Originally Posted by AZjeff
Originally Posted by Rmay635703
According to the most experienced industry expert (the only one that counts)
https://www.tirebusiness.com/articl...-new-tires-on-rear-axiom-tire-age-debate
Interesting. Isn't this quote what this whole debate is about:
Quote
He also showed videos of his own vehicle testing, using tires of different makes, models and tread depths.
"The results showed that the lowest tread depth, regardless of position, dictated where vehicle control was lost..."..
And the point the rest of the industry tries to make is the average (low skill) driver is better able to deal with understeer than oversteer?
And if he's the only expert that counts, what about this quote?
Quote
Tire age also can't be left out of the equation, according to Mr. Baldwin. Based largely on the results of his testing, Ford recommends that vehicle owners replace their tires after six years regardless of the tires' remaining treadwear.
If we believe the expert about one thing we've got to believe him about another right?
We also have to believe his imperacle data that few cars actually follow the recommendations yet tire irregularities don't add significantly to the accident rate.
AKA It matters less than most say it does or every car on the road would crash
Further, tires bought "new" can be up to 5 years old and have less grip than your worn tires and shaved tires have significantly less grip than worn tires making the practice more dangerous than irregular tread depth.