be factual…‘did they influence the outcome’. Insurance adjusters may not concern themselves with all the aspects an investigator-assessor might.

Thanks for clarifying that by raising the issue. Capri’s BMW is likely to have tyre manufacture date unless such niceties are not included in USA…however as most tyres are from China and Japan (and maybe Mexico) they’d have production dates. My 330 BMW is an E46 with Yohahamas about a year old onboard…Another two and they’d be replaced. My SAAB Carlsson has very expensive tyres and has been on blocks for most of the last 6 years…the tyres have done about 200kMs…they will be replaced when I put it back on the road…sometime…

My Cosworth has been up on blocks for 15 years…The ‘then new’ and so ‘good’ Michelins will be replaced along with the numerous other things stored cars need before being driven again. I have 3 4wd Pajeros and a Van I have owned for nearly 20 years , all have tyres no older than 15 months and although the van had good tyres, under 4 years old, with good tread I could tell the braking distance had increased through lockup skid in wet weather and effectiveness decreased…including easier rear wheel spin during the last year of it’s 4th year…so they were replaced. The improvement is/was immediately evident. Eighteen months later I can feel that performance has somewhat dissipated.My view is that other road users and pedestrians deserve my consideration of them also. Thus my suggestions are also what I do myself.

Wisdom might be to check production date on tyres and ask a competent authority what is the recommended replacement period. As I don’t drive in USA the injury and death toll on the road is of only passing interest however in other nations where I do drive I do see cars and drivers which should not be on the roads. When my Suburu WRX was completed I bought Michelin Pilots for it…and when obtaining quotes for them the build-date of the tyres was the first consideraton and price the second. I was fortunate that one supplier gave me the cheapest quote and tyres dated a month previously.

France is interesting. Long practice and belief when replacing a pair of tyres has been putting new tyres on the front wheels and perhaps the best of the rest on the rear. I was refused that arrangement in France, I was told it is unlawful…the newer tyres must be put on the rear…why?.. because rear end skids cause more incidents than the more controllable front wheel skids. Arguing such vague terms as ‘nonsense’ would make no difference. Some respond with Transference but some with fair argument. I appreciated those who argued politely by the way.

If that is the car-performance case in France it will be the case wherever cars and tyres are on the road… personal opinions or constitutional arguments make no difference to matters of fact…for rational people. I’ve said all I want to say on the matter.

Oh dear…as I close…another fashionable argument ‘fake news’ has arrived… Benz promotes through pretending that its cars are easy on tyres…as you indicated. To maintain tyres only need inspection after 5 years is pretty silly… clinging to a straw…I continue to have a 3 year target…but I re-iterate I no longer buy American cars, I gave them away in 1965 after driving a European car. I’d owned and restored some 70 or so American cars by that time…but that aside I buy tyres for adhesion, not for longevity. Voila

If you actually think that buying only 2 new tire that they should go on the front makes everything you say worth ignoring .


Varies state to state, but generally that’s the case for most USA based car insurance. If something important changes about car or ownership, car owner is required to inform insurance company. However in 50+ years of driving I’ve never been asked by an insurer to bring my cars to their office so they can inspect them for modifications or anything else. The insurance companies have access presumably to the required Calif emissions inspection reports, for example for my 30 year old Corolla. They may have access to safety inspection reports in states that require them.

Do you live in California, George?

Here’s something to think about . . .

I recently was working on one of our fleet’s trucks. It wasn’t a preventative maintenance inspection. I was diagnosing a check engine light. I performed my diagnosis, ordered parts and parked the truck

A few days later, all the parts had arrived and I go to the back parking lot to get the truck. One of the front tires had blown out all on its own, without even being moved since I parked it

I nursed the truck back into the shop. All of the tires had plenty of tread, but the date code was the 22nd week of 2010

needless to say, I replaced all the tires

So I agree with @Old-Days-Rick about replacing tires that are 10 years old or more

And the tires were Michelins . . . so definitely modern tires, not old garbage from the 1990s :smirk:


Probably the wife and I have not been in enough accidents to have tires and brakes etc. inspected to determine owner fault.

Were there any cracks in the sidewall of those old tires?

Yes. San Jose, California.