Run-flat repairs?
in [Car Maintenance]
|
From: Duncan Wood on 26 May 2010 12:45 On Wed, 26 May 2010 16:57:41 +0100, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "Duncan Wood" <nntptmp(a)dmx512.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like > they were saying: > >>>>> Agreed. I have often wondered the wisdom of buying secondhand tyres >>>>> whose history is unkown. The wheels could easily have come from a car >>>>> involved in a fatac. > >>>> & yet nearly everyone does it whenever they buy a 2nd hand car. > >>> There's usually far easier ways to tell whether the used car you buy >>> has been involved in a serious collision than the used tyres you buy. >>> >>> For a start, why've they come off a car before being worn out? > >> What's a collision got to do with the state of the tyres? > > It all depends on what the tyres bounced off in the throes of the > collision, doesn't it? But you've no idea what the previous owner bounced it off without a serious collision. It's almost irrelevant, if you folded a bit of car into it during the collision then there'll be far more visible damage than one that somebody has driven along the road whilst underinflated.
From: Adrian on 26 May 2010 14:36 "Duncan Wood" <nntpnews(a)dmx512.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> What's a collision got to do with the state of the tyres? >> It all depends on what the tyres bounced off in the throes of the >> collision, doesn't it? > But you've no idea what the previous owner bounced it off without a > serious collision. Very true. But at least you can make a decision based upon the general condition of the car, and on the owner himself.
From: Michael Hubert Kenyon on 26 May 2010 14:44 Duncan Wood wrote: > On Wed, 26 May 2010 16:34:00 +0100, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> "Duncan Wood" <nntptmp(a)dmx512.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >> they were saying: >> >>>> Agreed. I have often wondered the wisdom of buying secondhand tyres >>>> whose history is unkown. The wheels could easily have come from a car >>>> involved in a fatac. >> >>> & yet nearly everyone does it whenever they buy a 2nd hand car. >> >> There's usually far easier ways to tell whether the used car you buy has >> been involved in a serious collision than the used tyres you buy. >> >> For a start, why've they come off a car before being worn out? > > What's a collision got to do with the state of the tyres? > Wheels locking up at 80MPH just before impact will not do the tyres much good nor will a car rolling and hitting the ground wheels first. Chuck in weights coming off and buckles and past repairs by the above cowboys that you haven't seen and no thanks. It cost me �140 for a pair of brand new Michellin and I have full come back as well as peace of mind especially when I have the kids in the car.
From: Duncan Wood on 27 May 2010 03:52 On Wed, 26 May 2010 19:36:12 +0100, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "Duncan Wood" <nntpnews(a)dmx512.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like > they were saying: > >>>> What's a collision got to do with the state of the tyres? > >>> It all depends on what the tyres bounced off in the throes of the >>> collision, doesn't it? > >> But you've no idea what the previous owner bounced it off without a >> serious collision. > > Very true. But at least you can make a decision based upon the general > condition of the car, and on the owner himself. I'm failing to see how that's an improvement on looking at the inside of the tyres.
From: Mike Tomlinson on 27 May 2010 03:50
In article <864tb8FeohU23(a)mid.individual.net>, Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> writes >For a start, why've they come off a car before being worn out? Came off a fleet car? -- (\__/) (='.'=) Bunny's thinking about giving Windows 7 (")_(") a go despite what he's said about it... |