Maybe I'm missing something but unless there is a mechanical issue like alignment, bent suspension part, over/under inflation, there shouldn't be any uneven tire wear. If fronts wear twice as fast as rears, why not just replace the fronts twice as often as the rear and skip all the needless rotations. If you have a tire(s) with uneven wear, address the root cause of the problem instead of trying to mask it by rotating.
Minimum tire rotation internal, why not (expected mileage life)/4?
- Thread starter kehyler
- Start date
How do you convert a FWD car into a RWD car so as to fix the issue?
Have you done the math out on replacing just pairs of tires at a time? I recall doing so, and IIRC it didn't matter over 200k. I should try spending my morning on figuring that math out again.
Edit: took too long to think about it. My tire buying is buying a new set every 40k, that is when I hit 4/32's and it's time to move on. FWD cars and about 2x faster wear on the front. A set of rears would last 60k and fronts would last 30k if I did no rotations (assuming linear wear, which isn't 100% true, but close enough).
If I bought a new set for the fronts after 15k (half worn) and rotated to the rear, I would be buying a pair every 15k. Versus a set of 4 every 40k. At the 120k mark I would be just buying my third quad set (so a total of 12 tires) versus my 8th pair (so a total of 16 tires).
That's an extra 4 tires every 120k (or 2 if I sold the car at 120k with dead tires I guess).
Last edited:
You'd also be inviting overseer and spin-outs with new ties in front and old tires in the rear.
Regular rotations keep tires in near equal condition front vs back, so vehicle handling is predictable and as-designed.
I see what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree fully: I mean, yes, if I put tires with 11/32's on the front and 6/32's on the rear, the rear has less grip in wet. Problem is, is it that much worse than if I have 6/32's on all four corners? and if so--why the heck am I driving that hard in the first place?
Most FWD's understeer. Actually I think most cars in general understeer? Half worn on the rear might eek it towards neutral for all I know. Not sure if that is a good thing or not. I get it: the car has different grip front to rear than what it was designed, but I'm just not sure that it matters that much.
Not that it matters, not for me anyhow, I'd rather rotate and save on tire costs.
My understanding is that most vehicles are set up to understeer because it’s “safer” for the average driver, even RWD vehicles. At least with RWD you can give it some gas, a little counter steer, and not drive off straight off the road.
Ford charges $39 for a basic oil change, and $49 for Works Service (Includes brake/tire measurements and rotation).
Every 5k I get one service, the next service i get the other service.
I have a two dollar tire tread guage to guide me if I need a rotation. They are usually spot on and worn pretty darn evenly.
So basically every 10,000 miles someone is taking the wheel off and looking at the breaks and the safety items.
Every 5k I get one service, the next service i get the other service.
I have a two dollar tire tread guage to guide me if I need a rotation. They are usually spot on and worn pretty darn evenly.
So basically every 10,000 miles someone is taking the wheel off and looking at the breaks and the safety items.
