The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

A report released earlier this year resulted in the recall of a number of Jaguar and Landrover models after it was found that they emitted more CO2 than was recorded in the official certification.

 

At a time when the group is struggling financially the recall, whilst expensive, was nothing like the costs and fines that were imposed on the VW Group. Did someone play down the findings to give Jaguar a chance to instigate the recall?

 

Here’s the report from the BBC:

 

Jaguar Land Rover is recalling 44,000 cars in the UK over carbon dioxide emissions, the car maker has said.

 

Regulators found 10 models were emitting more of the greenhouse gas than they had been certified to emit.

 

The car maker will contact owners to arrange repairs, a JLR spokeswoman said.

 

JLR is facing a number of challenges at the moment, including a slump in demand for diesel cars and a sales slowdown in China.

 

The firm said it was a voluntary recall of certain 2016-2019 MY Jaguar and Land Rover vehicles fitted with two litre diesel or petrol engines.

 

The affected models are:

 

Some two-litre 2016 to 2018 Land Rover Discovery and Discovery Sport cars

Certain two litre Range Rover Evoque, Sport, and Velar cars

Jaguar E-Pace, F-Pace, F-Type, XE and XF cars.

Most models are petrol, while some are diesel.

 

Some of the models will need physical repairs in a dealership, while some will need software updates, the spokeswoman said.

 

“The modifications made to affected vehicles will be made free of charge and every effort will be made to minimise inconvenience to the customer during the short time required for the work to be carried out,” the firm added.

 

In January the firm confirmed it is cutting 4,500 jobs, with the substantial majority coming from its 40,000 strong UK workforce.

 

The firm has complained about uncertainty caused by Brexit.

 

Emissions have come under more scrutiny since Volkswagen’s diesel scandal.

 

Investors are pursuing the German car giant for about €9.2bn (£8.2bn) in damages, claiming the company should have come clean sooner about falsifying emissions data. By Graham Hill

We all like to think that we will be able to continue driving until we decide that we no longer wish to. But with people living longer due to massive improvements in health care being alive doesn’t mean that you are medically fit to still drive.

 

According to official statistics released earlier this year more elderly drivers have had their licences revoked than ever before.

 

Data shows the number of drivers aged 70 or older banned from driving on medical grounds has increased by nearly 150 per cent

 

The number of drivers aged 70 or older banned from driving for medical reasons has increased by nearly 150 per cent in the space of a decade, according to new data.

 

Almost 22,500 elderly motorists had their licences revoked on medical grounds in 2018, according to DVLA (Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency) figures obtained by the Times via a Freedom of Information request.

 

Drivers should have an eye test every decade, urge experts

 

The data shows 61,482 car and motorbike licences – for drivers of all ages – were revoked for medical reasons last year – an increase of 116.8 per cent since 2010.

 

Yet over the same period, the number of drivers aged 70 and over having their licences revoked on medical grounds shot up by 142 per cent, from 9,265 in 2010, to 22,453 in 2018.

 

Two-thirds of 70+year-olds currently hold a driving licence, up from 39 per cent in the mid-1990s. The issue of elderly drivers holding licences was thrown into sharp relief back in January, when Prince Philip’s Land Rover Freelander collided with a Kia near the Queen’s private home at Sandringham in Norfolk.

 

A spokesperson for road safety charity Brake told the Times that regulation around drivers’ fitness to drive should be “more rigorously enforced” via means such as compulsory eyesight tests.

 

AA president Edmund King echoed this sentiment, calling for evidence of regular eye tests for elderly drivers and stricter guidance from GPs.

 

Caroline Abrahams, charity director of Age UK, disagreed though and pointed out that older drivers are, on average, less likely to have an accident than younger drivers.

 

Meanwhile, the Department for Transport said the issue of older drivers would be addressed in a “refreshed road safety statement” later in the year.”

 

Thanks to Auto Express – By Graham Hill

Auto Express have carried out some surveys amongst their readers into satisfaction levels achieved by Insurance Companies and Breakdown Services.

 

The winner of the insurance top place was a surprise to me, is not available on the comparison sites but has won for the fourth time in a row. The top breakdown service was also a surprise to me but as the report shows it’s the 7^th year in a row for this one.

 

To see the full survey buy a copy of Auto Express or look it up online. The insurance survey asked 7 questions:

Ease of purchase (web & phone)

Telephone experience when making a claim

Keeping you informed when claim is being assessed

Speed to settle a claim

Friendliness and helpfulness during claim

Value for money

Overall satisfaction with claim process

 

The top 5 insurers were as follows:

1. The National Farmers Union Mutual (NFU Mutual) – available to everyone
2. RIAS (up 9 places)
3. Privilege (Part of Direct Line)
4. LV= (Formerly Liverpool Victoria)
5. Quote Me Happy.Com (Budget arm of Aviva)

 

I would add one to avoid – Zurich which didn’t even appear in the top 50. They refused a payout when I made a claim and it took two and a half years to finally get the Financial Ombudsman to find in my favour after an adjudicator had constantly told them to pay out – avoid like the plague!

 

Moving on to the top breakdown services. There are 190,000 breakdowns each year according to Highways England so seen as a must have for most motorists. Auto Express listed 25 top providers which you can see in the full report but for your information, I’ve shown the top 5. First of all the list of questions asked:

 

Ease of purchase

Keeping you informed

Speed of recovery

Ability to fix the fault

Friendliness and helpfulness

General presentation

Value for money

 

The top 5 breakdown services were as follows:

1. GEM Motoring Assist (7^th year in a row)
2. Green Flag (best at keeping customers informed)
3. LV= Britannia Rescue (LV owned Britannia carried out most roadside repairs)
4. AutoAid
5. AA (largest UK provider)

Just out of interest the RAC was next after the AA.

 

So there you have it – By Graham Hill

As we move towards the winter months when poor weather can lead to problems with grip it raises the question as to which end of the car should you fit the new tyres?

 

I addressed this problem earlier this year but it might be worth reminding you what was said at the time. You may think this is a daft question – simply replace the tyres that are worn – right?

 

Front tyres generally wear out quicker than rears if your car is front wheel drive and rears wear quicker if rear wheel drive, so wouldn’t it be correct to replace the tyres that wear fastest with the new boots? No!

 

Most safety experts ignore the wear element or whether the car is front, rear or all wheel drive and suggest that you always put freshest tyres on the rear of the car. This is because if the car loses grip in a corner, it will either oversteer or understeer.

 

Unless you are an F1 fan you may not understand what this means. Understeer is when the front tyres lose grip in a corner causing the front of the car to slide out whilst oversteer means you lose grip at the back of the car, causing the rear of the car to swing out.

 

It’s actually easier to control a car that is understeering than one that is oversteering – simply slowing down should help to regain grip if the car is understeering.

 

This is why it is important that you should maintain the greatest grip at the rear and fit your new tyres at the rear of the car. This will minimise the chance of potential oversteer and minimise the chance of a serious accident. Great advice eh! Graham Hill

Tyre technology is improving constantly with some tyres even able to generate electricity that can be used to re-charge the battery. But what about the important factors like fuel efficiency, grip and road noise?

 

Whilst a budget or mid-range brand may save you a few pounds do you know what you may be giving up in terms of safety or fuel-efficiency. Budget tyres seem to fare poorly in terms of road noise but do they? The tyre markings can tell you a lot.

 

My thanks to Tyre Shopper for their Guide to EU Tyre Labels:

 

All new tyres we supply for cars, vans and 4x4s come with EU Tyre Labels.

 

The labels, mandated in 2012, provide information to help buyers make an informed tyre choice. The labelling covers fuel efficiency, braking distance in wet road conditions, and exterior noise.

 

Tyres that don’t have the EU tyre labels include off-road, vintage, spare, studded, racing tyres and those with a speed limit of up to 80km/h.

 

Why do we need EU tyre labels?

 

EU tyre labels are designed to help drivers who regularly take motorway trips or travel long trips in different weather conditions, to know how well their tyres can handle poor road conditions.

 

What do EU tyre labels look like?

 

The tyre rating labels are shown in their respective sections below with more information each.

1 – Fuel Efficiency

 

Tyres have a fuel efficiency rating from A (most fuel-efficient) to G (least fuel efficient).

 

The better the fuel efficiency, the lower the cost of motoring and the less harmful Carbon Dioxide pumped into the atmosphere.

 

Choosing A-rated tyres over G-rated tyres equates to a 7.5% saving in fuel.

 

An A-rated tyre may use 80 litres less fuel each year (over £110) compared to when using G-rated tyres. This estimate is based on a petrol engine covering 10,000 miles at a cost of £1.40 for every litre of petrol.

 

Rolling resistance

Tyres indirectly use a fifth of their fuel consumption due to something called ‘rolling resistance’. This is the friction created when the tyres touch the road. Each tyre has a different amount of rolling resistance depending on its shape and composition. They use less fuel and cost less to own.

 

2 – Wet Grip & Braking Distances

 

Tyres struggle to grip the road to slow down in wet road conditions, so manufacturers change tyre patterns to improve braking times and reduce the chance of aquaplaning.

 

Tyres are rated for their combined wet grip and braking distance rating – how long it takes for the vehicle to come to a complete stop in wet road conditions.

 

All-weather tyres can be used when weather is poor for many weeks and we stock a range of these to suit many types of vehicles.

 

The EU tyre labels helps drivers choose the tyre with the shortest stopping distance.

 

Braking distance variation between each wet weather tyre rating from A to G, equates to 3-6 metres. The maximum benefit is 18 metres shorter braking distance based on driving at 50mph in wet road conditions when choosing A-rated tyres over G-rated ones.

 

3 – External Noises

 

External noise emissions measure the decibels (dB) created outside the vehicle when that tyre is used in normal driving conditions.

 

The tyre noise rating label displays either one, two or three audio waves, with the number of decibels shown as a number.

 

• One wave – three decibels or more under the current noise legislation.
• Two waves – an acceptable noise level for current and future noise legislation.
• Three waves – a tyre that will meet current noise mandated levels, but will fail future limits and need changing in the future.

 

Are the labels standardised across tyre brands?

 

Whether you’re looking at Michelin, Continental or other tyre brands, the label information can be compared side-by-side.

 

This includes the mid-range brands and budget brands. I remember the days when the now premium brand Hankook was a budget brand.

 

And whilst Nanking are a budget brand could they be going the same way as Hankook, they certainly don’t seem to be far behind when you check the labels.

 

One final thought. If you have a car on a lease or PCP and intend handing the car back at the end of the agreement check to see if they stipulate the tyres to be fitted when it comes to replacing them.

 

You don’t want to be forking out for more new tyres when handing the car back because you haven’t complied with the contract.

 

All cars must now be fitted with tyre pressure monitors but you shouldn’t simply rely upon the accuracy of the monitors and stop checking tyre pressures on a regular basis. Having improperly inflated tyres not only has safety and cost consequences you could end up with points and a fine.

 

It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that tyres are in proper condition and penalties for offences are very severe. The penalties for having illegal tyres are currently up to a £2500 fine and 3 penalty points PER TYRE. Two faulty tyres could cost six penalty points, loss of license and a £5000 fine!

 

Apart from the requirements regarding tyre wear, tread depth, damaged sidewalls, etc, the tyres must be correctly inflated. Regulation 27 section b states “the tyre is not so inflated as to make it fit for the use to which the motor vehicle or trailer is put”. This definition is not very helpful, but correct tyre pressures are vital for safe handling and optimum braking, grip and tyre life.

 

Low tyre pressures

Cause increased fuel consumption, more air pollution, shorter tyre life and greater risk of tyre failure.

 

High tyre pressures

Cause reduced comfort, less grip, greater risk of impact tyre damage and reduced stability in braking and cornering.

 

By Graham Hill

Car batteries are nothing like they were when I first started driving. All cars, even the most basic, are reliant on batteries to power masses of equipment so they are very high duty these days but even new batteries don’t last forever.

 

It’s important to make sure that you don’t fit incorrect batteries which could leave you stranded so for many the solution is to use a main dealer to ensure that the correct battery is fitted. However, Auto Express has found some massive differences between dealers depending on where the dealer is located.

 

This is what Auto Express found:

 

Replacing a car’s battery is something that many buyers will face at some point. But how much does it cost on the UK’s most popular new cars? And are buyers getting a fair deal?

 

An Auto Express investigation can reveal that some car owners are being charged a staggering £1,250 for battery replacement, while others face bills as low as £98.

 

Auto Express compiled a list of the UK’s 20 best-selling vehicles and contacted three franchised dealer networks across the country to get a price for parts and labour. The only information dealers requested was the vehicle’s registration details.

 

Owners of the current-generation Mercedes C-Class are in for the biggest shock, because we were quoted a fee of £1,248 for a replacement battery. A second dealership quoted a price of £1,098.90 for the same job, while a third was charging only £315. To check this figure was not an anomaly, we contacted two more dealerships and again received quotes of £1,111.80 and £1,198.80.

 

A Mercedes spokesperson told Auto Express: “We believe the majority of retailers you contacted have quoted for a lithium-ion battery, and one quote may be for a 12v battery. We can only recommend a retail price for these parts, which means there could be a variation across retailers.”

 

By comparison, prices for a replacement battery on a comparable BMW 320i started from £296.98 and rose to £392.57.

 

The Vauxhall Mokka X was also a model that had a big disparity in price, with some dealers offering parts and labour for as little as £98.46, while two other dealers quoted £248.40 and £262.80. “We believe that the cost of the lowest-priced battery quoted to your researcher was based on a unit that was not of comparable quality to the other units for which quotes were received,” a Vauxhall spokesperson told us.

 

Volkswagen Tiguan owners also face quite a disparity in price for a battery replacement, ranging from £190.66 up to £320.66 – a difference of more than 68 per cent.

 

The fairest and most consistent pricing was to be found with the Toyota Yaris; all three franchised dealers quoted the same £105 fee for parts and labour.

 

Industry regulator Motor Codes told Auto Express that the results highlighted the importance of buyers shopping around if vehicle repairs are required. “When purchasing and/or having a replacement part fitted, such as a battery, we always advise motorists to shop around and to spend time doing their research.

 

As the retail price of batteries isn’t regulated, this means that the brands supplied and the cost to the consumer will vary between retailers for the recommended technical specifications advised by the vehicle manufacturer.”

 

Here are their findings

 

Car battery costs

Car	Dealership 1	Cost	Dealership 2	Cost	Dealership 3	Cost	Difference
Ford Fiesta 1.0 EcoBoost	Bridgend	£199	Nottingham	£208	Bristol	£186	11.28%
Volkswagen Golf 1.5 TSI SE Edition 5dr	Loughborough	£194	West London	£244	Swansea	£250	28.86%
Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost auto Style	Maidstone	£181	Gravesend	£218	Cambridge	£193	20.44%
Vauxhall Corsa 1.4 Design 5d	North London	£284	Bristol	£249	Manchester	£237	19.83%
Mercedes A-Class A 180 SE	Manchester	£322	Loughton	£444	Coventry	£377	37.88%
Nissan Qashqai 1.2 DiG-T Acenta	Nottingham	£129	Birmingham	£132	North London	£130	2.32%
Volkswagen Polo SE 1.0 TSI	Bristol	£234	Newport	£212	Ashford	£192	21.87%
Ford Kuga Titanium X 1.5 TDCi	Manchester	£206	Swindon	£202	Liverpool	£228	12.87%
Kia Sportage 1.7 CRDi ISG 2	Solihull	£286	Leeds	£215	Cardiff	£309	43.72%
MINI Hatchback Cooper S Classic 3d	Liverpool	£357	Milton Keynes	£232	Coventry	£224	59.37%
Mercedes C-Class C 200 SE*	Central London	£1,248	Cambridge	£315	Harrogate	£1,098.80	296.44%
Vauxhall Mokka ecoTEC XDesign Nav 1.4i	Tonbridge	£248.40	Burnley	£98.46	Leeds	£262.80	166.91%
Vauxhall Astra 1.4 Design	Crawley	£135.00	Birmingham	£134.40	Carlisle	£136	1.19%
Volkswagen Tiguan 2.0 TDI 150 SE Nav	Maidstone	£190.66	Coventry	£320.66	South West London	£235.66	68.18%
Audi A3 Sportback 1.5 TFSI	Whetstone	£405.46	Leicester	£336.60	Harrogate	388	20.45%
Toyota Yaris 1.0 Icon Tech	Ashford	£105	Cheltenham	£105	Rotherham	£105	0%
BMW 1 Series 118i Sport	Essex	£332.57	Boston	£292.57	Newcastle	£271.27	22.59%
BMW 3 Series 320i SE	Eastleigh	£296.98	Coventry	£300.77	Doncaster	£392.57	32.18%
Hyundai Tucson 1.6 GDi SE Nav	Maidstone	£289.76	Bristol	£321.18	Sunderland	£298.38	10.84%
Fiat 500 1.2 Lounge	Crawley	£207	Chesterfield	£192	Glasgow	£193	7.80%

* Mercedes prices varied so widely that we obtained two extra quotes of £1,111.80 and £1,198.80 from other dealerships

 

Thanks to Auto Express – By Graham Hill

Up until Boris took possession of the keys to number 10, I like many believed that it would be impossible for us to leave the EU without a deal.

 

However, I’m now starting to believe that this is a serious option and might be out of our hands anyway because if we don’t negotiate a deal we leave without a deal whether we like it or not. It’s the law.

 

Even with a deal we will still be outside the EU so can’t take advantage of the free trade deals already in place between the EU and various countries around the world.

 

Let’s take South Korea where Kias and Hyundais are built. As part of the EU we are able to import their cars duty free but the minute we come out of the EU (unless we have a deal with a transition deal that includes current free trade agreements) we will have to pay 10% duty on top of the cost of the cars.

 

Whilst Kia and Hyundai are a South Korean group what about other manufacturers who build their cars in non-European countries? For example Mercedes build cars in Mexico with whom the EU has an agreement.

 

As import duty is applicable from the last country that touched the goods, even with a deal that includes Germany, as the cars may come from Mexico their cars will be 10% more expensive. In fact, Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Honda and VW all have manufacturing plants in Mexico.

 

Of course, we may be able to negotiate quick deals with all the countries with which we have free trade deals as part of the EU but the consensus is that this won’t happen. So at this point in time with so many unknowns my advice is don’t wait till after the end of October if you are toying with the idea of taking out a new lease.

 

As always – if you see a deal that you like don’t wait for a better deal as they may be gone forever after the end of October. By Graham Hill

Failure to wear a seatbelt could result in penalty points as well as a fine, under new road safety plans being considered by the Government.

 

The Government is considering issuing penalty points to drivers who fail to wear a seatbelt as part of a new road safety action plan aimed at reducing the number of deaths on the UK’s roads.

 

Despite the fact that, in 2017, 27 per cent of car deaths involved people who were not wearing a seatbelt, the punishment for committing the offence in England, Scotland and Wales is just a fine of £100, which can be increased to a maximum of £500 if the case goes to court.

 

Now, the Department for Transport (DfT) is considering introducing penalty points for such an offence, as part of a package of 74 potential actions to improve road safety in the UK. This follows a report from the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS) calling for Great Britain to adopt the same rules as Northern Ireland, where drivers who don’t wear a seatbelt are handed three penalty points.

 

Another key area of focus in the DfT’s plan is rural roads, for which an advisory panel will be set up to look at how rural road safety can be boosted via the improvement of roads and traffic signs, as well as by tackling issues around speed limits and enforcement.

 

The DfT has broken down some of its other plans by which age groups they will affect. For children, a £225,000 grant has been given to Good Egg Safety to deliver a safety training programme for retailers to help parents correctly fit baby and child seats.

 

Research will also be commissioned into whether mobile phone use among young pedestrians leads to an increased risk of road collisions, as well as how children aged seven to 18 with special educational needs and cognitive disabilities can be taught to understand the dangers near roads.

 

For young adults, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency is developing a behavioural change campaign designed to encourage learner drivers to broaden their experience by using more rural roads and driving at night before taking their test.

 

One in four people killed on road not wearing a seatbelt

 

There will also be research into the benefits of Graduated Driving Licences, while THINK! will continue campaigning against drink-driving, mobile phone use while driving, speedin and passenger distraction.

 

With adults in mind, the DfT will be looking at the feasibility of alcolocks, while a greater focus on roads policing will be spearheaded by a two-year project with the Home Office and National Police Chiefs’ Council to identify best practice and gaps in services to see how policing can be improved.

 

Finally, for older drivers, RoadSafe has been given £50,000 to deliver a digital platform to share best practice to reduce road safety risks for elderly road users.

 

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said: “Today’s action plan is a key milestone in our road safety work and sets out the important steps we are taking to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on our roads.”

 

Steve Barrett, head of car insurance for Direct Line, commented: “Through better enforcement and greater public awareness, we can hopefully increase seat belt wearing rates and reduce deaths and serious injuries on our roads.”

 

David Davies, executive director of PACTS, added that it was “unusual to find a road safety measure with so much benefit and no downsides”.By Graham Hill thanks to Auto Express

Drivers in the UK have spent more than £3m buying International Driving Permits since February in preparation for a no deal Brexit.

 

UK motorists have bought 584,000 International Driving Permits (IDPs) since February 2019 in order to still be able to drive in Europe following a no deal Brexit.

 

This means drivers have spent in excess of £3.2 million on them in the last six months, according to figures revealed by transport minister Michael Ellis in response to a written Parliamentary question.

 

Previously, IDPs were available from 89 Post Office branches, as well as from the RAC and AA. Around 100,000 were issued each year to British motorists looking to drive outside Europe. In February, though, the rules were changed so that IDPs were only available from 2,500 Post Office branches and nowhere else.

 

The Government issued advice to drivers saying UK driving licences may no longer be valid in EU and EEA countries following a no-deal Brexit, which could have occurred on 29th March or 12th April 2019, before the deadline was moved to 31st October

 

This led to a spike in demand for IDPs, with 282,000 applications in March and 163,000 in April. A number of Post Offices saw long queues, prompting a House of Lords report to call for IDPs to be available online.

 

Nicholas Lyes, head of roads policy at the RAC, commented: “It’s truly astonishing that more than half a million International Driving Permits have been issued since the Government took the service in-house. In one month alone, the number of IDPs issued was almost three times higher than the amount normally issued in an entire year.

 

“This shows that people who were planning to take their vehicles abroad most definitely heeded warnings about being ready to drive in the EU in the event of a no-deal Brexit. During the Spring, this led to long queues and even shortages of IDPs at some Post Offices.

 

“As we head towards the next Brexit deadline of 31st October 2019, it is vital that Post Offices are set up to cope with a sudden surge in IDP requests so that drivers are not confronted with frustrating pre-holiday delays. However, much of this will be dependent on the terms of the UK’s departure from the EU.” By Graham Hill Thanks To Auto Express

New tyres come with grading that show their performance in the wet, noise levels and fuel efficiency. However, new cars with maximum tread are only in that condition for a limited time, the question is – how do the tyres perform once they are worn and in particular when the tread drops to the legal limit of 1.6mm.

 

With this in mind Michelin has stepped up its campaign for mandatory tests of tyres at the legal tread depth limit in a bid to reduce waste, cut CO2 and lower costs for customers.

It has backed an EU resolution by France, which, if adopted, could see tyre performance rated when worn as well as when new. The new procedure could be adopted this autumn, and a working group has been set up at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) to define the procedures for these tests, the reference tyres and regulatory thresholds.

Michelin says that although many tyres perform well when new, there are huge variations in performance at the 1.6mm legal minimum. It also claims that manufacturers can engineer tyres to perform well when worn but choose not to because there is no testing.

Michelin has campaigned for several years against the best practice theory of changing tyres at 3mm, suggesting it is too wasteful and quoting a study by Ernst & Young that predicted that running tyres to 1.6mm rather than 3mm would mean a reduction in tyre production of 128 million units in Europe alone, along with a CO2 saving of 6.6 million tonnes, and cost savings of more than £6 billion.

Some of that saving would be felt by fleet operators, many of whom adopt the best practice of changing tyres at 3mm. Having the confidence to run tyres until 1.6mm thanks to official testing would also allow employers to meet health and safety requirements.

Pierre Robert, vice-president of the ambition test programme at Michelin, said: “Dry grip improves by up to 10% on a worn tyre, and 70% of road accidents occur on dry roads. Fuel consumption is also better on a worn tyre, with up to a 20% improvement.

“But wet grip decreases, and currently it is difficult to predict performance. Tyre ratings when new are not necessarily a good indicator of performance at 3mm or when worn.”

Michelin also claims that as vehicles are increasingly equipped with new safety technology, it becomes more important that the tyres perform well to ensure the car’s features work properly.

Robert insisted that good performance when worn is a choice by the tyre manufacturer, as water dispersion ability at the legal minimum can be designed into the tread.

Tyres are currently tested and graded for fuel efficiency, wet weather performance and noise when new, giving consumers a clear indicator of performance in these areas.

Michelin says it supports the implementation of a minimum threshold for wet braking when worn to ensure consumers a minimum performance for all tyres on the market, which could see some manufacturers withdrawing tyres from the market if they fail the test.

Michelin also believes rolling resistance and noise should continue to be tested when new, as these improve with wear, although it does not want to change the labelling structure from the new tests.

Testing worn tyres
Michelin provided two circuit tests – one for handling and one for braking – to compare the performance of worn Michelin tyres with identical cars fitted with worn tyres from another premium brand.

 

For the braking test, we were asked to apply maximum braking force on a very wet road surface from 50mph to measure the stopping distance (calculated by GPS), while for the handling test we drove on a short lap with a mixture of wet and dry corners, gaining an impression of how the two sets of worn tyres performed.

 

Our braking test, taken twice on the same tyres – first for the Michelin, then for the other brand – showed a difference of more than 15m between the two, the other brand taking almost four car lengths more to stop.

 

The handling test showed the electronic stability control activating sooner and for longer in the rival brand tyre compared with the Michelin.

 

It is possible that other brands’ tyres perform better than Michelin when worn, but until mandatory tyre tests come into force, we won’t know before we make the choice. Michelin appears confident enough to face the challenge. By Graham Hill with thanks to Business Car.