Tires / Acceptable age?

[CTHawk]

Hello all,

I have on my 98 Z3, tires purchased April 2003 with approx. 18,000 miles on them now (Yes, I need to use the car more !). Although they have good tread and do not appear to have any flaws (dryrot etc.), should I consider replacing them? My thoughts are yes as I do do some "spirited" driving time to time.

Thanks,
Bob

[Monolith]

[NC02Z3]

Yeah, if you were just 'putting' around town with no high speed or spirited driving, you could eke out another year or two. I've replaced 6 year old tires on cars with much less mileage, and it breaks your heart, but gambling with your life at high speeds isn't worth it. Almost every tire person will say the age or damage will be worse on the inside of the tire, something you can not see.

[CTHawk]

[prdz3]

I didn't check the original source, but:

British Rubber Manufacturers Association (BRMA) statement issued on June 5, 2001 regarding the age of tires: "BRMA members strongly recommend that unused tires should not be put into service if they are over 6 years old and that all tires should be replaced 10 years from the date of their manufacture."
Phil '97 1.9 Montreal Blue

[biklen]

I replace my tires based upon age rather than mileage. I did a lot of research, and found that many manufactures (as prdZ3 indicated) recommend no longer than 10 years. My 99 Z3 tires looked like new in 2009 (only 16000 miles). Lots of tread, no weather cracking, etc. The 10 years is based upon close inspection each year.

Anyway, here is the advice. I bought 4 tires from tire rack, dropped shipped. When I got them, the date code on them indicated they were already over 1 year old. I complained, and they knocked off $50/tire. Not sure what they would do now, but on their site they talk about the age of the tires you purchase. Tom B