Stretched tyres - Legal?
Discussion
There's a discussion in the GG at the moment about "Euro look" cars which has turned into a small argument about how legal the stretched tyres that some of them run are. Basically they fit wide wheels with narrow tyres stretched to fit.
Various visitors from a euro look site have joined to argue the point, which seems to be that if the tread is within the wheel arch they're legal.
The PH consensus view is that a) they look stupid and b) they're illegal because the tyres are being used outside manufacturers' recommendations.
Any one got any views?
ETA the thread's here if you want to read a mild bit of handbag waving
Various visitors from a euro look site have joined to argue the point, which seems to be that if the tread is within the wheel arch they're legal.
The PH consensus view is that a) they look stupid and b) they're illegal because the tyres are being used outside manufacturers' recommendations.
Any one got any views?
ETA the thread's here if you want to read a mild bit of handbag waving
Edited by mechsympathy on Friday 6th June 11:51
Would need a lot of digging in EC regulations and we'd end up in the minutiae of the individual vehicle and tyre type approvals but I think it would be impossible to prove that a tyre/rim combination as displayed would be safe at the speed and load ratings with which the tyres will have been stamped for approval, or at the maximum speed for the vehicle. Depends which bit of the regs you are looking at.
Even if you did dig through everything you might not even find a definitive written answer.
Which takes us to a discussion in court.
Vehicle examiner. Gives expert and technical opinion re unsuitablity of this set up based on qualifications plus years of experience.
Driver: well wikkid innit, everywun at MaccyDs reckons. Aye fink it iz ghetto, bro.
Magistrate: Case proven.
Even if you did dig through everything you might not even find a definitive written answer.
Which takes us to a discussion in court.
Vehicle examiner. Gives expert and technical opinion re unsuitablity of this set up based on qualifications plus years of experience.
Driver: well wikkid innit, everywun at MaccyDs reckons. Aye fink it iz ghetto, bro.
Magistrate: Case proven.
My argument (in the other thread) is that in order for a tyre to be legal, it must be properly fitted. In order for a tyre to be properly fitted, it must be in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations and or limitations. If the manufacturer provided recommended rim sizes (min/max) for any given tyre then it follows that fitting outside of those parameters is "improper" and therefore renders the tyre illegal. After all, tyres are made in different widths for a reason.
Now, I accept that there is no specific legislation (that I know of) that covers this so it would end up as a court decision to set precendent.
I would be interested to hear what others with more knowledge think.
Now, I accept that there is no specific legislation (that I know of) that covers this so it would end up as a court decision to set precendent.
I would be interested to hear what others with more knowledge think.
Edited by Strangely Brown on Friday 6th June 13:23
SB, OK agreed, I need to clarify what I was saying.
I think you'd find the information you are talking about in the records of the type approval. Therefore the tyre would not have been fitted according to that, thus an offence in my book.
Now I quickly scanned through C&UR to find the bit which I thought also says something along the lines that the tyres must be fitted such that they are safe when used at the speed and load that they are approved for.
In the way of such things based on a quick scan I could not find it, but I think that would be the only defence that the driver could use.
DVD/VH would be more precise in pointing to the exact bits on this.
Law is one thing, common sense is another, and such is life sometimes they are at variance.
~FiF
I think you'd find the information you are talking about in the records of the type approval. Therefore the tyre would not have been fitted according to that, thus an offence in my book.
Now I quickly scanned through C&UR to find the bit which I thought also says something along the lines that the tyres must be fitted such that they are safe when used at the speed and load that they are approved for.
In the way of such things based on a quick scan I could not find it, but I think that would be the only defence that the driver could use.
DVD/VH would be more precise in pointing to the exact bits on this.
Law is one thing, common sense is another, and such is life sometimes they are at variance.
~FiF
" available.7db said:
Why trawl CUR, when S2 RTA will suffice?
"...in a dangerous condition..."
Yeah but no but."...in a dangerous condition..."
Isn't it then simply a matter of opinion. You and I might say it is dangerous, yoof who has this vehicle and also has a qualification in vehicle engineering from tech college might not agree. Who is more qualified then?
I'm a great believer in, "if this were me how would I defend myself?" Then if I can think of something, go and investigate that possible defence, it might just be valid! In which case well stuff me sideways he's innocent. However if you can disprove that possible defence then another nail in the coffin is banged home.
I'm sure you are right that Mrs Blue Rinse on the bench would agree to S2 RTa dangerous condition, but it would be nice to stuff it up them, Muppets.
I mean there is no doubt that you can push the rim width up a little, but that? How in holy phluck do they get the beads to seat when fitting? Does anyone know? is it one of these bead seater jobbies?
.jpg)
Surely whoever fitted the tyres to the rims would have a duty of care to ensure they did not fit tyres that would be potentially dangerous in use. If an accident was proven to be caused by a tyre knowingly fitted to an incorrect rim then surely there would be some ramifications for the fitting company.
Oh and they look stupid too!
Oh and they look stupid too!
F i F said:
Isn't it then simply a matter of opinion. You and I might say it is dangerous, yoof who has this vehicle and also has a qualification in vehicle engineering from tech college might not agree. Who is more qualified then?
The test is whether the vehicle is in a dangerous condition and whether the driver should have know that it was in a dangerous condition. I'd hear evidence from accident investigators, VoSA qualified vehicle inspectors et al to determine the fact of dangerous condition.
I think it's obvious that the scrote (sorry, I mean defendant) knew his tyres were like this. It's not like someone secretly did this to him after he closed the door...
Cool car.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff