Whats a reasonable mileage?

[BedfordGeorge]

Just replaced my two rear tyres from which I only got about 15,500 miles out of. The fronts have about another 1,000 on them, is this reasonable or should I be getting more?

I would admit that I tend to push on when towing, which accounts for at least 50% of the mileage, but would appreciate any thoughts on the matter.

 

[KeefySher]

What make of tyres have you worn out? If premium like Michelin / Conti then no that is not good. If cheap budget chinese keep you out of a ditch type, is ok.

 

[BedfordGeorge]

Good question, I have Pirelli tyres, which I understand are good quality. In the past I had Kumho and I seem to think got better mielage from them.

 

[Hutch]

Hi George, I have Hankooks, Vectus prime2, on my Santa Fe, done 34k so far and recon I will get to 40k before replacment. On my last SFe, I had Avon ATT''s and the were between 30 k before I sold the car.
Hutch.

 

[Dustydog]

Hi George

On my second Sorento . 1st did 40k all four tyres . BF Goodrich All Terrains
The Titan is on Goodyear Wranglers and again achieved 40k on all four.

 

[otherclive]

How long is a piece of string, and at what tread depth do you consider the tyres to be worn? I always change at 3mm. But if your Sportage is the last model shape and if it has a similar, not identical, powertrain to the 2004 (and later) Sorento then it drives on its rear wheels most of the time and only switches to FWD either using the ATT system (if fitted) or when the driver activates 4WD. Therefore, the rear tyres are putting down the power for the majority of the time, and the front are primarily taking steering and breaking loads. Without knowing the exact tyres currently fitted its not really possible to compare with AT tyres as these have deeper tread depths to start with and do tend to have a harder compound than more road orientated tyres. I fitted may Sorento with Yokohama AT but the penalty was an increase in road noise compared to the OEM Kuhmos. But even among AT tyres there are degrees of tread "aggression' as I had Falken Wild Peaks on my Pajero and these were very good noise wise, and gave good confidence on normal roads, but they wore down quickly compared to my subsequent BFGs. So its really a case of deciding what you want out the tyres and if you need the more aggressive AT pattern with possible increased noise, and fuel consumption, and the less certain normal road performance in terms of road holding and braking perfomance. My current car will probably require its Yokohama G91Fs to all be changed at around 25000 miles as they will be down to 3mm and I also need to keep all tyres within 1mm tread depth of each other. Last summer I took a non-repairable puncture and fortunately I had converted the spare to a full size alloy with a half worn compatible tyre, otherwise I would have been looking at a £500 all round tyre change if I had only had a space saver in the back.

 

[Raywood]

The front tyres on my Mazda 6 last about 20,000 miles. I replace with Avons which seem to be a cair balance beween quality and price. At 44,500 miles the rears are still only half worn.
The life partly depends on your driving style though. If you accelerate and brake hard and corner fast then they will have a shorter life and a you will also have a higher fuel bill.

 

[pitpony]

George,
I had a Mondeo with a similar problem it just ran the tyres of the backend, my problem was that rear wheel alignment was way out, after having all four wheels done that solved the problem,

 

[JonnyG]

Good question, I have Pirelli tyres, which I understand are good quality. In the past I had Kumho and I seem to think got better mielage from them.

indeed Pirelli are good tyres but longevity in the past was not something they were renowned for, it might be different now but i doubt it. there are tyre sites that tell you a tyres specifics from wear rating to how good they are in the wet and dry ,of hand cannot recall but not too difficult to find them and then you would be able to see if your wear rate is normal or not for the make of tyres you have.

 

[Keefanmaxx]

If I remember correctly, Pirelli are a soft compound when compared to others and were known for wearing.
As mentioned by others, the load carried, driving style, tyre pressure and wheel geometry can all have an effect on wear.

We have Hankook Optimo's on our Antara and after just under 8,000 miles since buying it, there is not a great deal of wear. They seem to be a good all round tyre up to now and perform well when towing in the wet.

In the past I've had most mainstream brands on a number of cars but tended to stick with Goodyear based on their grip in the wet and ability to disperse water.

It's a personal choice as shown in previous posts, but I'd be disappointed at only getting 15,000 moles from a set!

 

[KeefySher]

Another factor is the profile. 60 profile wear considerably quicker than others, probably why you don't get many 60 profile tyres these days. Back in the early days of the 'hot hatches' 60's were the common profile. I had a MkI Astra GTE, mates had Golf GTi's, Peugeot 205 1.9, Alfasud, all with 60's. Pirellis would last around 2k miles on the front of Golfs. Conti's on my Astra around 5k miles. But those were the days when it was all about speed!!! I've grown up since then

Recently the initial tread depth on some premium brands new tyres has been reduced by 1mm, which in turn gives you a false impression as you start with less tread. Obviously accountants doing sums again. Before flaming, go measure

Another thing I've noticed is the original fit tyres at the factory on new cars seem to wear better than subsequent after market sets. e.g. on my S Klasse the original michelins all round lasted 35k miles. The second rears, 275/40R19 on Michelin lasted 19k miles, the current Contis are at 21k. I replace when the tread markers show. Also have staggered wheels on the S which may or may not have a bearing on tyre life.

On front wheel drive I've had over 100k miles out of rears. On my 3 consecutive Mercs (2E,1S) the factory fit originals wear front and rear at the same rate, might be the heavy diesel engines and auto boxes at the front even though rear wheel drive. Had Kumho on the E270 for 2 sets that gave excellent mileage of 43k per set. Avon for 1 set were pretty good.

I do tend to do high mileages so tend to stick with Michelin or Conti.

I have a set of Nokian ditch finders on a Z3 2.8 roadster that is a toy, but not impressed with them.

 

[Damian]

Pirelli tyres have always been bad as far as longevity is concerned.
They are a soft compound which wears very quickly

 

[Thingy]

On Dunlop Grandtreks, I got way over 40k on my previous Shogun. Pity they are poor in the wet or I would replace like for like.

Strangely, on my current Shogun, just 15k on the clock, the same tyres seem to be wearing much faster.

On my xTrails, i got through front tyres very quickly, just over 20k. Are your pressures correct, are they wearing evenly?

 

[BedfordGeorge]

Sorry for slow response, but I have been busy. It is interesting that a couple of people have indicated that Pirelli have a soft compound. The other point that my Sportage mk 2 being a rear wheel drive has worn the rears slightly quicker than the fronts. The original where Kumho and they gave me a better mileage, but when I came to replace the original they were unavailable. I think when I replace the front in a month or so, that I will put a different make on, and maybe get the Pirelli's fitted on the front.
I had a problem on my caravan, and the complete ALCO Axle was replaced under guarantee, following which I noticed 12 months later that both tyres had worn severly on the inside tread and I had to replace them whilst in Spain. So I am unhappy with the cost of replacing tyres on both my van and tow.

 

[JonnyG]

Another factor is the profile. 60 profile wear considerably quicker than others, probably why you don't get many 60 profile tyres these days. Back in the early days of the 'hot hatches' 60's were .

there is absolutely no technical reason why 60 profiles tyres would wear at a greater rate than any other low profile tyre ie 50s 45s 40s in fact in many ways a 60 profile tyre is far superior it should be quieter give a better ride possibly give better mpg , should be lighter too ,only the tyre compound would affect tyre wear or alignment problems in the suspension set up.. these ultra low, lower profile tyres give more grip better braking ect only if you go to the extremes. frankly more a fashion fad 50s then 45s then 40s ..are we down to 30s and 25s yet ....

 

[Hutch]

On my Sante Fe, the Hankooks are 235/60/18, just done 34k on them and still have 4mil on all 4 tyres, but i did swop fronts for rear at 20k. So when I get down to between 2 or 3 mil or start to get noticable lose of grip, then I Am Swopping then for Nokien, Weatherproofs, see how much wear I get from them.

 

[ProfJohnL]

We expect tyres to do a hell of a lot, and becasue of the diverse jobs they do and the way we expect them to do it, we will see big differences in the rate at which they wear.

Just off the top of my head I can identify the following factors all of which will affect normal tyre wear.

VEHICLE/DRIVER RELATED
Weight of the vehicle
Driven wheels (Fwd, Rwd or 4x4)
Steering wheels
Braking and cornering forces
Tyre pressures
Engine power and torque
Tracking
Driving habits

TYRE RELATED
Circumference of the tyre
Tread pattern and depth
Tyre compound
Cross or Radial ply

ENVIRONMENTAL RELATED
Road surface
Temperature
Water

Consequently comparing tyres on different is almost certainly going to produce variable results.

Give the same journey, tyres and car to different drivers and you will get differences in the amount of tyre wear (perfect example is F1) But there are some general trends;

Softer compounds do tend to wear more quickly

Tyres supporting greater loads wear more quickly

Front tyres on FWD vehicles are subject to more stresses and will wear more quickly, than those on a RWD vehicle.

Tread patterns designed for off road usage wear more quickly on tarmac.

Smaller circumference tyres wear more quickly than larger for a given distance, but also the rubbers attack angle to the road surface is greater which scrubs the tyres more quickly also. Smaller tyres for the same load will run slightly hotter.

There's a risk that basing a tyre choice on another persons recommendation if the vehicle and tyre size is different to your own may not produce comparable results.

 

[Dustydog]

Hi Prof.
Just a couple of points
Tread patterns designed for off road usage wear more quickly on tarmac.
There are a number of off road tread patterns available . In the case of BF Goodrich they do 100% mud pluggers. Agreed these may wear more on tarmac but they are invariably a very hard compound and not so good on the wet tarmac. The BFG All Terrains are 50/50 on / off road.three sets of these on my last Sorento did 40k each with no wet issues. On a different Sorento I now use Goodyear Wranglers which are more road than off road. Again these are heading for the high mileage.
Smaller circumference tyres wear more quickly than larger for a given distance, but also the rubbers attack angle to the road surface is greater which scrubs the tyres more quickly also. Smaller tyres for the same load will run slightly hotter

The tyre is a tangent to the road surface. The given footprint determined in part by the tyre pressure. I don't quite see how the smaller circumference will cause more srcub. Are you saying the footprint is larger on a smaller wheel? If so then surely that is a good thing, More contact with the road the better?? Yet car makers for years have headed for larger wheels.

 

[otherclive]

I cannot agree that 60 aspect ratio are low profile against todays criteria. Some years back 80 would have been called low profile but these days 55 or below is normally consider to be low profile.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Dusty,

Regarding your first point,
I'm not going to argue your experience, except to point out that variability of wear due to so many factors. When you suggest your tyres are heading for high milage, is that higher than you expected, or higher than other tyres? either way again I'll point to the numerous variables which are uncontrolled in real life.

Now to the circumference issue. As we know when a loaded tyre is sat on the road, its no longer a complete circle, there is a deformed flattened portion that describes a 'chord' At each end of the chord the tyre has to transfigure to the circular outline. Its these transition points that i'm referring to.

As the tyre rotates, the point on the tyre surface that's just about to come into contact with the road, the tread pattern will be normal (i.e. 90 degrees)to it radius with the axle. The angle this radius makes to the vertical is called the attack angle. As the wheel continues to rotate the point on the tyre is stationary on the road, but the axle continues to make forward progress over it, so the angle of the points radius initially reduces to zero and then becomes increasingly negative. the angle at which the the point lifts off the road is called the departure angle. It will be similar to the attack angle for steady speeds.

The bigger the diameter of a wheel the smaller the attack/departure angles will be. And this means the tread rubber is distorted less as when it comes into contact with the road surface as the wheel's diameter increases.

Les distortion uses less energy, and generates less wear.

This is one of the major reasons why tyres with low attack angles offer lower rolling resistance. This is most often achieved by increasing pressure to reduce footprint, or by increasing wheel diameter.

 

[JonnyG]

ok did everybody understand all that! frankly pretty confusing to a layman who wouldn't possibly realise circumference is irrelevant it doesn't actually mean anything in context with OP question of comparing wear rate of one make of tyre to another, as there circumference near as dam it will be the same .ie a 205x50x16 made by pirelli will have the same circumference as a 205x50x16 made by bridgestone or Michelin .

 

[emmerson]

I run a Range Rover Classic on budget tyres. These can be whatever make the local shop has at the best price .I've just checked in the file and find that in January 2013 I fitted four Matador tyres which cost £77.50 each. The mileage was 134,897. They are still on the car with 4mm of tread left, and the mileage is now 173,345.
My neighbour has a "thing" about Pirelli tyres and won't have anything else. They cost twice as much as my Matadors and he is now on his second set at half my mileage.
You pay your money, and make your choice!

 

[ProfJohnL]

ok did everybody understand all that! frankly pretty confusing to a layman who wouldn't possibly realise circumference is irrelevant it doesn't actually mean anything in context with OP question of comparing wear rate of one make of tyre to another, as there circumference near as dam it will be the same .ie a 205x50x16 made by pirelli will have the same circumference as a 205x50x16 made by bridgestone or Michelin .

I disagree with you about the relevance. Dustydog's question was quite specific and required an explanation..

I do agree with you about the in the context of size for size comparisons, but if you only have reference to reports about different sized tyres, the wear rates are affected by diameter/radius/circumference, amongst all the other variables

 

[JonnyG]

ok did everybody understand all that! frankly pretty confusing to a layman who wouldn't possibly realise circumference is irrelevant it doesn't actually mean anything in context with OP question of comparing wear rate of one make of tyre to another, as there circumference near as dam it will be the same .ie a 205x50x16 made by pirelli will have the same circumference as a 205x50x16 made by bridgestone or Michelin .

I disagree with you about the relevance. Dustydog's question was quite specific and required an explanation..

I do agree with you about the in the context of size for size comparisons, but if you only have reference to reports about different sized tyres, the wear rates are affected by diameter/radius/circumference, amongst all the other variables

hi prof, i suppose my point was we can get too technical, besides i'm not convinced by your circumference argument it take in no account of camber castor nor toe {toe in toe out] and wider tyres equal bigger contact area equals more initial energy needed to move it .. larger circumference and wider Tyre equasl more rubber more belt materials equals more tyre weight.. again more energy needed more wear.. so any advantage one could claim a larger circumference or wider tyre had in terms of this debate is lost .. now i'm sure everybody understands the difference between larger circumference and bigger wheels?
An 18 inch wheel with a 205x40x18 has the same circumference as a 17 inch wheel shed with a 235x40x17 and a 16 inch wheel fitted with a 195x55x16 or indeed a 215x50x16..all have a radius of 621mm.. and really does anybody really need to know any of this on a simple question of tyre wear....

 

[ProfJohnL]

Edited text by PJL

Jonny,

You are correct that all these other factors you mention will have an effect on tyre wear, and I don't discount them, but Dusty had a question about my initial comment, specifically questioning the basis that circumference affects tyre wear, That required me to answer his question with the detail I provided. I perhaps should have stressed more strongly that this is just one aspect of many that affects tyre wear but I did make that point in my initial comment.

It is tiresome in the extreme to be continually told by the same FEW contributors that my answers are unwelcome.

This is an open forum where anybody can read the threads. Whilst an OP may have a specific problem that needs to be addressed, there may be several other readers with similar issues, and who appreciate the background and detail rather than just " fix it this way" answers.

I will point to the fact that I have received many thank you's for the answers I give. and that I believe justifies my methods.