Tyre Load Index

[RS2000]

Came out to my 2008 Roomster 3 1.9 tdi the other morning and noticed this scary crack in the sidewall of front tyre.

Not the newest of tyres and near to life end anyhow (had already been pricing up replacements), but it was an 83 load index rated tyre and not the 87 it should have been.

I can only assume they were not a high enough load rating for the diesel Roomy, hence causing such a failure.

They were the tyres that were on the car when I got it second hand - so beware all, it will be worth checking your tyres just in case 

 

https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-iymvR8X6De_6rtI7g2iFaOIf8LvaUHnNNLRZvr6U-o?feat=directlink

 

[the_raz]

I am not entirely sure that load index 83 is not sufficient for a Roomster. If the tires are old it is also possible that the tire has been scratched at some point, and just not failed immediately.

Sent from my RM-875_eu_finland_208 using Tapatalk

[RS2000]

Perhaps I should have mentioned that my tyres are the 205/45x16 and the OEM shows these should be 87 load rating, whereas the ones fitted on my car were that size but in the 83 load rating

 

As the 83's will have a 'weaker' sidewall than the 87's it's safe to assume that in time they are more likely to suffer a sidewall failure, hence my post to raise awareness

 

Thanks

[grafitti]

Yes I believe the 15 inch wheels can cope with either 83 or 85 rated tyres, the 16 inch ones use 87. Or so says the person i spoke to at camskill, since I asked about it when ordering my new Rainsport 3's today.

[Jeeves]

LI 83 supports a maximum axle capacity in excess of 970kg whereas LI 87 goes up to 1090kg. I can't imagine that a Roomster has either max axle capacities at these levels, but worth checking the plate on your car. It's often found on the B pillar.

These are design capacities and not indicative of the actual weight on each axle. You wouldn't normally load a vehicle to these capacities but it's not impossible (and more easily done with a pickup truck).

More likely to be misuse or a rogue tyre. Underinflation (and run on) now I've seen the picture.

Edited 26 April, 2014 by Jeeves

[RS2000]

Bear in mind it is not just about how much weight there is, it is also about load, for example when cornering, braking etc.

 

I for one shall be sticking to what Skoda says the tyres should be.

 

I also wouldn't want an insurance company being able to get away with not paying out due to having "modifications from standard" that I hadn't previously declared

 

 

[Jeeves]

Can't disagree. Fortunately I have a very understanding insurer who doesn't charge for amendments.

I think there's far more risk from abuse by a former owner than of a manufacturing defect and I wouldn't put it down to the lower LI. It just makes it less tolerant to abuse.