Steve D wrote:

No offence intended. I was just referring to Internet forums in general - it just came across wrong! I am guilty myself of taking advice on one trade from others in a totally different trade. Of course, it’s a totally personal choice but being in the motor trade myself as well as being an mot tester, I’m not as fazed by things that may look out of sorts to the average punter. I once 'tweaked' the water pressure safety valve on my pressurised hot water system on the advice of an unknown person on a plumbing forum only to be contacted by quite a few others telling me how dangerous that advice was. I put it back to how it was before my storage tank went boom!

Now I would have strongly advised against *tweaking* that !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I am very weary about tyres which is why we're all changed at 4mm. If it wasn't so bad it'd be funny.

🐑
Freelander 2 HSE auto 2014 ( Florrie ) ..... Try again.
Freelander 2 GS 2012...... Gone.

I'd also replace it for peace of mind. Price of a tyre is little when you and your families lives depend on it. Landrover - turning owners into mechanics since 1948

2014 Orkney grey Freelander SD4 GS.
2004 Zambezi silver Discovery 2 Td5 (Gone)
1963 Surf blue Morris Mini Minor Super de Luxe (my little toy)

Although the damage seems very superficial to me, and that damage alone wouldn't bother me in the slightest, I then look at the "bigger picture". Notice the fact that the Goodyear lettering is worn right down, suggesting to me that the tyre has been rubbed along the kerb throughout it's life when being parked. That sidewall is constantly being knocked and dragged down the kerb. I'd personally get rid of it.

iain cooper wrote:

The integrity of the tyre is damaged, and with no offence intended you would be an idiot not to replace it.

The debate on whether it's legal or not is superfluous.

Iain

Why would I take offence at being called an Idiot!

To take this discussion away from personalities, we need to look at this as any company would when making decisions on quality or whether something is fit for purpose.

The method used is to look at the cost of non-conformance. That is to compare the cost of doing something against the cost of not doing it.

In my opinion, and it is only that, the possible cost of not changing the tyre is much greater than the cost of changing it.

It is hard to say what caused that damage or its internal extent. You could xray the carcase to help your diagnosis, but the cost is most likely more than replacing the tyre.

You could continue to use it and, if you knew what you were looking for, regularly inspect it. Some people have this expertise to know what they are looking for, but would be expensive to use after a while.

Look at a new tyre as an insurance policy, you may never have needed to change it, it may have lasted, but if it didn't you may have wished you had spent the money.

A link to the theory follows

https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&...4EJm8_brq4 FL2 XS SD4 Auto 2010 2012-2017 (21k - 91k miles) (MY2011)
FL2 Metropolis SD4 Auto 2014 2017- (16k - 76k+ miles) (MY2015)

dondiddy wrote:

iain cooper wrote:

The integrity of the tyre is damaged, and with no offence intended you would be an idiot not to replace it.

The debate on whether it's legal or not is superfluous.

Iain

Why would I take offence at being called an Idiot!

Sorry Ian but I have enough of that stuff at work and we manage to waste thousands (of taxpayers money) on it by binning perfectly good items that have years of life left in them. We even have in the past cut up items to prevent others making use of them. In my home life I like to keep things simple and accept that there is an element of risk in life and don`t worry too much about it. Lets agree that you would change the tyre if it was yours and I would continue to use it if it was mine. (neither of which is the case so no point getting worked up about it!) The original OP should have done the post with a poll and went with the majority (which if I`m correct is change it!) Or could put it in the boot as a spare!

I'd use it, and keep bit of an eye on it for a while. See if it bulges, opens, legthens, whatever. Hard to tell exactly from a pic, it only looks a millimetre or two deep.

However, I was also unimpressed with the Wranglers on my FL when I got it, and would probably use the cut as an excuse to ditch them.

I got Pirelli ATR, will look at ATPlus or AT3 next time.

I love tyre shopping though. MY11 SD4 SE Auto

A few years back , I hit a deep pothole in a company 5 series . It resulted in a scollop of rubber bring chopped out of both the front and rear nearside tyres . Very similar to the original picture in this thread in size and shape but an entire piece missing . It was a leased car , the lease company would not replace the tyres , they said they were legal . I took it to an independent tyre company they also said legal

I had little choice , accept what I had been told , or to to pay for two very expensive directional low profile , run flat tyres,out of my own pocket . This was not an option . The tyres ran just fine for over another ten thousand miles.

Sometimes you have to trust the experts . 2009 GS Auto Zermatt Silver - Sold June 21 after 10 years of ownership

2016 Subaru Outback SE 2.0 diesel SE Premium Lineartronic Sold 2024 after 8 years and 80k miles . Best Car I ever owned !

2023 Toyota Hilux invincible X 2.8 Auto .

Well I suppose if you kept your eye on it it would be fine, and nothing at all to be concerned about.

Iain

Bobupndown wrote:

I'd also replace it for peace of mind. Price of a tyre is little when you and your families lives depend on it.

One more for changing it. I’m no tyre expert but imagine the result of a 70 mph blowout. I would imagine an insurance assessor would query it to.