tyre tread - what's the limit?

Still 1mm on cars that were first used before 3 January 1933.

I'd rather run something like bridgestone s02s at 1mm than a cheapy brand at 3mm.

In the dry the tread on the car shouldn't make any difference at all to being "twitchy". If it's you that is twitchy then I'm still not sure that's better :-)

Alistair J Murray wrote on Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:03:48

+0000:

The MOT tester guide specifically says its OK to be bald, as long as there's no cords showing through... I certainly wouldn't suggest it's a good idea, but its apparantly an MOT pass.

From

Just after the bit about 'no cords showing through':

============== Reason for Rejection:

1. (i) the tread pattern is not clearly visible over the whole tread area. (see information column)

(ii) The depth of tread is not at least 1mm throughout a continuous circumferential band measuring at least three quarters of the breadth of the tread, (see information column).

(And in the 'information column'...)

1. Check that there is a visible tread pattern around the complete circumference of the tyre- Ensure that the tread depth meets the requirements using a depth gauge.

==================

Also the higher pressure means water gets forced out better. Lower speed works for this too.

cheers, clive

Erm, I was only claiming it was a pass for cars to be bald outside the central 75%. That's the motorbike MOT test manual (the 1mm limit is a hint).

If you look at

you'll see:(as quoted previously by me in this thread) "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."

Ah. I joined the thread late and that bit had been snipped.

I'll .. umm... get me coat...