Indeed. as per my reply to someone on the storey thread:

I would be cautious - replacing worn tyres is far easier than dealing with the ramifications of a serious accident, and you don't want to test their theory (where's the proof?) than tyres at 1.6mm thread will work fine in very wet conditions. What they DON'T say is that running OLD tyres is at least as bad as very worn (or unevenly worn) tyres - older tyres become very hard and brittle and are prone to cracking, meaning the don't work as they would do in the early years, so grip is presumably significantly reduced.

I can attest to that, having changed my last set at only ~40k miles and 4-5mm tread, but they were 6.5 years old. I had some VERY hairy moments in the wet at relatively slow speeds (about 20mph or so) on roundabouts, losing the back end both times. I was luck, and took heed of the sign to change tyres.

[BTW - mine were premium brand tyres, Bridgestones, not Michellins]

Like many others I will continue to regard 3mm as the minimum.

Andy, I appreciate depends on the tyre, at what age would you consider a tyre is becoming too old for safety ?

I must admit that it may vary dependent upon manufacturer, model of tyre bought and usage. I find that, as HJ recommended, 6 years seems to be a good maximum to use (mine were 6 months over when replaced), assuming they don't wear out through use - I am quite light-footed (not a slow driver), but it was more that I (up until recently) didn't do a great deal of mileage, so I normally went through tyres because they were too old and lost their traction.

It also happened (though no really scary moments - just a noticeable loss in traction in the wet) with my previous car, a Nissan Micra (1996), which had the factory-fitted Dunlops on. They lasted 50k miles and 8 years, though they were worn to 2.5-3mm. The Bridgestones on my Mazda3 just went really hard - great for mpg, very bad for wet grip and noise.

My current Dunlop tyres have now done about 15-20k miles and are down to about 5-6mm, so not too bad, and are still performing well even after 4 years. I'll probably replace the car before it needs new boots.

I think in the end, we should trust our own judgement (forget the wallet) and replace tyres when they feel like they are losing too much grip (especially in poor weather conditions) compared to when new, or when they are down to 3mm, whichever happens sooner. Why take the risk, especially as the tyres are the only contact between the car and the road.

I'd also rather down-spec a new car's wheels/tyres from, say, 17in 45 profiles to 16in 55 or 60 profiles to get better mpg, tyre life, comfort (including noise) and a redcution in the cost of replacements, even if it ever-so-slightly reduces traction/grip (I doubt if anyone notices it under driving) and saleability (its not as though I'm selling a Ferrari).

Thanks Andy for informative reply.

www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/2008/5/12/tyre-management.../

Does this mean MIRA are just bar room engineers too?

I like the bit in the OP's post where it says " The current legislation on minimum tread depth dates back to 1989". Before that it was 1.2mm IIRC which must have been deemed not enough for them to increase it.

Edited by Wackyracer on 01/10/2016 at 11:22

Why did he say the tyres were unsafe ? Was there another reason ? If it was purely on depth then I would make a complaint.

If over a certain level there is only a marginal gain then I am happy to pay to secure any improvement in safety.

I am neither smug nor loaded with dosh and will never compromise where safety is concerned. Skodalan has raised, in my view, an important consideration. It does come down to thinking and making sure your car is as safe as it can be.

If, like me, you are not knowledgeable find out from someone you can trust.

Edited by nick62 on 03/10/2016 at 15:28