Ford Forums banner

Abnormal tyre wear

2K views 7 replies 8 participants last post by  Kieron 
#1 ·
One thing Mrs z isn't these days is a leadfoot.

When she bought her BA XT, it was quite highly optioned and included 17 inch alloys. They were fitted with 225.50.17 Dunlop LeMans LM602's.

At the 15,000 service it was noted that one of the rear tyres was down to the wear markers. Went to the local Bob Jane, where I've bought a lot of tyres over the years. Verdict - right rear and left front illegal - the other two close to the legal limit. No abnormal wear pattern. Wheel alignment OK.

Anyway, we fitted 2 Yokohama ES100's in one size up 235.45.17's and expect to fit 2 more in the near future. But, given the way this car has been driven, I reckon I would get half the mileage and a real leadfoot a fraction of that!

It doesn't make any sense. Even if the tyres were an exceptionally soft, sticky compound, you'd have to drive fairly hard to chop them out at 15,000k. Surely someone else would've had the same experience?

Any ideas welcome.

PS the Michelin Preceda's I fitted to my T are like new at 10,000 and I drive a lot harder than Mrs z.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
15,000k is a bit rough. Late model Falcons have pretty average tyre wear on the fronts due to camber adjustment or lack of it. The best thing to do is to get a camber kit installed by Pedders or another reputable suspension company. With the rear end there maybe a toe in/toe out adjustment that can be done. From new they settle on the bushes etc and go out of alignment.
 
#3 ·
when i had 17s i was very lucky to get 20k out of them. was told that because of their size they are more performance based so they wear quicker. cant really say i wore them out from burnouts as the fronts used to wear quicker even with a camber kit (damn city of roundabouts!) maybe you might have to consider going back to 16s if the mileage is a problem.
 
#4 ·
davway said:
when i had 17s i was very lucky to get 20k out of them. was told that because of their size they are more performance based so they wear quicker. cant really say i wore them out from burnouts as the fronts used to wear quicker even with a camber kit (damn city of roundabouts!) maybe you might have to consider going back to 16s if the mileage is a problem.
See my avatar - 17s. Hardish driving. 14 500km. Probably half worn at the most. Dunlop SP3000 or something. Heard the LeMans wear fast on the G220 somewhere else on this site...
 
#6 ·
baxr6na said:
Yeh the Lemans are Shit, 22,000 kms out of them first round and that was driving the car like a baby.

I never again will drive a car with dunlops - from now on dealer must change them before car is delievered - for free ofcourse otherwise i wont accept it.
Dont know if its Dunlops. I have 19,000k's on my XR6T with minimal wear and that includes a lot of laps around race circuits and similar driving activities (eg slalom, braking & cornering exercises, etc).

The sort of tyre wear described may be wheel alignment/camber related as it is unusual for the two left to be worn more than right (maybe lots of driving in circles in Coles carpark). Also, the tyres you would have on the car would not be "performance" type of tyres just because they are 17".

Hope it gets sorted!

DEMO KING
 
#8 ·
back2thefutura said:
You'll probably find this hard to believe, but on our AUII (with 17's), we have 'Ultra GT' brand - some unknown brand, but they have last over 60,000kms and they are still legal (just).
Our first BA XT at work has circa 56,000k's on the factory rubber, about 85% worn.

My BA XR6 with the 17's has got 25,000k's and around half worn, another BA XR6 at work is circa 32,000 with about 60% worn.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top