Bald tyres on a car

Joe_Horner wrote: »

No, you telling me that really wouldn't make much of a difference, and neither would the partisan line of manufacturers with a vested interest in selling new tyres.

The facts are quite simple. If those makers could provide solid evidence that the risks of retreading a tyre carcass were unacceptable then remoulds would be illegal.

They're not only legal throughout the world, the US actually requires federal vehicles to use them when available under EO 13149.

As for your last bit, where have I (seriously) advocated continuing to run on tyres with worn out tread without remoulding first?

Yes, those evil tyre manufacturers. And those even more evil independent tyre technicians and accident investigators. Who would be stupid enough to listen to them.....?

almillar wrote: »

Slick tyres have more grip, of course, otherwise dry racing tyres would have grooves. Independent of compound etc, you want to have maximum contact area with the road.
So when you're driving on the dry flat road with your legal tyres, you've got air gaps which gives you less grip - your dry road driving is compromised by the trade-off of having the tread that allows you to drive in the wet.
In the wet, you still want the tyre to contact the road. To do this, you need to provide space for the water to channel, let the water out, so the tyre still touches the road. There will be a speed where the water can't clear, and the tyre lifts up onto a film of water. That's aquaplaning, which you don't want.

Worn tyres and slicks arent quite the same thing, the worn tyres on a road going car are likely to have the wires and nylon of the carcass coming through, road tyres have to cope with water dispertion too, slicks do not.


Lewis Hamilton wouldnt drive on these..

Worn tyres and slicks arent quite the same thing

Worn - to what degree? I was talking about simply worn beyond having tread (or very little tread). Your example photo goes beyond that, and isn't work evenly. I was talking about perfect rubber, maybe worn, but smooth. No threads or nylon or anything showing.

On a drying race track, Lewis Hamilton WOULD (and has done) stay on worn intermediate tyres. The track is drying, going towards a need for slick tyres, and the tread on the intermediate tyres would be wearing out, losing tread, and therefore wet performance, but improving dry performance. The example is true, but simplified as he'd also be burning up the intermediates on a drying track and need to cool them, not a problem on the road.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Obviously not just about every government in the world when setting road laws.

• They make you wear seat belts even though you usually only harm yourself by not.
  
• Since 2004 they make you have ABS.
  
• They have detailed regulations on what tyre damage is acceptable
  
• In the UK they even have a regulation to prohibit toilets that empty directly onto the road and to specify the type of chemicals they should contain!

But they allow you to strap a set of remoulds on and head off down the road as fast as you like.

If there was any credible evidence that correctly remoulded tyres were a hazard they would be illegal for road use.

Ah, I see - you're a "the government's out to get me" person. It all makes sense now!

You (probably accidentally) hit the nail on the head with remoulds when you use the word "correctly". It's a very difficult thing to achieve. Perhaps it's why those evil tyre companies (who could make even more evil profit from it) don't do it. And why if you ask for a remould down at your local tyre place you won't be able to get one. Hang on - maybe they're in on the conspiracy too.....

And, as another poster has pointed out, there's the heat-cycling to take into account. Plus the ageing of the compounds used in the tyre construction etc. Tyres are far, far more complicated than you think.....

Keep wearing the tinfoil hat!