Tyre valves

valve stem seriously damaged section 5.23 (j) in testing guide

Most probably some one trying to put air into the tyre

I just thought we might have a professional discussion about it as some testers think the valve stem deteriorates and some think damage is the wrong interpretation. 

I think you are aware that there is no RFR for deteriorated.

It's damaged or misaligned (correct me if I'm wrong). So if you see a valve stem that is clearly un-serviceable and likely to fail then put it down as damaged. Is anyone really going to challenge that interpretation?

Or ignore it if you like, and when it fails with catastrophic consequences you can argue your point until your heart's content. Good luck with that then.

We all know the Manual is STILL lacking in accuracies, but, it appears, there's fcuk-all that can be done about it. So take from it what you will and stand or fall by your own sensible interpretations and decisions.

That point i will disagree with. Most rubber products supplied 17 years ago would last a lot longer than the same item supplied 17 months ago. The ingredients used have changed and i get fed up with changing such as CV gaiters that only last months where the original lasted 10 to 15 years.

Yes but a split CV gaitor would not become an immediate road safety issue. We see split gaitors all the time. A seriously damaged tyre valve stem that could cause rapid deflation at speed on the roads could cause serious stability problems in the wrong road conditions and as such end up in road accidents and or deaths.

Tyre valve stems today do split which is damage but deterioration would be something else. I have other vehicles that have been stood over the last five years or so. Should I take a photo and see what they are like?

Ford (you may have come across this) on some of their valve stems insert a brass tube. They have a genuine good reason for that, and I doubt you'd find a damaged valve stem in that design.