I assume tyres must be made of much softer rubber these days as, despite a more sedate driving style and plenty of motorway use, I get far lower mileage from tyres these days.
I once got 90K from a set of Michelin X tyres fitted to a Beetle that was driven flat out everywhere. Even 40K from a set of Continentals on an early Audi 100.
Now I am pushed to get 15K on a Golf GTI turbo or SWBBO's Yaris Verso. Daughter's Polo gives similar mileage.
Not complaining, merely commenting!
That said years ago a pal scrubbed out a set of front cross ply tyres on a Mini-van in 1,500 miles - driven vigorously on minor roads in Pembrokeshire.
Does anyone get high mileage these days?
|
|
A friend of mine claims to have got 92k out of tyres on his Citroen ZX, attributing it to use mainly on motorways.
|
He was lucky to get 92k out of a Citroen ZX in the first place!
I get 17-18k out of Dunlop SP2020 tyres on my Galaxy.
|
He was lucky to get 92k out of a Citroen ZX in the first place!
I assume this is yet another derogatory comment about a Citroen. There must be plenty of big mileage ZXs still on the road. Whilst not sharing the build quality of the Xantia, the basic design is sound, and the engines would have no trouble going past 100,000 (particularly the diesels). I had a 1.4i up to 47000 and it never required topping up with oil between changes, always returned at least 40 mpg and the car was easy cruiser at 80 mph.
With regard to this thread, I believe I got around 45K miles out of the front tyres. The back ones would no doubt have gone on for much longer than that.
|
|
|
|
|
I got over 40k from the Dunlop Sp9000s on my Yaris. Probably would have been nearer 50k if I had maintained the pressures better.
|
|
|
I once got 90K from a set of Michelin X tyres fitted to a Beetle that was driven flat out everywhere. Even 40K from a set of Continentals on an early Audi 100.
IIRC the Michelin X tryes did have quite a hard compound. Though they probably lasted longer, I doubt they would offer the same grip (especially in wet conditions) than the current range of "softer" tyres.
I also think the fact that most cars are FWD and also to a greater or lesser degree, the fact that most cars are more powerful and heavier will contribute to tyre wear too.
|
I also think the fact that most cars are FWD and also to a greater or lesser degree, the fact that most cars are more powerful and heavier will contribute to tyre wear too.
Similar thoughts - more power, power steering almost universal, much better brakes loading the tread. Softer compounds seem likely though.
Have just got 35000m from a set of Bridgestones on a CRV - the most miles I have ever got from a set of tyres on any car.
|
Have just got 35000m from a set of Bridgestones on a CRV - the most miles I have ever got from a set of tyres on any car.
From what I seen and heard, it seems that 4X4 type vehicles have better tyre wear than normal cars, certainly on a Landcruiser it is not uncommon to get 30-40K.
I'm not sure what the contributing factors are..... but possibly to do with the aggressive and deeper tyre tread and perhaps harder compounds?
|
68000 and still going, BF Goodrich A/T tyres on my landrover. I'm going to have to replace for age/cracking before wear is much of a factor.
About 6000 on a set of Avons CR28 on my Morgan but they are road legal racers and a very soft compound.
You get what you pay for here, and most road tyres of today are softer compounds than older types. And, cars of today are heavier, and much more powerful, both of which impose high tyre loads.
Added to this, the fact that nearly everything these days is front wheel drive. These can make big demands on the front tyres to steer, and apply power.
|
|
Mumble, Grumble, whinge..... just got 3000 miles from Michelin pilots.....
|
|
i used to always use michelins(think they were something like mx'1s) until i got 3000 miles out of a set on my old orion!!never bought the brand since.normally look for around 20000 out of them.bridgstones on at the minute but if im buying i have tended to buy conti's
|
|
Just a thought, but the vast increase in the weight of modern cars compared to those of even 10 years ago may be a cause - after all more weight on the tyres would increase friction would it not? And we demand more and more from tyres - reduced noise, greater grip and comfort...
|
|
|
|
Unless you (and Martint123) where doing something outrageous, I'd be going to Michelin about that.
|
|
|
|
|
In my younger days, I got just over 1/2 million miles out of a set of drive axle tyres for my old roadtrain. Still on them when it was sold. But that was with a recut. I think they were michelins, but decent ones, not rubishy remixs.
Its a pity you cant re-cut car tyres (its illegal) but I wonder if people might be willing to pay, say a 30% premium for a tyre that could be made as good as new in 10 mins with a hot cutter.
What that would do to speedo calibration on a small wheel, though, is something I cant be bothered to think about though.
WTM
|
|
|
Michelin X tyres were noted for having no wet grip whatsoever. I had a couple of cars with them on and they just didn?t do corners in the wet.
I think the power is much greater now ? my Cortina Mk 3 GXL?s 2.0L engine had (I think) 98BHP which was really something then.
It also depends more on driving style than some people will admit ? I used to work in a company with a fleet of 60 Cavaliers. It was noted that several drivers could drive cars from new until they were changed at 60,000 miles without changing tyres, whereas others where changing fronts at 10,000.
Most tyres have a Tread Wear Rating on them which is an American standard. TWR 100 means the tyre did 15,000 miles in the test. I?ve seen tyres with TWR?s of 400 (especially the low rolling resistance tyres) but most OEM new tyres are TWR 180 or 200.
|
|
|
