New tires quicker to feather?

[supton]

Driving home tonight I thought my tires were singing a bit, so when I stopped I checked--sure enough, "lots" of feathering on the rear. And some excessive shoulder wear too it seems. Nature of the beast? Only have about 5k on the tires, so just barely rotation time. I did have it aligned a year ago (22kmiles?), so it shouldn't be out this early.

So, can tall tread feather more quickly than half worn tires, or is it basically the same? I don't think I drive it that hard, but apparently these tires think otherwise. [Prior tires that came off were same brand & type, RT43 in 195/70R14.]

 

[Rand]

sounds like your alignment is out.

 

[mk378]

It might only take one good bump to throw alignment out.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

You need shocks

 

[Nick1994]

My Camry only feathers the front tires even after an alignment at the dealer. I have RT43s too.

 

[Wolf359]

Feathering is usually the suspension. How old are the shocks/struts?

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Feathering is usually the suspension. How old are the shocks/struts?
I believe supton's struts are all new.

 

[Brolly]

I also have the RT 43 on the 1999 Camry. I can hear the feathering also but it isn’t bad. So far the wear is even I think I have 6000-7000 on this current set. My struts are 5 yrs old with new outer tie rods/lower control arms and front links and rear links just last year.

 

[MONKEYMAN]

I had them on my previous car. Keeping air pressure higher reduced feathering.

 

[CapriRacer]

There are 2 kinds of feathering - one caused by alignment, and one caused by normal rolling, especially when under torque. Unfortunately, you can't tell the difference. Plus, it's a matter of degree, not kind.

While it is common for rolling tires to develop a bit of heel and toe wear that will eventually lead to feather wear, alignment induced feather wear is usually worse.

The problem is that many vehicle manufacturer's alignment specs will develop feathering, especially if the alignment is at the edge of the tolerance. For that reason, I advocate for the alignment spec tolerances (just the tolerance, not the target value) be 50% smaller than published (with a few exceptions!)

Also, like most tire wear terms, the term *feathering* is sometimes used incorrectly. Hopefully that is not the case here.

And for the record, any abnormal wear is worse when tires are new, because the tread elements are taller and more flexible.

 

[supton]

That's what I thought, more flexible.

Struts went on, oh gee has it been that long? I guess it's been 30k & a bit more than a year now. Monroe Quickstruts, so new springs and struts and related. Alignment 22k ago, so less than a year ago--never had a car actually go out of alignment, not even with all our potholes. I thought the rear toe was excessive, but when it was less the car liked to wander quite a bit in crosswind.

Seems rear tires are feathered on outside, and fronts are a little feathered on the inside. Interestingly, the right tires seem to have a bit of outside shoulder wear, which doesn't make sense to me--if I corner hard, it's always in a right hand turn (on/off ramps).

 

[meep]

I notice general wear patterns a little more when brand new also - have always attributed to softer rubber - the taller tread block makes sense too. I'll rotate them sooner when newer if I see the wear.

-m

 

[Marconis]

That's what I thought, more flexible.

Struts went on, oh gee has it been that long? I guess it's been 30k & a bit more than a year now. Monroe Quickstruts, so new springs and struts and related. Alignment 22k ago, so less than a year ago--never had a car actually go out of alignment, not even with all our potholes. I thought the rear toe was excessive, but when it was less the car liked to wander quite a bit in crosswind.

Seems rear tires are feathered on outside, and fronts are a little feathered on the inside. Interestingly, the right tires seem to have a bit of outside shoulder wear, which doesn't make sense to me--if I corner hard, it's always in a right hand turn (on/off ramps).

How did this situation wind up for you? Did the feathering wind up balancing out with rotations? Have the same tires on an AWD and my fronts are wearing down faster than rear, which I believe is expected.

I know this thread is old, but I’m noticing feathering (heel toe, front edge of tread is raised and sharp while rear edge is sloped downward) on my 3,000 mile Altimax RT43 fronts. Alignment was good on the rack, not sure if my toe is changing when driving. Vehicle has 34,000 miles.

 

[supton]

To be honest I did not keep good notes here. My notes indicate that I rotated every 5k and then replaced after 29k. I do not recall thinking they were chopped and loud, but it's been 2 years since replacing.

Looking at that I *am* surprised I only got 29k out of them, usually I get more. I must have written them off and on the next set made sure to get an alignment at the same time. Looks like after 20k I measured 5/32's on outer/mid tread area, with 7 on the inside tread, so I could see that being 4/32's at 29k. [I don't always measure tires and record, I really should do that at each rotation.]

 

[Marconis]

To be honest I did not keep good notes here. My notes indicate that I rotated every 5k and then replaced after 29k. I do not recall thinking they were chopped and loud, but it's been 2 years since replacing.

Looking at that I *am* surprised I only got 29k out of them, usually I get more. I must have written them off and on the next set made sure to get an alignment at the same time. Looks like after 20k I measured 5/32's on outer/mid tread area, with 7 on the inside tread, so I could see that being 4/32's at 29k. [I don't always measure tires and record, I really should do that at each rotation.]

Thanks for the reply!

I plan on rotating every 5,000 (always have no matter the vehicle). When I go in I'll have them put it up on the rack and get some alignment measurements to see if anything is out of whack again. I just had an alignment when I got these new tires, so it leads me to suspect that something may be amiss with my suspension -- despite them finding nothing wrong when I paid for a front end suspension diagnosis for a separate issue. Or it's just the tire, driving style (my wife has driven it quite a bit recently), or inflation pressures. Here's a shot for reference, taken from the front right of the vehicle, looking towards the rear. Not sure if your feathering was similar, but you can see the front edge of the tread is raised higher than the rears (less pronounced in person). One of the VAI sipes is scrubbed away on the outer edge, while all of the others look essentially the same side to side.

 

[CapriRacer]

Honestly, this latest one looks like alignment to me.

First, as a general rule, the published alignment tolerances are too wide - by half. In order to get good tire wear, the parameters have to be within the inner half of the spec range.

Second, any camber over 1° is problematic.

Many alignment techs think they don't need to look at anything but toe. Kind of a "Toe and Go!" approach. Especially if the factory didn't provide adjustability into the suspension. They are wrong!

It may take a camber plate or an eccentric bolt (Extra cost!!) to get it right and many alignment shops don't like to tell customers it may cost them more (understandable), but to have a vehicle leave an alignment shop out of spec is just not completing the job!

 

[Marconis]

Honestly, this latest one looks like alignment to me.

First, as a general rule, the published alignment tolerances are too wide - by half. In order to get good tire wear, the parameters have to be within the inner half of the spec range.

Second, any camber over 1° is problematic.

Many alignment techs think they don't need to look at anything but toe. Kind of a "Toe and Go!" approach. Especially if the factory didn't provide adjustability into the suspension. They are wrong!

It may take a camber plate or an eccentric bolt (Extra cost!!) to get it right and many alignment shops don't like to tell customers it may cost them more (understandable), but to have a vehicle leave an alignment shop out of spec is just not completing the job!

Thanks for the reply, Capri. These are my alignment specs below when I got the new tires. The wheel in question (right wheel) has -.9* camber, and .08 of toe-in. Maybe the toe-in is the issue? The negative camber would show the wear on the inside edge. Also wondering if their machine simply isn't calibrated, or something is not staying tight when I'm actually driving. That, or the tire is out of whack or balance?

Does anything about my specs and/or tire wear at 3,000 miles look "extreme" to you?

 

[CapriRacer]

Thanks for the reply, Capri. These are my alignment specs below when I got the new tires. The wheel in question (right wheel) has -.9* camber, and .08 of toe-in. Maybe the toe-in is the issue? The negative camber would show the wear on the inside edge. Also wondering if their machine simply isn't calibrated, or something is not staying tight when I'm actually driving. That, or the tire is out of whack or balance?

Does anything about my specs and/or tire wear at 3,000 miles look "extreme" to you?
[[Photo deleted for space reasons]]

So they didn't measure the caster, nor did they look at the rear - especially thrust angle! I don't think we have enough of a picture to say things are good.

But what I see here doesn't say that anything is bad. Everything is within the inner half of the range. Barely so, but within.

 

[Marconis]

So they didn't measure the caster, nor did they look at the rear - especially thrust angle! I don't think we have enough of a picture to say things are good.

But what I see here doesn't say that anything is bad. Everything is within the inner half of the range. Barely so, but within.

They definitely did the rear (I watched them), I just didn't post that. That's attached below. The rear right toe the guy was working on for a long time, and it seems that's as far as he was able to get it. I didn't ask at the time why, because I had my toddler with me and just wanted to go, but the vehicle was in a rear end collision prior to my purchase so my assumption is something is bent on that side, or he did his best to get the total toe on-center. The vehicle tracks straight, and my rears don't seem to have any uneven wear at this time. Fully aware the rear should be better.

Oh, and more interestingly, the left front tire seems to show this wear pattern on the inside edge; front right here shows it on the outside.

 

[CapriRacer]

They definitely did the rear (I watched them), I just didn't post that. That's attached below. The rear right toe the guy was working on for a long time, and it seems that's as far as he was able to get it. I didn't ask at the time why, because I had my toddler with me and just wanted to go, but the vehicle was in a rear end collision prior to my purchase so my assumption is something is bent on that side, or he did his best to get the total toe on-center. The vehicle tracks straight, and my rears don't seem to have any uneven wear at this time. Fully aware the rear should be better.

Oh, and more interestingly, the left front tire seems to show this wear pattern on the inside edge; front right here shows it on the outside.

OK, let's see if we can make sense of this.

First, I am going to assume that if they were to measure the alignment today, they would get the same thing.

Second, the left rear has the worst alignment settings. It's still "In Spec" but it is not within the inner half of the range.

But what that LR toe is going to do is force the rear of the car to track to the right - balance the rear toe out. That will force the driver to steer to the right, uncambering the RF, and getting more camber on the LF - AND - getting more toe on the RF, and less on the LF. The cross camber should result in a pull to the left - so that would counter act the rear.

So the vehicle would track straight, but the front tires aren't pointed straight ahead, so they would slightly grind off the tread rubber - outside shoulder on the right, inside shoulder on the left.

- BUT -

All this assumes that it's currently like this. I'll bet it is not.