New Tires - Manufactured Date - What is Fair and Reasonable

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I just checked the new Z8s on my Street Twin.

I had them mounted and reinstalled the wheels, and then went out to see how the bike handled. The rear stepped out just a tiny bit a couple of times because the tire was new and Metzeler uses a release compound (unlike Conti which grip from the first mile).

After that, the tire broke in and 15 miles later, just about peg-dragging, lots of grip and fantastic handling.

The rear tire was made the 42nd week of 2014, the front about six months later. No worries.

The M7RR rear I just put on my 2015 ZX-10R was made in 2017, and I'd expect that, but it's a very different bike.

You have nothing to worry about, put your mind at ease and go ride. Just let 'em break in easy.

Those mileage estimates everyone is giving are probably pretty accurate for the CB1100 with the weight and power. Keep the pressures where they should be, 36F/42R. If the weather is cold or it's raining you could drop it a pound or two, but I would not go below 34F/40R.

[Marc_imp]

I am not so much concerned about tire failure but rather if it is fair to receive a three year old tire when being purchased as new. Since I am relatively new to buying motorcycle tires I was unsure if receiving a three year old tire, as new, was normal and acceptable from a consumer's perspective.

Earlier today, I decided to contact the re-seller and they agreed to take it back and ship me a newer one. No argument from them and I didn't press the point. They told me they would check the date code on the replacement and inform me before sending it out. I suspect they use a third party to fulfill their tire orders so they would normally never look at the date codes. Let's see what the next date code will be. Maybe a newer Z8 rear doesn't exist in this size?

Let me know if I was too critical in this decision. I will likely be buying a lot more tires in my future so I'm trying to get educated.

[emptysea]

Tires are your connection to the road. Just knowing that you have good ones mounted adds to your mental comfort when riding. If it helps you have more confidence in your tires to have ones with a more recent date of manufacture, then you were most definitely NOT being too critical. I think that you'd have been fine with the others, but in the end, it's not about what anyone else thinks.

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I am not so much concerned about tire failure but rather if it is fair to receive a three year old tire when being purchased as new. Since I am relatively new to buying motorcycle tires I was unsure if receiving a three year old tire, as new, was normal and acceptable from a consumer's perspective.

Earlier today, I decided to contact the re-seller and they agreed to take it back and ship me a newer one. No argument from them and I didn't press the point. They told me they would check the date code on the replacement and inform me before sending it out. I suspect they use a third party to fulfill their tire orders so they would normally never look at the date codes. Let's see what the next date code will be. Maybe a newer Z8 rear doesn't exist in this size?

Let me know if I was too critical in this decision. I will likely be buying a lot more tires in my future so I'm trying to get educated.

If that is your only question, yes, it is perfectly fair and acceptable to be shipped a tire that is less than five years old. This is the industry standard. They don't make tires "to order". Tires are made with preservative and flex agents that allow them to last that long before the first use and still provide the mileage and performance expected.

If your vendor will take the tires back, and you feel better about it, that's business. It's not science.

Science says those tires will work perfectly and they will, as I just described in my earlier post.

The only time I would be concerned about the date is for a tire destined for track use.

Why not contact Metzeler directly and see what they have to say about all this? I'd go with that. Meanwhile check out this video, the link is in [url=http://cb1100forum.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=11935&pid=189792#pid189792]this post.

[Guth_imp]

Marc, I think that you did the right thing by sending those tires back. As people say often say, "you should ride your own ride" and in my mind that means not only how you handle yourself going down the road, but also how you prepare and maintain your bike. You must do all of these things at a level that you are personally comfortable with, not by what anyone else goes by.

I'm one of those guys that tends to stick with tires in the stock sizes if I can get them. Changing sizes up isn't the end of the world, but I just like what I like. After I took ownership of my Hawk GT, one of the few radial tires made it in the stock sizes for that bike was the Avon Azarro. I was very happy with the first set I owned. The best thing about them was how well they stopped when riding in the rain. The last time I ordered a set, like yourself I received tires that were unacceptable to me and so I sent them back. In my case, the company I ordered them from wasn't willing to have the tire date of manufacture checked before sending them out, so I just asked for a refund.

I don't put nearly as many miles on my two bikes as a lot of guys around here do and so in my case I like to get the freshest tires I can as I know that I'll typically be replacing them before I've managed to wear them out due to the tire's age. Again, there might be tread left, but where I notice the aging of the tires the most is when riding in the rain. In the case of those Avon tires that I returned, one was around 1 1/2 years old and felt nice and pliable. The other tire was three years old and it was hard as a rock. The difference between the two was not at all subtle. So back they went (I ended up going with a different tire as those Avons had become very hard to find by then.)

I ended up deciding that not all tires are probably stored as they should be. Others can tell you that all should be fine, but it's your hide that's on the line, not anyone else's. I'm getting ready to change out the tires on my CB here in the next couple of weeks. I ordered a set of Metzeler Z8's to go on the bike. One of the tires that I received is 5 months old and the other is 14 months old and both feel plenty pliable just as I would expect from a new set of tires.

[Cormanus]

In support of Guth's post, but put in a slightly different way, if you're worried about the quality of your tyres (or some other bit of gear on your bike) it will make your riding tentative as you try to compensate for the worry. It's not worth it. Get tyres you're comfortable with.

[peterbaron]

In support of Guth's post, but put in a slightly different way, if you're worried about the quality of your tyres (or some other bit of gear on your bike) it will make your riding tentative as you try to compensate for the worry. It's not worth it. Get tyres you're comfortable with.

+1

Mark,
I always followed this:: listen to my heart and let my brain make the decision....sometimes not so perfect
Buy what you like/love and even if is not so perfect , you will not regret it.
What field of engineering are you engineering?


pb

[Ulvetanna_imp]

In support of Guth's post, but put in a slightly different way, if you're worried about the quality of your tyres (or some other bit of gear on your bike) it will make your riding tentative as you try to compensate for the worry. It's not worth it. Get tyres you're comfortable with.

Agreed, Marc did what was right for him under the circumstances.

But the original question, and the one that still remains, is whether a tire is completely serviceable with the specified time period; that's been answered several times on several posts. It's a small matter, but if one always goes with what makes him or her feel good instead of viewing the whole picture with some kind of objectivity, eventually feelings aren't going to be a good basis for choices.

Why am I harping? Because the tire manufacturers could not sustain a series of returns of tires just because someone has the mistaken notion that a tire is not serviceable, when it truly is. They base pricing and availability on a five-year shelf life. If very many riders start thinking tires are not good after a couple of years, the older stock becomes somewhat harder to sell, not to mention additional shipping costs for returning "old" tires which are in reality perfectly serviceable.

I related my experience with a pair of Z8's which were between 36-48 months old. I have Z8's on four motorcycles and am very familiar with the tire. These tires gripped and performed perfectly, and not to put too fine a point on it, but I was not riding like a grandma.

If we expect a manufacturer to supply a product to us that is of high-quality, at a reasonable price, and readily available, some examples are going to be "older" than others. This is the same as helmets. I have heard some people say helmets should be replaced after two years. Two years? No, all helmet manufacturers state FIVE YEARS before replacement should be considered. After that time, they cannot guarantee performance.

That means the helmet has been out of the box and in the elements for five years. The countdown starts from the date of the helmet's first sale. The date of manufacture is stamped either on the strap or somewhere in the helmet. I've picked up some excellent bargains (RF-1100, for example) where I got helmets for half-price because they were discontinued or superseded. But they're still going to be serviceable for the five year period. If the helmet is stored in the box, on a shelf, out of sunlight and away from harsh chemicals, it's going to be serviceable for the entire five-year period. And so it is with tires.

I've seen many a rider who has certain habits about riding which have become feelings. They don't feel comfortable braking into turn, for example, or downshifting a certain way. So they don't try it. It doesn't feel good. They continue to ride like that, with bad habits developed over a period of time, without correction. That can lead to trouble later. Science, not feelings, needs to be considered once in a while. (If anyone is getting annoyed about these comments simply refer to Mr. Keith Code's "[url=https://www.amazon.com/Twist-Wrist-Motorcycle-Roadracers-Handbook/dp/0965045013]Twist of the Wrist" series where this exact philosophy is discussed. One of the volumes is called "[url=https://www.amazon.com/Soft-Science-Roadracing-Motorcycles-Procedures/dp/096504503X/ref=pd_sbs_14_8?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=096504503X&pd_rd_r=4KZ3JDV1QNCJWSSBE7G1&pd_rd_w=7rPlX&pd_rd_wg=hvKvR&psc=1&refRID=4KZ3JDV1QNCJWSSBE7G1]The Soft Science of Motorcycle Road Racing.")

It can do no harm, of course, to swap an older tire for a new one for individual riders, but if most or all riders begin to believe this (don't use the front brake, you'll go over the bars!) it's going to affect the market. Bear in mind also that tires are hazardous waste. To dispose of unsold tires which were rejected because of an incomplete understanding of tire service life is going to be expensive as well.

I am an aggressive rider; not unsafe, but I use plenty of lean angle and like to brake and accelerate hard. I will use any tire on a street bike within the five year specification, without concern.

[Guth_imp]

Ulvetanna, people come at purchasing motorcycle tires from a number of different perspectives. Guys like The ferret and Empty Sea are going to be replacing their tires quite often because they rack up a lot of miles on their motorcycles so they will undoubtedly always be replacing those tires before they bump up against the timeline five years past the manufacturing date.

I don't rack up a lot of miles every year, so I prefer to purchase tires that are still somewhat reasonably new and have been properly stored. In your case, you'll likely have bought and sold at least three motorcycles (along with their tires) before I get around to changing out one set of tires on my CB.

If motorcycle tires don't meet my requirements, I'll continue to send them back. If the tire manufacturers ultimately have a problem with me doing so then I'd suggest that they look into the reseller/distributor chain involved here. I'd also be willing to pay a higher overall price for tires to a reseller that would be willing to have the manufacturing date checked to guarantee the tire was no more than a couple of years old. But only providing that they were properly stored. And as I mentioned in my example above, I don't believe there is a guarantee that this will always be the case.

[the Ferret]

I go thru 3 sets of tires every year. One set on the CB and two sets on the ST, so unless a tire is over 4 years old it would be of no concern to me. As a matter of fact I never looked at the date on my tires and never have. Not really sure where it is even. I'm more concerned with wear bars. I have a set in the garage now I got from Revzilla just last week and have no idea when they were made. Don't really care. By end of this summer they will be worn out lol.

I can certainly understand someone else's concern over the issue though, and given a choice when ordering, I'd opt for newer tires over older tires..just because. I think from a distributors point of view though, if the tires are within date, I see no issue with sending them out but I doubt that they even check that. They just get the order, go to the rack, grab the right size/model/brand of tires and wrap them up for shipping.