Switched from 23mm to 30mm tyres- bad move?

arthur_scrimshaw

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Arthur Scrimshaw wrote:

Is that taking into account the depreciation and initial outlay of the car as well? I find that hard to believe.

Of course not... but I have a car, whether I use it to go to work or not, I have it... there are weekends, holidays, family things... in the end if you have a car it costs you X to maintain it, whether you use it or not is irrelevant. Insurance, road tax, services, MOT... all stuff you have to pay even if you use it once a month.

I have tried to convince my wife we don't really need it, but she disagrees saying renting one when you need it is not as convenient and requires planning ahead and she has a point, to be honest

I sold my car last year and now use the wife's Panda on the rare occasions I do drive. The last year I owned it I did 450 miles in it so no loss really. In fact I'm now rarely allowed to drive if we're going out as she says I drive like I'm riding my bike. Which is apparently not a compliment.

itboffin

fitted a pair of Uniroyal rain tyres on the 24th Jan this year to my wife's car, yesterday they has to be replaced, 10 months and about 7k miles.

Now that's expensive

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

My cars don't get serviced once a year - they get serviced based upon (mostly) mileage. It's a nonsense to service a modern car once a year. I think my Fiat is on an 18,000 mile service interval.

You service the car when a light on the dashboard tells you it's time to service the car... we are in the 21st century and you no longer have the initiative... Now that I live in London I do no more than 3000 miles per year, yet the dashboard rules

EKE_38BPM

dhope wrote:

Pfft, EKE's Kaffenback probably takes 70c, as long as they each weigh over a stone

Why are people putting a c after the width of tyres on this thread? Unless you mean 70cm and not even the Kaff has that much clearance. You are right about the weight though.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

My cars don't get serviced once a year - they get serviced based upon (mostly) mileage. It's a nonsense to service a modern car once a year. I think my Fiat is on an 18,000 mile service interval.

You service the car when a light on the dashboard tells you it's time to service the car... we are in the 21st century and you no longer have the initiative... Now that I live in London I do no more than 3000 miles per year, yet the dashboard rules

YOU service your car when you are told, people with a bit of knowledge of modern cars use their common sense. 3000 miles between services is just crazy, your garage must love you.

ugo.santalucia

EKE_38BPM wrote:

YOU service your car when you are told, people with a bit of knowledge of modern cars use their common sense. 3000 miles between services is just crazy, your garage must love you.

If I don't service the car when I am supposed to, I invalidate the manufacturer's warranty.

I am being very patient with you, but you should change your attitude on this forum... take it as a good advice given free of charge

bendertherobot

CookeeeMonster wrote:

ok planet x only have 37mm randommer pro's left...ribble have the 32mm for £18.99.

Shall I pull the trigger...

Probably. They are very good. I'd go with the wider ones. They're not really 37. Probably more like 35. Bit more air, possibly a bit more comfort.

They're relatively light, pretty much bombproof. Good in the wet.

They don't like the greasy, muddy cycle paths round by me though. Came off a few times. Running CX tyres now on the commute. Better overall on the variety of terrain.

If you're sticking to tarmac only, great choice.

ugo.santalucia

bendertherobot wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

ok planet x only have 37mm randommer pro's left...ribble have the 32mm for £18.99.

Shall I pull the trigger...

Probably. They are very good. I'd go with the wider ones. They're not really 37. Probably more like 35. Bit more air, possibly a bit more comfort.

They're relatively light, pretty much bombproof. Good in the wet.

They don't like the greasy, muddy cycle paths round by me though. Came off a few times. Running CX tyres now on the commute. Better overall on the variety of terrain.

If you're sticking to tarmac only, great choice.

I haven't tried the 37, but yes, the thread is for touring on roads... they do OK on a gravel path, but they are useless on a muddy track. The strength is extended mileage (I did over 6000 miles on a set before the red layer underneath began to show) and some serious puncture resistance, another league compared to Gatorskin or 4 Seasons

itboffin

I wonder if I should get a set for my wife 26" hybrid its still got the original tyres its had since 2007 whilst she doesn't do many miles I did back in 2007-8 when it was my daily commuter.

I guess I could always store them until needed, what's the grip like?

ugo.santalucia

itboffin wrote:

I guess I could always store them until needed, what's the grip like?

It's good... not inferior to any decent road tyre out there, probably a bit better given you can run low pressure and have a bigger footprint. I'm not very aggressive in the wet, so I can't really give you an answer in that respect

itboffin

Worth a punt I can always use them on the MTB or something ...

bendertherobot

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

ok planet x only have 37mm randommer pro's left...ribble have the 32mm for £18.99.

Shall I pull the trigger...

Probably. They are very good. I'd go with the wider ones. They're not really 37. Probably more like 35. Bit more air, possibly a bit more comfort.

They're relatively light, pretty much bombproof. Good in the wet.

They don't like the greasy, muddy cycle paths round by me though. Came off a few times. Running CX tyres now on the commute. Better overall on the variety of terrain.

If you're sticking to tarmac only, great choice.

I haven't tried the 37, but yes, the thread is for touring on roads... they do OK on a gravel path, but they are useless on a muddy track. The strength is extended mileage (I did over 6000 miles on a set before the red layer underneath began to show) and some serious puncture resistance, another league compared to Gatorskin or 4 Seasons

Muddy paths. As in tarmac. Specifically the taff trail. They weren't keen on tarmac with leaves, mud etc on top.

antonyfromoz

I am looking at getting some bigger tyres than the 28mm ones I have on my commuter bike at the moment and have been looking at the panaracer range as well as the vittorias. The new 32mm gravel kings look good to me or the
32mm ribmo but has anyone had any experience with either tyre?

ugo.santalucia

antonyfromoz wrote:

I am looking at getting some bigger tyres than the 28mm ones I have on my commuter bike at the moment and have been looking at the panaracer range as well as the vittorias. The new 32mm gravel kings look good to me or the
32mm ribmo but has anyone had any experience with either tyre?

I like Panaracer... I have a set of Pasela 32 which look enormous... very plush ride but less puncture proof than the Randonneur

antonyfromoz

ugo.santalucia wrote:

antonyfromoz wrote:

I am looking at getting some bigger tyres than the 28mm ones I have on my commuter bike at the moment and have been looking at the panaracer range as well as the vittorias. The new 32mm gravel kings look good to me or the
32mm ribmo but has anyone had any experience with either tyre?

I like Panaracer... I have a set of Pasela 32 which look enormous... very plush ride but less puncture proof than the Randonneur

Thanks Ugo, I have never used panaracer tyres before but these two looked okay - although both are more expensive than the vittorias in 32mm.

EKE_38BPM

ugo.santalucia wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

YOU service your car when you are told, people with a bit of knowledge of modern cars use their common sense. 3000 miles between services is just crazy, your garage must love you.

If I don't service the car when I am supposed to, I invalidate the manufacturer's warranty.

Fair enough, but I would question why a car only doing 3000 miles a year needs servicing so frequently. Unless you are racing it or putting it under some serious stress, 3000 miles is waaaaaaaaaaaay too frequent. If a Fiat can do 18,000 miles between services you must be driving Fernando Alonso's Ferrari F1 car.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I am being very patient with you, but you should change your attitude on this forum... take it as a good advice given free of charge

Eh?
You wrote something out of order. It was deleted (by you or someone else with THE POWER). I spotted it and commented on it and now you are being patient with me because of my attitude?

Please explain the problem (as you see it) with my attitude to me as I'm missing it.

ugo.santalucia

EKE_38BPM wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

YOU service your car when you are told, people with a bit of knowledge of modern cars use their common sense. 3000 miles between services is just crazy, your garage must love you.

If I don't service the car when I am supposed to, I invalidate the manufacturer's warranty.

Fair enough, but I would question why a car only doing 3000 miles a year needs servicing so frequently. Unless you are racing it or putting it under some serious stress, 3000 miles is waaaaaaaaaaaay too frequent. If a Fiat can do 18,000 miles between services you must be driving Fernando Alonso's Ferrari F1 car.

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I am being very patient with you, but you should change your attitude on this forum... take it as a good advice given free of charge

Eh?
You wrote something out of order. It was deleted (by you or someone else with THE POWER). I spotted it and commented on it and now you are being patient with me because of my attitude?

Please explain the problem (as you see it) with my attitude to me as I'm missing it.

EKE... it's quite simple.The warranty agreement implies I service the car at regular intervals which are 12,000 miles or 12 months, whichever comes first. I am sure if you own a car you have a similar agreement, if you are more clever and decided to ignore it, that's great for your wallet, I wouldn't go around advising others to do the same though. Whether it actually needs service is irrelevant. I have a warning light which is annoying enough for me to spend 150 quid to shut it up. All recent cars do that. No need to further comment... it is a fact.

Re. your attitude: you took a dislike because I diminished your sporting hero... I am entitled to have opinions. I deleted the comment as the thread was going the "defamation route" and didn't want to make it worse. In a different context I would have left it, I stand by what I said.
If you can't accept others opinions and you have to pick on me every time, then this forum is not the place for you. If you want to say something, say it without adding a slab of sarcasm. If you can't refrain yourself from making pointless silly comments like the one above, don't quote me or even better learn to refrain. I can tolerate being targeted a couple of times, if it becomes recurrent I will no longer tolerate it.

Most importantly, learn to live in a world of different opinions, no matter how absurd you think they are. If you think I am an idiot, ignore me

meanredspider

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

My cars don't get serviced once a year - they get serviced based upon (mostly) mileage. It's a nonsense to service a modern car once a year. I think my Fiat is on an 18,000 mile service interval.

You service the car when a light on the dashboard tells you it's time to service the car... we are in the 21st century and you no longer have the initiative... Now that I live in London I do no more than 3000 miles per year, yet the dashboard rules

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. Better for you, your wallet and the environment to be spending the service money on Dura Ace parts than chucking good engine oil away. Anyhow - the choice is yours - like it is the folks that ride expensive bikes. But you might question your own choices whilst questioning theirs.

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. .

I agree and if you have a tip on a car that doesn't require service every 12 months by the book, please advise, I might be on the market in the next year or two.

bendertherobot

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. .

I agree and if you have a tip on a car that doesn't require service every 12 months by the book, please advise, I might be on the market in the next year or two.

Alfa, naturally. If you keep the mileage low. Mine has done 15k so far. One service (which was free) and due next one January 2016.

meanredspider

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. .

I agree and if you have a tip on a car that doesn't require service every 12 months by the book, please advise, I might be on the market in the next year or two.

Fiat 500 - 18,000/2 years

I wouldn't own a car if I was only doing 3,000 miles a year - certainly not a new car: it's the equivalent of burning money. If you must, I'd lease it and buy something where the servicing is included in the price.

ugo.santalucia

bendertherobot wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. .

I agree and if you have a tip on a car that doesn't require service every 12 months by the book, please advise, I might be on the market in the next year or two.

Alfa, naturally. If you keep the mileage low. Mine has done 15k so far. One service (which was free) and due next one January 2016.

Can't afford an Alfa... not even the Mito... :oops:

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Frankly I wouldn't buy a car that needed servicing every 12 months - the car company are bending you over and shafting you. .

I agree and if you have a tip on a car that doesn't require service every 12 months by the book, please advise, I might be on the market in the next year or two.

Fiat 500 - 18,000/2 years

I wouldn't own a car if I was only doing 3,000 miles a year - certainly not a new car: it's the equivalent of burning money. If you must, I'd lease it and buy something where the servicing is included in the price.

The 500 is pretty, but how am I going to fit a couple of bikes inside it?

I think the main mistake I made last round was to go for a diesel... didn't know about the DPF at the time and it's been nothing but hassle.
Not owning a car is something we thought about and rejected. It's nice to know it's there if you wake up on a sunday morning and feel like going somewhere without having to plan ahead. We also drive abroad a couple of times per year and most rental companies won't cover for that or they do at an extortionate price (if you know otherwise, please advise).

markhewitt1978

Cars and their fluids like oil etc will degrade / leak of the course of a year regardless of if the car is driven or not. For many the once a year service is the only time a car gets looked at.

veronese68

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I think the main mistake I made last round was to go for a diesel... didn't know about the DPF at the time and it's been nothing but hassle.

I think if you're not doing big miles a diesel is definitely not worth it. But you should be able to sell a low mileage diesel fairly easily. As you say things like the DPF just don't work
I only ever buy old cars. Our Audi is 10 years old and has only done about 40,000 miles. We are only doing about 4,000 a year, mostly on the family holiday driving to Italy and back. I think I paid just over £3000 for the car and it's still worth about that. It's just a regular 2.0 petrol engine, not particularly economical or fast. But doing so few miles it really doesn't matter.
The old Mini we bought recently on the other hand is worth twice what I paid for it and will only increase in value. It costs hardly anything to run, as I work with old cars, and is a cinch to park. I actually enjoy driving it occasionally as well. Perfect town car, assuming you don't need to put a bike in it.

meanredspider

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Cars and their fluids like oil etc will degrade / leak of the course of a year regardless of if the car is driven or not. For many the once a year service is the only time a car gets looked at.

Modern lubricants don't degrade much (when not "working") and you'd certainly hope they don't leak.

Most new modern cars also shouldn't need much looking at other than checking over the tyres and fluid levels. The current driving test at least includes these "skills".

@Ugo - you'd be surprised how big the 500 is inside if you've not been in one - more practical than a Mini. A Punto is another option. You're lucky you can't afford a MiTo - I'm a confirmed Alfista (16 and counting) and I hated the MiTo with a passion. The 500 (with half the power I had in the MiTo) is a much better drive and far more fun.

bendertherobot

I love mine. 3 years, problem free, decent pace when you stick it in D mode. Tidy handling. Looks great. Oddly, drove the 500 when I bough the Mito and thought it charming but not as good to drive...................

ugo.santalucia

Veronese68 wrote:

I think if you're not doing big miles a diesel is definitely not worth it. But you should be able to sell a low mileage diesel fairly easily. As you say things like the DPF just don't work

I agree... but when I bought it I wasn't living here and was doing at least double that mileage. The diesel I had before didn't have the DPF and never gave me any problem, so I got another diesel not knowing about the stupid filter. I won't buy another diesel... not sure about getting old cars though, spares aren't cheap, especially on Audi and BMW.
My philosophy is to get the cars people don't want to buy, get them delivery mileage and get them cheap... I've always had the ugliest cars heavily discounted.

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

@Ugo - you'd be surprised how big the 500 is inside if you've not been in one - more practical than a Mini. A Punto is another option. You're lucky you can't afford a MiTo - I'm a confirmed Alfista (16 and counting) and I hated the MiTo with a passion. The 500 (with half the power I had in the MiTo) is a much better drive and far more fun.

I had a Punto... it was great, then I gave it to my sister... wanted to get another one but there was nothing with the money I had at the time.
I kind of like the new Panda, especially the 4 x 4... just need to find one that people don't want...

dhope

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I think if you're not doing big miles a diesel is definitely not worth it. But you should be able to sell a low mileage diesel fairly easily. As you say things like the DPF just don't work

I agree... but when I bought it I wasn't living here and was doing at least double that mileage. The diesel I had before didn't have the DPF and never gave me any problem, so I got another diesel not knowing about the stupid filter. I won't buy another diesel... not sure about getting old cars though, spares aren't cheap, especially on Audi and BMW.
My philosophy is to get the cars people don't want to buy, get them delivery mileage and get them cheap... I've always had the ugliest cars heavily discounted.

I think I'll be getting my father's hand-me-down 5 Series next year. Apparently it's been the cheapest car they've ever had to run (vs things like VW Estates). Slightly fearful of the potential costs...

markhewitt1978

meanredspider wrote:

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Cars and their fluids like oil etc will degrade / leak of the course of a year regardless of if the car is driven or not. For many the once a year service is the only time a car gets looked at.

Modern lubricants don't degrade much (when not "working") and you'd certainly hope they don't leak.

Most new modern cars also shouldn't need much looking at other than checking over the tyres and fluid levels. The current driving test at least includes these "skills".

Perhaps so but at least for the first three years of a cars life that service is practically the only time it gets look at. Many would be driving around with all their rear lights not working, and completely flat tyres.