Tyres. Front tyres.
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Some interesting old bikes for sale
Next: Things you don't want an orthopaedic surgeon to say ...
From: Nige on 9 Apr 2010 17:25 On 09/04/2010 22:19, Andy Bonwick wrote: > On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:01:52 +0100, ogden<ogden(a)pre.org> wrote: > >> Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: >>> No, not a "which one" thread. More of a "when?" thread. >>> >>> Look, this is a little embarrassing... >>> >>> OK, modern front tyres don't have a whole hell of a lot of tread to >>> begin with. And I have real trouble deciding what's legal, and what's >>> not when they get worn. >>> >>> My front tyres tend to "feather" in that the individual tread blocks >>> wear on the leading corner, so I end up with a tyre that looks pretty >>> worn and pretty new at the same time. >>> >>> So how do you judge when it needs changing? >> >> I tend to have mine replaced as a set, and the rear always wears out >> first. I know I could save a few quid by stringing the front along a bit >> longer but it hardly seems worth the effort. > > This ties in with the way I work it. A front will last maybe 50% > longer than a rear tyre but if the front is fucked when the rear is > still good you tend to ignore it until both need replacing. Not a good > idea. > I got 6k out of a front with 3 rears :)
From: ogden on 9 Apr 2010 17:29 doetnietcomputeren wrote: > On 2010-04-09 23:05:55 +0200, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> said: > > > doetnietcomputeren wrote: > >> On 2010-04-09 22:34:29 +0200, Wicked Uncle Nigel > >> <wun(a)wicked-uncle-nigel.me.uk> said: > >> > >>> No, not a "which one" thread. More of a "when?" thread. > >>> > >>> Look, this is a little embarrassing... > >>> > >>> OK, modern front tyres don't have a whole hell of a lot of tread to > >>> begin with. And I have real trouble deciding what's legal, and what's > >>> not when they get worn. > >>> > >>> My front tyres tend to "feather" in that the individual tread blocks > >>> wear on the leading corner, so I end up with a tyre that looks pretty > >>> worn and pretty new at the same time. > >>> > >>> So how do you judge when it needs changing? > >> > >> As I understand it, only the part of the tyre that has a wear indicator > >> is measurable.[1] > > > > You understand wrong. > > really? Really. > > It has to be within limits for a continuous unbroken area covering 3/4 > > (I think) of the width of the tyre. That is to say it can't be within > > wear limits for the 1/4 nearest the edge on one side and the whole of > > the other side, but it can be fucked for the quarter nearest the edge on > > one side. > > So tell me how that works on this: > > http://www.ziemasriepas.lv/images/upload/MichelinPilotSportCup/large_Michelin_SPORT_CUP.jpg That's a funny looking bike tyre, particularly for a front. > given > > that there is no measurable tread on the outer 1/3rd of the tyre when new. From the MOT manual for bikes, grounds for failure include: "The depth of tread is not at least Imm throughout a continuous circumferential band measuring at least three quarters of the breadth of the tread" But since you're now talking about car tyres, the grounds for failure for a car include: "The grooves of the tread pattern are not at least 1.6mm throughout a continuous band comprising 1) the central three-quarters of the breadth of tread, and 2) round the entire outer circumference of the tyre. Note: Each side of the central band of the tyre can be devoid of tread (ie. ?bald?) and still meet the pass standard although in practice such tyre wear is unlikely to occur. See diagram below" -- ogden | gsxr1000 | rgv250
From: Wicked Uncle Nigel on 9 Apr 2010 17:31 Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> typed >Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: >> No, not a "which one" thread. More of a "when?" thread. >> >> Look, this is a little embarrassing... >> >> OK, modern front tyres don't have a whole hell of a lot of tread to >> begin with. And I have real trouble deciding what's legal, and what's >> not when they get worn. >> >> My front tyres tend to "feather" in that the individual tread blocks >> wear on the leading corner, so I end up with a tyre that looks pretty >> worn and pretty new at the same time. >> >> So how do you judge when it needs changing? > >I tend to have mine replaced as a set, and the rear always wears out >first. I know I could save a few quid by stringing the front along a bit >longer but it hardly seems worth the effort. Except... The GTR seems to do roughly 1.5 front tyres to 1 rear. -- Wicked Uncle Nigel - "He's hopeless, but he's honest" I've always been a man who's open to persuasion
From: ogden on 9 Apr 2010 17:44 Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: > Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, ogden > <ogden(a)pre.org> typed > >Wicked Uncle Nigel wrote: > >> No, not a "which one" thread. More of a "when?" thread. > >> > >> Look, this is a little embarrassing... > >> > >> OK, modern front tyres don't have a whole hell of a lot of tread to > >> begin with. And I have real trouble deciding what's legal, and what's > >> not when they get worn. > >> > >> My front tyres tend to "feather" in that the individual tread blocks > >> wear on the leading corner, so I end up with a tyre that looks pretty > >> worn and pretty new at the same time. > >> > >> So how do you judge when it needs changing? > > > >I tend to have mine replaced as a set, and the rear always wears out > >first. I know I could save a few quid by stringing the front along a bit > >longer but it hardly seems worth the effort. > > Except... > > The GTR seems to do roughly 1.5 front tyres to 1 rear. I'm sure there are a number of reasons I get less life from a rear than you, not least the ripsnorting motor and my prolific wheelying. -- ogden | gsxr1000 | rgv250
From: doetnietcomputeren on 9 Apr 2010 17:46
On 2010-04-09 23:29:26 +0200, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> said: > But since you're now talking about car tyres, I already was, but I hadn't realised that WUN wasn't, IYSWIM. > the grounds for failure > for a car include: > > "The grooves of the tread pattern are not at least 1.6mm throughout a > continuous band comprising 1) the central three-quarters of the breadth > of tread, and 2) round the entire outer circumference of the tyre. > Note: Each side of the central band of the tyre can be devoid of tread > (ie. ?bald?) and still meet the pass standard although in practice such > tyre wear is unlikely to occur. See diagram below" So, my point that, the outer edge can be near as bald as it gets, as long as the actual tread pattern (which is the bit with wear indicators), was about right then. Thanks. -- Dnc |