Michelin tires and their problems

on the internet about sidewall failure, especially with Costco tires.

price competitive?

No - all suppliers get the same quality tires if they are the same model.

complaints on the internet about sidewall failure, especially with Costco tires.

more price competitive?

Tires get an expiration date Tuesday, May 31, 2005 By Timothy Aeppel, The Wall Street Journal

-----------

Main points:

Drivers are being advised to start paying attention to the age of their tires.

Ford has begun urging drivers to replace tires after six years, regardless of wear.

The tire industry says it's more important to monitor tread depth than age and recommends that treads be at least 1/16 of an inch thick.

Some European car makers as well as Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. have long warned drivers that tires are perishable.

-----------

Drivers who know to check tires for worn treads and low air pressure now have something else to worry about: vintage.

Ford Motor Co., in a move roiling the tire industry, has started urging consumers to replace tires after six years. The car maker says its research shows that tires "degrade over time, even when they are not being used." That means even pristine-looking spares that have never left the trunk should be pitched after a half-dozen years.

That's a radical concept in the staid U.S. tire business, which insists there's no scientific evidence to support a "use by" date for tires. It would also surprise most motorists, who are taught that a tire's lifespan is measured mainly by tread depth. The tire industry says that tires are safe as long as the tread depth is a minimum of

"Tires are not milk," says Daniel Zielinski, a spokesman for the Rubber Manufacturers Association, the tire industry's main trade group.

For many consumers, the issue never comes up, since passenger-car tires last an average of 44,000 miles -- meaning they are usually replaced before hitting the six-year mark. But many people simply assume that unused spare tires -- even those that are a decade old -- are as durable as brand-new tires, and sometimes use those spares as full-time replacements for the regular tires. Classic-car buffs and others who drive only infrequently could also be affected by the latest research.

In its new stance on tire safety, Ford is getting some support from other researchers. Sean Kane, president of Safety Research & Strategies Inc., an auto-safety research firm working with lawyers who are preparing lawsuits arising from accidents thought to be linked to aging tires, says older tires are a road hazard. Mr. Kane's group has collected a list of 70 accidents involving older tires, which resulted in 52 deaths and 50 serious injuries.

In a sense, the U.S. car industry is just catching up to global standards. Many European car makers as well as Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. have long warned drivers, including those who buy their cars in the U.S., that tires are perishable. Many of them also use a six-year threshold for the age of a tire.

DaimlerChrysler AG has already adopted a position parallel to Ford. The car maker's Mercedes division had been telling drivers that tires last only six years. But starting last fall, the Chrysler group began including such a warning in 2005 owner's manuals. "We did do some research and we found that's just a pretty safe and steady guideline," says Curtrise Garner, a Chrysler spokeswoman, adding that "it's a recommendation, not a must-do."

Other car makers are also taking up this question, and some are reaching a different conclusion than Ford. General Motors Corp. spokesman Alan Adler says GM has discussed the aging issue, but doesn't have any research that supports a move to such a guideline. "We're not joining in the six-years-is-the-magic-number thing right now," he says.

The age of tires already appears on tires, but as part of a lengthy code that is difficult for average consumers to decipher. To find the age of a tire, look for the letters DOT on the sidewall (indicating compliance with applicable safety standards set by the U.S. Department of Transportation). Adjacent to these letters is the tire's serial number, which is a combination of up to 12 numbers and letters. The last characters are numbers that identify the week and year of manufacture. For example, 1504 means the fifteenth week of the year

Not only are the numbers difficult to interpret, but they can be hard to locate: The numbers are printed on only one side of the tire, which sometimes is the one facing inward when the tire is mounted on a wheel.

Ford's new stance on tire aging is a direct outgrowth of the Firestone tire recall that began in August 2000. That episode involved Firestone tires failing suddenly, mostly on Ford Explorers, leading to a wave of deadly crashes. The crashes sparked a series of lawsuits, including monetary and personal-injury claims, some of which are pending.

Ford's new position won't affect those lawsuits. But it could play a role in future legal action. Some attorneys who have sued over the Firestone case are now mounting cases that focus on tire age.

John Baldwin, a Ford materials scientist who studied the root cause of the Firestone problems and has spearheaded the car maker's continuing research on tire aging, says Ford's intention is to develop a test to help prevent another Firestone-type debacle. He says Ford's research into the Firestone problem showed that as tires age, the chemistry of the rubber changes as oxygen migrates through the carcass of the tire. This leads to a weakening of the internal structure that can result in tire failures. Driving in hot climates or frequent heavy loading of vehicles speeds this aging process, he says.

In April, Ford posted a warning on its Web site saying that "tires generally should be replaced after six years of normal service." The company also plans to include similar wording in owner's manuals starting with the 2006 model year.

Firestone spokeswoman Christine Karbowiak says the company can't comment on Ford's new recommendation, because it hasn't seen Ford's research.

Tire makers certainly don't want to see the six-year rule become any more deeply ingrained. While it might seem that putting a limit on the lifespan of tires would be a boon to tire makers, who would presumably sell more tires, the costs and complications it could create are considerable. Among other things, the industry is worried about the logistical problems that would arise if customers suddenly started demanding only the "freshest" tires. In some cases, tires take months to move through distribution channels from factories -- through wholesalers, and then on to retail outlets.

"We don't have any data to support an expiration date (for tires)," says Mr. Zielinski of the RMA. He agrees that age can be a factor in tire performance, but says it shouldn't be used as the sole reason to determine that a tire is no longer usable.

Mr. Zielinski says Ford went public with its position without sharing its research with the tire association or individual tire makers. Ford, in turn, says that it presented its research in trade publications and at a series of public forums, including a technical meeting of the rubber division of the American Chemical Society in San Antonio, Texas, two weeks ago. Ford has also given its research to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is developing a test to simulate the effects of aging on tires.

Ford's test involves putting inflated tires into an oven for weeks at a time. The tires are then taken out and studied to see, among other things, how well the layers of rubber hold together.

Strategic Research wants tires to be labeled more clearly with the date they were produced, so consumers can better identify older tires and, ultimately, an explicit expiration date.

An argument that seasonal tires (still mounted to wheels) should be stored with the air taken out of them (ie deflated) ?

Also an argument that tires be filled with nitrogen? Perhaps some other gas?

complaints on the internet about sidewall failure, especially with Costco tires.

more price competitive?

I am not absolutly positive but when I worked at a Ford store they were a Goodyear tire dealer and we price matched with any competitor exept Wal-mart,Costco and Sams because they had the same tire with the same part number but they are different tires specifically made for those vendors,the parts manager at the Ford store told me they are completely different tires. like I said I don't *know*because I was just told that by the parts manager.

Wish I'd been thinking in those terms a month ago. Tires with less than 5000 miles, but over six years old, and I had a tread separation just outside Austin. Cost me a fender skirt and a wheel cover on my '78 Newport, (anybody out there got a hex dome type wheel cover, Chrysler part numbers 3699496 (cover) + 3880842 (cap), Hollander interchange 397A?

I'd felt a little vibration a week before, and had my tire shop look at them. They noticed they needed rebalancing, but didn't notice anything else. Oops.

My original factory space-saver spare is now in my garage, and a real spare is now in my trunk...

Seems he knew about as much as most parts managers --------

Tires DO deteriorate with age - and there are many factors that contribute. Filling the tires with nitrogen instead of atmospheric air extends the life of tires considerably, because atmospheric air is about 21% Oxygen. The oxygen oxidizes components of the rubber - notably the plasticizers, from the inside out. The oxygen (in the air) migrates though the inner liner, around the cords, and eventually to the atmosphere by osmosis. Keeping tires out of direct sun and heat also helps - as both UltraViolet and Ozone also deteriorate rubber.

Just about any tire I have had for more than 4 or 5 years, regardless of mileage and tread-depth has lost significant wet traction, and also start squealing on warm pavement. I threw away a 4 year old set of TigerPaw Touring tires last fall with 3/4 tread on them so I would not be tempted, in a moment of weakness, to put them back on the van when the snows came off this spring. Those tires wore like iron - and had about the same amount of traction. When new, they were pretty good, but by 4 years, they were definitely getting dangerous.

--------

dq

Below is a cut and paste from an e-mail in response to my query of Michelin, Canada

Thank you for visiting our Web site and sending us your e-mail.

Regarding your message:

All tires with the Michelin name are built to Michelin quality standards. There are different tires built for different purposes and expectations but the quality would be the same. If the tire has the same name on the sidewall it would be the same tire regardless of where it was purchased.

If you have additional questions, please respond to this email or you may call us at 1-888-871-4444 (toll-free) between 8:30AM and 6:00PM Eastern Time Monday through Friday to allow one of our Consumer Relations Representatives to assist you.

Michelin North America Consumer Relations Department

Horseshit. ALL manufacturers have firsts, seconds, thirds and so on, of any given product. That's the nature of mass production. And since there's always a buyer who puts a litle higher priority on price than the next guy, there's always a market for those seconds. By the time you get to thirds or fourths, the product often gets sold under a different name. Fourths or fifths and below usually get destroyed or recycled.

But there's a thriving market for seconds.

When I worked for DC Canada, all autopar tires were made by Michelin. We had complaints from dealers that the cost on the tires were more then what Costco sold them for. Michelin told US (DC) that Costco tires were primarily Blemished tires, that is why they were cheaper.

So I would have to agree with Daniel.

Which MUST be marked as such, IIRC. And they are referred to as "blems". From my experience (over 30 years), blems stand up as well as firsts. If Michelin sells the tire with it's brand on it - and under a given "model name", it's the same tire whether purchased from a BFG/Michelin authorized dealer, Costco, or Canadian Tire. You MIGHT get a lower quality version of the same carcass sold with a different name on it (house brand tires) - although OFTEN the house brand tire demands a higher quality spec than the Mfg name brand tire.

UniRoyal and BFG (Michelin) both had large tire plants here in Kitchener up until about a decade ago, and Shell and ESSO (Atlas) had their tires made by both companies at one time or other. The plant employees would buy either the Shell or Atlas tire rather than the BFG or UniRoyal tire because they knew the quality control was much more strict on these "house brand" tires than on the OEM spec tires.

I always found these tires ballanced up with less weight than the OEM brand tires, on average.

They aren't required to tell the customers that they are buying seconds? What's to keep a business from selling seconds and charging full price since, as far as the public knows, they are all the same tire. Sounds fraudulent if that's the case.

Is it (legally) that way in the U.S. too (i.e., seconds or blems can be sold as first run)?

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x')

I can't think of any law in the US or Canada that would require them to do so, no. Sears bought Tecumseh's seconds for *decades* and put 'em (without any Tecumseh labelling, and with the Tecumseh engine numbers replaced with proprietary Sears numbers) on zillions of Craftsman lawnmowers and snowthrowers, and I never saw a sign in Sears that said "Our outdoor power equipment is powered by Tecumseh's factory seconds".

Nuffin' but their conscience, if so equipped.

Think about it: Did you ever see a sign or label specifying that the tires you were buying *are* firsts? Or did you just assume...?

Talking small engines in lawn mowers, etc....

Consumer Reports says those Honda engines in cheap mowers and power washers do not contain the same expensive engine designs and parts as Honda made equipment.

I don't see how a tyre with a blemish should perform in an inferior fashion, though it should normally {presumably (dangerous assumption)} cost a bit less. It's not as if the tread is duff. Just maybe some letters of the embossed text are not clear, no? Or have I misunderstood what a "blemish" is?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Daniel, your assumption that Sears engines were Tecumseh seconds is FALSE. Sears engines were built specifically for Sears by Tecumseh. They came off the same line as the tecumseh branded engines, and some were every bit as good as the tecumseh engines. The only difference was in the QC spec. Tecumseh may have pulled one in 10 off the line for inspection when building their own engines, and one in 100 for Sears Craftsman. (or it might have been 1 in 100, and 1 in 1000).Sears engines may have been required to meet a lower tolerance than the Tecumseh engines - but many exceded that tolerance by a good margin.

As for "factory second" or "Blem" tires, in the several decades I was in the automotive buisiness, ALL "Blem" tires sold in Canada were clearly branded as such, and it was illegal to remove the markings for sale in Canada. There was a local tire exporter that bought TONS of blems and seconds from local tire companies and buffed off the brand names. These were clearly marked (stamped into the rubber) "for export only" or "Not DOT approved for highway use" I installed thousands of "blem" tires over the years - all clearly marked and sold as such. I'm not aware of consumer legislation in Canada being relaxed in any way over the last 10 years or so. Now, enforcement? Thats another joke.

In over 20 years of actively selling and installing tires (from the late sixties on) the VAST majority of "blems" were white-wall related. The white rubber was not exactly in the right place in the carcass, so when the white-walls or white letters were buffed out they were not totally white. Some also were not as well balanced as "first run" tires - might take more than 2 ounces of lead to ballance where a prime tire usually ballanced with less than 1.5. Some had blurred print on the sidewalls

That couldn't hurt, but when they crack and "appear" old, the cracks are always on the outside, while the inside looks pristine. I was taught that it is ozone that really works on them, but I don't work for a tire company, so I don't know. I can tell you that tires have prodigious amounts of antioxidants in them, so apparently somebody is very worried about oxidation.

It would be interesting to know whether tires last longer in areas with low environmental ozone (pollution).