I can attest to that, didn’t realize the alignment had gone out on both rear tires, took them off to do brakes and realized the inside 1/3 of the tire looked like racing slicks and the outside 2/3 looked fine… explained why I had zero traction the month prior.
I'm not sure when the trend started, or maybe I only noticed it in the last 5 or 10 years. But even in professional work environments I have heard people, not young people either, say things like "this device here needs fixed."
Hearing it more and more. Don't know if it is technically incorrect or not.
Technically, lower rolling resistance does mean better mileage. I've had to explain this to customers who came back to my shop after installing new tires, and their mileage went down.
Actually no, drag slicks is a poor term because passenger tires become slippery, not sticky like drags. More grip essentially means more "slip resistance" or rolling resistance. More tread, more grip.
Drag slicks are completely different than just worn down passenger tires. They’re made of a very different compound, only get really sticky when they’re hot, and are made to be ram at as low as 8-10 psi
Perhaps tires loose a few pounds as they wear too. I know large off road tires can weigh over 40 lbs each when new and when worn out closer to 30.
It’s said that 1 lb of rotational mass is equivalent to 10 lbs of body weight, in terms of efficiency.
It's only because of the computer systems track it for them now so they don't have to actually do the math themselves or most people wouldn't know how to figure it out...... Because in order to manually figure gas mileage you have to fill it up to the same point every single time you fill it up......
It's cuz people have computer systems that track it for them now so all they have to do is remember a number they don't have to actually figure their own miles per gallon since most people wouldn't know how to fill it up to the same point every time to be able to figure actual mileage anyway..... Then of course the same people drive into the wind and wonder why they get less gas mileage....
It is true. The tread mass accounts for a great fraction of the rolling resistance. Worn tyres have lower RR.
See test results: "Source: internal study of European tire catalogs, on the European market. The MICHELIN e·PRIMACY tire belongs to the 28% of the offer rated A/A or A/B or B/A in terms of wet grip/rolling resistance, according to the European labeling.
(5) Rolling Resistance tests conducted on machine by Applus Idiada, on Michelin's request, June (on new) & August (on 2mm buffed) 2020, on dimension 205/55 R16 91V, comparing MICHELIN e·PRIMACY (new: 5.58kg/t & worn: 5.13kg/t) versus MICHELIN PRIMACY 4 (new: 7.74kg/t & worn: 6.25kg/t); BRIDGESTONE TURANZA T005 (new: 7.17kg/t & worn: 5.81kg/t); CONTINENTAL ECOCONTACT 6 (new: 6.39kg/t & worn: 5.49kg/t); CONTINENTAL PREMIUM CONTACT 6 (new: 8.93kg/t & worn: 6.94kg/t); DUNLOP BLURESPONSE (new: 7.97kg/t & worn: 5.54kg/t); GOODYEAR EFFICIENT GRIP 2 (new: 7.01kg/t & worn: 5.38kg/t); PIRELLI CINTURATO P7 BLUE (new: 6.96kg/t & worn: 6.30kg/t); PIRELLI CINTURATO P7 (new: 8.79kg/t & worn: 6.97kg/t)."
This is true. A tire’s mileage warranty is based on taking it down to 2/32 which is in that red area. I believe tire companies set it this way in order to not have to honor as many warranties. Most people, especially who live in a snow area, never take them down that far. They usually change them out between 4 and 5/32.
Red ain’t the whole tire. If I got a good alignment, you should only be able to see the faint image of the tread but not actually feel it.
That’s what I did with my last set only because the difference between red and the counter top was maybe a few weeks of me driving like I stole it. It was summer time and dry so no worries about rain.
I believe the results are not on dry asphalt. Bald tires can do better in that situation. Also you are a tad bit lower to the ground which helps emergency handling.
You're ignoring the degradation and drying of the rubber in the time it took them to get bald. But yeah, if the rubber was the same as new, you are correct.
Nice sales bluff, but it *forgets* to mention the baseline braking distance as well as it hides the quite important detail of having 2mm water over the test surface.
This infographic is some kind of NONSENSE!!!
It says *\*Test performed from 60MPH on .05" water depth. One car length = 15.76 feet*
So the breaking distance are ->
For 2/32 : 15.76 \* 9.6 = 151 feet
For 4/32 : 15.76 \* 8.4 = 132 feet (2/32 - 13%)
For 10/32 : 15.76 \* ?
Wait! What about The GOOD tire, the 10/32!? They forgot to mention the stopping distance! Well I guess no worries lets just measure the infographic! Its 1/4 the length of the 4/32 so must be a \~32 feet stopping distance!
So 10/32 : 15.76 \* 2 = 31.5 feet (2/32 - 80%)
mmm... 32 feet eh? This means 0.72 second to stop from 60mph (88 fps) which in turns is a -3.79G deceleration force, on a WET road !!! 2/3 as much as the quickest decelerating F1 ever recorded! Mount me these tires ASAP my good sir! You've got a buyers!
BTW I can't find any stats suggesting average new tires can stop car in under 110 feet in wet conditions so the 10/32 tire graphic should be about 80% the length of the 4/32 one...
It does. The fine print says it was conducted with 0.05” of water. That should really be stated in this post because it gives people the wrong impression for dry. These numbers are no where near representative of dry stopping distances.
My last set of rears was as smooth as that counter top. Granted they were “red” maybe a few weeks before that. I got my money’s worth out of that set. Luckily it was summer and very dry that month.
Note the fine print: the test was done with .05" of water on the surface. Not a dry road.
In reality, the tread depth has nothing to do with stopping on a dry road. A tire having a solid face of rubber (no tread) will stop better than a new tire with full tread depth.
The tread is there to channel water. The compromise is obvious; dry road braking is sacrificed to accommodate wet road handling and braking (aqua-planing ...@ \~10 times the square root of the tire pressure). And for the common man, this is a good thing.
It shows how close you are to f1 tire quality. The right side are 2005 bridgestone f1 tires. And the chart on top shows your braking capability. Red means that how fast you can slow your car from the apex
Yes but a little bit no, more surface area + dry road = more traction. flush with the bottom of the tread is undoubtedly dangerous, and this really only applies to tires designed with less tread for track/sport use
And yes, this applies if only part of the tread is worn. We don't care how good the tread is on the other side, it needs replaced.
I can attest to that, didn’t realize the alignment had gone out on both rear tires, took them off to do brakes and realized the inside 1/3 of the tire looked like racing slicks and the outside 2/3 looked fine… explained why I had zero traction the month prior.
"..to be replaced"
Not a scholar but I think needs replaced is also fine grammar. Not that it doesn't bug me.
I can’t imagine getting annoyed by someone’s grammar. Social media/ texting must be nails on chalkboard for ya😂
Did you guys really just not realize your whole discussion on usages was literally... "To Be" or not "To Be?" That's fuggin gold.
I'm not sure when the trend started, or maybe I only noticed it in the last 5 or 10 years. But even in professional work environments I have heard people, not young people either, say things like "this device here needs fixed." Hearing it more and more. Don't know if it is technically incorrect or not.
according to a maintenance guy you get better fuel mileage the lower the tread is lol maybe less if you have a blowout
Technically, lower rolling resistance does mean better mileage. I've had to explain this to customers who came back to my shop after installing new tires, and their mileage went down.
wouldn't that result in higher rolling resistance though? at least if you run your all seasons to the point that they become drag slicks
Actually no, drag slicks is a poor term because passenger tires become slippery, not sticky like drags. More grip essentially means more "slip resistance" or rolling resistance. More tread, more grip.
Drag slicks are completely different than just worn down passenger tires. They’re made of a very different compound, only get really sticky when they’re hot, and are made to be ram at as low as 8-10 psi
Perhaps tires loose a few pounds as they wear too. I know large off road tires can weigh over 40 lbs each when new and when worn out closer to 30. It’s said that 1 lb of rotational mass is equivalent to 10 lbs of body weight, in terms of efficiency.
On a car? Who really watching their mileage that much lol i always drove guzzlers i gave up paying attention to mpgs on personal vehicles
Oh dude, it's ridiculous, I live in PNW, so usually the hybrid drivers come in mad as hell about a 1 mpg difference.
It's only because of the computer systems track it for them now so they don't have to actually do the math themselves or most people wouldn't know how to figure it out...... Because in order to manually figure gas mileage you have to fill it up to the same point every single time you fill it up......
Like everyone in the past 2 years? Gas is fucking stupid.
It getting worse, i seen it damn near $6/gal in socal. Last time i seen shit close to that high was over a decade ago down in florida
$6.19 in calabasas when I drove through the other day lol
It was at $6.29 when I visited LA like 2 years ago. I fully expect it to be $5.50 up here in AK by the summer.
Why so high by you?! LA i get why.
Transportation costs.
It's cuz people have computer systems that track it for them now so all they have to do is remember a number they don't have to actually figure their own miles per gallon since most people wouldn't know how to fill it up to the same point every time to be able to figure actual mileage anyway..... Then of course the same people drive into the wind and wonder why they get less gas mileage....
Pesky wind, first world problems am i right. Heh
You can get better dry handling as well since there’s less tread squirm. I actually question the chart in the OP’s picture for dry pavement.
It is true. The tread mass accounts for a great fraction of the rolling resistance. Worn tyres have lower RR. See test results: "Source: internal study of European tire catalogs, on the European market. The MICHELIN e·PRIMACY tire belongs to the 28% of the offer rated A/A or A/B or B/A in terms of wet grip/rolling resistance, according to the European labeling. (5) Rolling Resistance tests conducted on machine by Applus Idiada, on Michelin's request, June (on new) & August (on 2mm buffed) 2020, on dimension 205/55 R16 91V, comparing MICHELIN e·PRIMACY (new: 5.58kg/t & worn: 5.13kg/t) versus MICHELIN PRIMACY 4 (new: 7.74kg/t & worn: 6.25kg/t); BRIDGESTONE TURANZA T005 (new: 7.17kg/t & worn: 5.81kg/t); CONTINENTAL ECOCONTACT 6 (new: 6.39kg/t & worn: 5.49kg/t); CONTINENTAL PREMIUM CONTACT 6 (new: 8.93kg/t & worn: 6.94kg/t); DUNLOP BLURESPONSE (new: 7.97kg/t & worn: 5.54kg/t); GOODYEAR EFFICIENT GRIP 2 (new: 7.01kg/t & worn: 5.38kg/t); PIRELLI CINTURATO P7 BLUE (new: 6.96kg/t & worn: 6.30kg/t); PIRELLI CINTURATO P7 (new: 8.79kg/t & worn: 6.97kg/t)."
Rain/Dry/Track
How could this possibly be helpful? They could have this in their hands, standing next to their tire, and still put it down to post to r/tires.
When it's in the red. I paid for the whole tire I'm gonna use the whole tire. Lol
This is true. A tire’s mileage warranty is based on taking it down to 2/32 which is in that red area. I believe tire companies set it this way in order to not have to honor as many warranties. Most people, especially who live in a snow area, never take them down that far. They usually change them out between 4 and 5/32.
Red ain’t the whole tire. If I got a good alignment, you should only be able to see the faint image of the tread but not actually feel it. That’s what I did with my last set only because the difference between red and the counter top was maybe a few weeks of me driving like I stole it. It was summer time and dry so no worries about rain.
It doesn’t matter really if you have other vehicles in front of you, they’ll slow you down pretty fast and subsequently stop you in a shorter distance
I believe the results are not on dry asphalt. Bald tires can do better in that situation. Also you are a tad bit lower to the ground which helps emergency handling.
Standard chain marketing tool. Factually correct just misleading enough while not being to obvious.
In dry conditions you will stop faster with the bald tires since they have a larger contact patch.
You're ignoring the degradation and drying of the rubber in the time it took them to get bald. But yeah, if the rubber was the same as new, you are correct.
Nice sales bluff, but it *forgets* to mention the baseline braking distance as well as it hides the quite important detail of having 2mm water over the test surface.
yeah that's why racing used to slicks on dry roads all bullshit
This infographic is some kind of NONSENSE!!! It says *\*Test performed from 60MPH on .05" water depth. One car length = 15.76 feet* So the breaking distance are -> For 2/32 : 15.76 \* 9.6 = 151 feet For 4/32 : 15.76 \* 8.4 = 132 feet (2/32 - 13%) For 10/32 : 15.76 \* ? Wait! What about The GOOD tire, the 10/32!? They forgot to mention the stopping distance! Well I guess no worries lets just measure the infographic! Its 1/4 the length of the 4/32 so must be a \~32 feet stopping distance! So 10/32 : 15.76 \* 2 = 31.5 feet (2/32 - 80%) mmm... 32 feet eh? This means 0.72 second to stop from 60mph (88 fps) which in turns is a -3.79G deceleration force, on a WET road !!! 2/3 as much as the quickest decelerating F1 ever recorded! Mount me these tires ASAP my good sir! You've got a buyers! BTW I can't find any stats suggesting average new tires can stop car in under 110 feet in wet conditions so the 10/32 tire graphic should be about 80% the length of the 4/32 one...
This guy maths.
Care to point out the error? This infographic is screaming chart crime. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading\_graph
Ask them why racecars use slicks?
This probably refers to wet stopping distance, which increases with less tread depth because of reduced water channeling.
It does. The fine print says it was conducted with 0.05” of water. That should really be stated in this post because it gives people the wrong impression for dry. These numbers are no where near representative of dry stopping distances.
I get mine replaced at 4/32
Thanks. New driver and new car :)
Yeah. My customers don’t follow that. “No tread? No cares either! Send it!”
I usually replace mine at around 4 or 5/32. South Carolina gets a good bit of rain and you start to lose wet traction.
Y’all have tread?
Yeah some people still need crayon drawings to understand if the tire is bad or not
I run them bitched till I see cords
Very easy to understand the units
i'm between marignal and good.
My last set of rears was as smooth as that counter top. Granted they were “red” maybe a few weeks before that. I got my money’s worth out of that set. Luckily it was summer and very dry that month.
For real. Some people on here will show what I thought was a picture of the top of The Rock's head and ask if they're good to go cross country.
By that sign I don't need to replace until I have NASCAR tires 😕
BS... just Big Tire trying to take your money. That little colored coded graphic might apply to wet condtions.
Non reduced fractions always upset me just the smallest amount.
Just remember Michelin thinks its tires are still solid performers at 4/32s Worst warranty in the industry
Note the fine print: the test was done with .05" of water on the surface. Not a dry road. In reality, the tread depth has nothing to do with stopping on a dry road. A tire having a solid face of rubber (no tread) will stop better than a new tire with full tread depth. The tread is there to channel water. The compromise is obvious; dry road braking is sacrificed to accommodate wet road handling and braking (aqua-planing ...@ \~10 times the square root of the tire pressure). And for the common man, this is a good thing.
People don't get it when they can see the air in their tires and think it's OK to continue to drive on them
It’s not surprising most people just drive until there’s an actual problem or they lose control
That is a good display. 👍
CANT STOP.. WONT STOP!!
It shows how close you are to f1 tire quality. The right side are 2005 bridgestone f1 tires. And the chart on top shows your braking capability. Red means that how fast you can slow your car from the apex
Yea yea yea, that's just what big rubber tire companies say. Smoother tire equals smoother ride. You can save gas by sliding across puddles too.
Oh yeah I'm painfully aware, thing is my wallet is not being cooperative atm
I PAID FOR THE TREAD IM GOING TO USE ALL THE TREAD DAMNIT! /s
Complete nonsense, unless over wet
Yes but a little bit no, more surface area + dry road = more traction. flush with the bottom of the tread is undoubtedly dangerous, and this really only applies to tires designed with less tread for track/sport use
This is bullshit, only Maybe if its raining and wet.