Another 'different' tire question...

Aged out tires

You may find this an interesting read.

For a motorhome when the tires get to 6 years plan on replacing asap..

Ever see the damage the blowouts cause to fiberglass..

goufgators wrote:

tomgagne wrote:
DOT guidance

Here is some guidance on the subject

Tomgagne: Thanks! This appears to the be answer I was looking for... . / Larry

I even doubted DOT. Then I found out our school dist replaced at 7 seven years. So I deferred to "well OK, maybe on to something, I'll replace mine also". But still not a real believer could be like when I was in school and the second ice age was coming, now 50 years later its global warming.

Suffered a blow out on single rear wheel F-250/camper pkg., had tires inspected @ selling dealer (Goodyear 7 yo) told no problem, tires are all good. 500 miles later tire blew, lucky I'd just exited the freeway. Some guys stay with 5 year limit on their big rig class A's, I go with 7 and my Wanderlodge lives in heated storage half the year on jacks, tires off the floor. You make the call, and live with it when it goes wrong.

Hi,

I know someone who laughed at the 7 year rule, and was towing his fifth wheel with 8 year old tires "Because I take great care of them, and always keep the air pressure correct". The damage to his sidewall and fiberglass piece around the tires cost $2,500 to repair.

Net savings? Well he had to replace his 8 year old tires anyway. . .

Another member who bought a RV that had dual rear tires. The "Outside" tires looked great and where less than 2 years old, however the prior owner did not replace the inner dual, it was 8-10 years old and blew out.

Me? Well I can not afford my motorhome right now, so it is in storage. However moving it from California to Oregon, I was running 3401 tires on the front (in April 13 that would put them at 11 years and 5 months old) and did not have a problem. My right rear are around 2005 while the other side was 2007. I was only driving 55 MPH mainly to get the best MPG possible.

My only blowout was when the RV was about 5 years old, it was the passenger outside tire, and most likely caused by the leaking rear axle seal, dripping rear axle oil onto the tire. That did about $200 in damage I was able to fix myself.

Fred.

If you look at weather underground or many other weather sites, they will tell you the ozone levels in your area. Ozone is one of the main things that causes the rubber on your tires, and other products to degrade. Higher ozone levels means your tires will start to degrade sooner than if you are in an area with lower ozone levels. The tire manufacturers pick an AVERAGE that is based on experience.
Tires that are exercised daily will last longer than tires that sit for months on end exposed to the elements. Excessive mileage and a worn tread is way down on the list of why RV tires fail.

There is no "seven year rule" even though it gets referred to that way. Here's a link to the Michelin statement on the subject. Note that it says that all tires over 5 years old should be inspected periodically by a professional and that tires that are 10 years old ought to be replaced. Michelin RV Tire Life

Steel belted radials are much more prone to tread separation than nylon belted tires. This makes the affect of aging much more likely to cause a problem. I've got Nylon belted tires that ran close to ten years.

goufgators wrote:
I am not questioning the 'seven-year' rule on replacing MH tires. I am wondering however how that particular number of years was decided upon. For example, why not six or eight or some other number...why seven? Any thoughts about the origin of the '7-year' rule? / Thanks... Larry

I think this boils done to people's experience.

As has been pointed out, there is quite a difference between the aging affects of a hot climate - say Phoenix - vs a cold climate - say Minneapolis. This difference makes the idea of a single value uncertain.

But I think the way MH's are used is a bit more consistent than the average car. They tend to take longer trips and to warmer climates - and I think that tends to even the differences out a bit more.

tomgagne wrote:
DOT guidance

Here is some guidance on the subject

Tomgagne: Thanks! This appears to the be answer I was looking for... . / Larry