I hear you. Videos are misleading in the sense the skillfull driving and smooth application of steering and brakes is what make the car remain under control. Stab the brakes and jerk the wheel is the technique the "testers" will likely employ, because they are testing to support a conclusin, not the other way around....bad science. To do it right, the difference in tread, difference in quality and AGE of the pairs of tires needs to be as great as possible, like on my MiL's minivan. Only 2/32" is legal in PA, so that on front in a 5 year old Generic tire vs a nice new AA traction all-season with skilled driver who SUPPORTS the new-in-front policy, a fair weat fast slalom test and oh, wet braking at +33f. Lol, I'm sure all the weight thrown forward on Mil's dry rotted Firestones will excell.
Shot down at tire shop due to dumb rules
- Thread starter Audi Junkie
- Start date
- Status
I am performance driving instructor and these "official positions" are simply liability CYAs.
What's missing here is that driving requires weight transfer between front rear. Most road cars are understeer from the factory stock, including most high performance cars. If the 80/20 rule of braking front to rear applies and handling is skewed to understeer, having better tires in the front is more stable under changing speeds and directions.
If you are going in straight line or a constant radius turn, the Michelin video is correct, but the real world is not like that.
The trade off here is that car with the new fronts has to go slower into the corner than the other, but I guarantee you that it will have much more grip under braking. Handling is a balance, you need to offset the front/rear traction with the appropriate speed and weight load on each tire.
The Canadian video is dead on - there is no substitute for grippy snow tires all around in snow or lots of water. In snowy weather, there is usually limited choice, but to go with 4 good snows tires or you have to go a lot slower.
Something I have noticed here in the NE USA and Canada, is that when the conditions get bad - the locals usually drive the speed to the conditions - regardless of tires, AWD, etc. It makes sense. When some of our neighbors from warmer areas are visiting, they go the same speed, but have white knuckles and ghost faces when they arrive. Seems like common sense.
What's missing here is that driving requires weight transfer between front rear. Most road cars are understeer from the factory stock, including most high performance cars. If the 80/20 rule of braking front to rear applies and handling is skewed to understeer, having better tires in the front is more stable under changing speeds and directions.
If you are going in straight line or a constant radius turn, the Michelin video is correct, but the real world is not like that.
The trade off here is that car with the new fronts has to go slower into the corner than the other, but I guarantee you that it will have much more grip under braking. Handling is a balance, you need to offset the front/rear traction with the appropriate speed and weight load on each tire.
The Canadian video is dead on - there is no substitute for grippy snow tires all around in snow or lots of water. In snowy weather, there is usually limited choice, but to go with 4 good snows tires or you have to go a lot slower.
Something I have noticed here in the NE USA and Canada, is that when the conditions get bad - the locals usually drive the speed to the conditions - regardless of tires, AWD, etc. It makes sense. When some of our neighbors from warmer areas are visiting, they go the same speed, but have white knuckles and ghost faces when they arrive. Seems like common sense.
This is the only time snap oversteer happened to me, and I drove RWD vehicles for the first four or five winters after turning 16:
My Old Post On This Topic
She has four studded BFG Winter Slaloms now, and the Motomasters stay on the back in summer.
My Old Post On This Topic
She has four studded BFG Winter Slaloms now, and the Motomasters stay on the back in summer.
I always buy my tires in sets of 4 and keep the rotated regularly to keep the wear even between the 4 tires. I always use winter tires in the winter also. I experienced a spin out once several years ago due to new tires in the front and over 1/2 worn tires in the rear on a snowy curve. I wasn't driving very fast but once the rear end started coming around there was nothing I could do. The rear tires had much less traction that the fronts in the wet snow and my greater ability to accelerate and brake due to the good tires on the front of my fwd vehicle gave me too much confidence. It has been about 15 years since that happened and I haven't had mismatched tires since and I've never spun out since. Now my rear only comes out when I want it to.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I decided I wanted my Eagles mounted up since it will be snowing later today. Naturally I wanted them in the front and my slightly worn ASX in the rear. They are also wider and lower by 10mm and half-series profile. Basicly running 215/55-16 when oem is 205/60-15. Difference in overall dia is negligible.
Anyway, my buddies at WalMart would not do it now, "policy". PepBoys wanted $23/tires and balked at the plus zero size. I can go to a place tomorrow, but wanted them now and they turned me away. That's just insane. The could advise and suggest all they want, but to literally turn someone out into the cold, puts me in peril far more than putting my dam new tires where I want them.
It's now industry standard, that bull about new tires in rear. They cite the oversteer/hydroplane thing. No way will better tires in rear stop strait as short nor will I have control, even moreso I won't even be able to get moving!
It's just irritating and wrong.
I have PLUS ZERO on the CR-V, and I find that I have to remove the wheels and just bring the wheels to have the tires mounted and balanced. This way there are no questions.
I decided I wanted my Eagles mounted up since it will be snowing later today. Naturally I wanted them in the front and my slightly worn ASX in the rear. They are also wider and lower by 10mm and half-series profile. Basicly running 215/55-16 when oem is 205/60-15. Difference in overall dia is negligible.
Anyway, my buddies at WalMart would not do it now, "policy". PepBoys wanted $23/tires and balked at the plus zero size. I can go to a place tomorrow, but wanted them now and they turned me away. That's just insane. The could advise and suggest all they want, but to literally turn someone out into the cold, puts me in peril far more than putting my dam new tires where I want them.
It's now industry standard, that bull about new tires in rear. They cite the oversteer/hydroplane thing. No way will better tires in rear stop strait as short nor will I have control, even moreso I won't even be able to get moving!
It's just irritating and wrong.
I have PLUS ZERO on the CR-V, and I find that I have to remove the wheels and just bring the wheels to have the tires mounted and balanced. This way there are no questions.
This experience made me get 2 spare rims to facilitate cary-in service for the Accord. 6 rims for a FWD car is ideal. Our CRV we have 3 full sets of 15"s.
Plus Zero on '04 means 15" or 16"? I'm familliar with the 15" fitment on the Gen 1 CRV. 205/70-15 is stock. Too tiny. Good for mpg or initial oem cost or whatever. I use 215/70-15s in all-seasons and snows, the Blizzaks we just got. I also broke down and got Falken 912 on special in sporty 215/65-15 since that was the only size/price/model that made it worthwhile to buy an extra set alomst a year in advance. Total for 4 was $140 shipped. Yeah, I'm crazy. I could see Plus Zero opn the 16" too, what is that 235/60-16?
Again, let me know if you every want to sell that 5-sp CRV.
Plus Zero on '04 means 15" or 16"? I'm familliar with the 15" fitment on the Gen 1 CRV. 205/70-15 is stock. Too tiny. Good for mpg or initial oem cost or whatever. I use 215/70-15s in all-seasons and snows, the Blizzaks we just got. I also broke down and got Falken 912 on special in sporty 215/65-15 since that was the only size/price/model that made it worthwhile to buy an extra set alomst a year in advance. Total for 4 was $140 shipped. Yeah, I'm crazy. I could see Plus Zero opn the 16" too, what is that 235/60-16?
Again, let me know if you every want to sell that 5-sp CRV.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Plus Zero on '04 means 15" or 16"?
The 05 comes with 16" rims to accomodate larger brakes. The stock tire is 215/65-16, I had a choice of upgrading to 225/60-16 or 235/60-16. I went with 225/60-16.
Plus Zero on '04 means 15" or 16"?
The 05 comes with 16" rims to accomodate larger brakes. The stock tire is 215/65-16, I had a choice of upgrading to 225/60-16 or 235/60-16. I went with 225/60-16.
Exactly, plus zero means the rim is the same diameter, but the width of the tire is greater.
Firestone never questioned my request for 31" tires on the Explorer. Stock was P235/75R15, I had 31x10.50s put on. That is a 2" difference in overall diameter. They put the tires on no problem, but did warn me that the speedo might be off. I tested the speedometer and odometer against a hand held GPS unit and they were just about spot on.
I don't get the tire-Nazi thing that some shops are doing. I always recommend the correct tire, but obviously it's up to the customer to make that decision. If I document that fact clearly on the repair order it basically covers my own tail.
Originally Posted By: Ringe
I don't get the tire-Nazi thing that some shops are doing. I always recommend the correct tire, but obviously it's up to the customer to make that decision. If I document that fact clearly on the repair order it basically covers my own tail.
They just want to cover their butts. They don't want to have people taking them to court over tire related accidents or problems.
Honestly, I am amazed that Firestone was all gung ho for putting the 31s on my Explorer. I was expecting them to put up a fight, but they were all for it.
I don't get the tire-Nazi thing that some shops are doing. I always recommend the correct tire, but obviously it's up to the customer to make that decision. If I document that fact clearly on the repair order it basically covers my own tail.
They just want to cover their butts. They don't want to have people taking them to court over tire related accidents or problems.
Honestly, I am amazed that Firestone was all gung ho for putting the 31s on my Explorer. I was expecting them to put up a fight, but they were all for it.
lol@"Tire Nazi"
here's another interesting tidbit from tirerack.com....just for you Audi Junkie
"In case there is any doubt, when tires are replaced in pairs, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front.
Most vehicles are equipped with the same size tire at every wheel position. Ideally all of these tires should also be of the same type and design, have the same tread depth and be inflated to the pressures specified by the vehicle placard or owner's manual. This combination best retains the handling balance engineered into the vehicle by its manufacturer.
However due to the front tires' responsibility for transmitting acceleration, steering and most of the braking forces on front-wheel-drive vehicles, it's normal for front tires to wear faster than rear tires. If the tires aren't rotated on a regular basis, it's also common for pairs of tires to wear out rather than sets. And if the tires aren't rotated at all, it's likely that the rear tires will still have about 1/2 of their original tread depth when the front tires are completely worn out.
Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and because there is still about half-tread remaining on the rear tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will provide more traction, and by the time the front tires have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it can be downright dangerous.
When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads because new, deeper treaded tires are more capable of resisting hydroplaning.
Hydroplaning occurs when the tire cannot process enough water through its tread design to maintain effective contact with the road. In moderate to heavy rain, water can pool up in road ruts, depressions and pockets adjacent to pavement expansion joints. At higher speeds, the standing water often found in these pools challenge a tire's ability to resist hydroplaning.
Exactly when hydroplaning occurs is the result of a combination of elements including water depth, vehicle weight and speed, as well as tire size, air pressure, tread design and tread depth. A lightweight vehicle with wide, worn, underinflated tires will hydroplane at lower speeds in a heavy downpour than a heavyweight vehicle equipped with new, narrow, properly inflated tires in drizzling rain.
If the rear tires have more tread depth than the front tires, the front tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the rears. This will cause the vehicle to begin to understeer (the vehicle wants to continue driving straight ahead). Understeer is relatively easy to control because releasing the gas pedal will slow the vehicle and help the driver maintain control.
However, if the front tires have more tread depth than the rear tires, the rear tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the fronts. This will cause the vehicle to begin to oversteer in which the vehicle wants to spin. Oversteer is far more difficult to control, and in addition to the initial distress felt when the rear of the car starts sliding, quickly releasing the gas pedal in an attempt to slow down may actually make it more difficult for the driver to regain control, possibly causing a complete spinout.
Members of The Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires of different tread depths - one vehicle with new tires on the rear and half-worn tires on the front, and the other with the new tires in the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the rear, and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising oversteer with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.
And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front. Michelin advises us that almost everyone spins out at least once!
Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!
In case there is any doubt, when tires are replaced in pairs, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front.
"In case there is any doubt, when tires are replaced in pairs, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front.
Most vehicles are equipped with the same size tire at every wheel position. Ideally all of these tires should also be of the same type and design, have the same tread depth and be inflated to the pressures specified by the vehicle placard or owner's manual. This combination best retains the handling balance engineered into the vehicle by its manufacturer.
However due to the front tires' responsibility for transmitting acceleration, steering and most of the braking forces on front-wheel-drive vehicles, it's normal for front tires to wear faster than rear tires. If the tires aren't rotated on a regular basis, it's also common for pairs of tires to wear out rather than sets. And if the tires aren't rotated at all, it's likely that the rear tires will still have about 1/2 of their original tread depth when the front tires are completely worn out.
Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and because there is still about half-tread remaining on the rear tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will provide more traction, and by the time the front tires have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it can be downright dangerous.
When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads because new, deeper treaded tires are more capable of resisting hydroplaning.
Hydroplaning occurs when the tire cannot process enough water through its tread design to maintain effective contact with the road. In moderate to heavy rain, water can pool up in road ruts, depressions and pockets adjacent to pavement expansion joints. At higher speeds, the standing water often found in these pools challenge a tire's ability to resist hydroplaning.
Exactly when hydroplaning occurs is the result of a combination of elements including water depth, vehicle weight and speed, as well as tire size, air pressure, tread design and tread depth. A lightweight vehicle with wide, worn, underinflated tires will hydroplane at lower speeds in a heavy downpour than a heavyweight vehicle equipped with new, narrow, properly inflated tires in drizzling rain.
If the rear tires have more tread depth than the front tires, the front tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the rears. This will cause the vehicle to begin to understeer (the vehicle wants to continue driving straight ahead). Understeer is relatively easy to control because releasing the gas pedal will slow the vehicle and help the driver maintain control.
However, if the front tires have more tread depth than the rear tires, the rear tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the fronts. This will cause the vehicle to begin to oversteer in which the vehicle wants to spin. Oversteer is far more difficult to control, and in addition to the initial distress felt when the rear of the car starts sliding, quickly releasing the gas pedal in an attempt to slow down may actually make it more difficult for the driver to regain control, possibly causing a complete spinout.
Members of The Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires of different tread depths - one vehicle with new tires on the rear and half-worn tires on the front, and the other with the new tires in the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the rear, and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising oversteer with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.
And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front. Michelin advises us that almost everyone spins out at least once!
Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!
In case there is any doubt, when tires are replaced in pairs, the new tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the worn tires moved to the front.
Bzzt.
I had two tires put on my Dodge at Costco last month. They insisted in putting them on the back. 3 weeks later I take my car in for an oil change. They rotated the tires front to back as they always have. So now the much newer tires are on the front! At the next 5,000 mile oil change I suppose the new tires will be on the back again.
Did I mention that half of the techs came out and told me their rule was dumb and wrong and they were sorry?
That's why I always put the wheels in back of the truck and take them for a ride to the tire store. I tell them I want this and that and OBTW, don't forget the other thing. No questions asked.
I had a very unpleasant experience today.
Driving home on light packed snow over ice, I was going too fast on the big sweeper turns. Just as I was just thinking: if this is frozen, I'm going too fast, I was, and the rear stepped out about a 1/2 foot at 70mph. This is just as 2 cars were on-coming on the inside of a left sweeper. I had to wait for them to pass to deal with the oversteer, as my correction (or over-correction) would shoot me over the yellow line. I had to keep or let the wheels continue to slide in order to kill some time as the other cars went past me and maybe bleed off some speed.
Then I did my "half-correction", not steering entirely into the skid only half-way, so my counter swing was not so great. It worked, but BARELY. The trick is to only partly correct at first, then commit more exactly as the tires start to bite down and the car is looking for it's new direction. The manouver "eats" up a bunch of momentum and sends the car back strait when done right. However, I still pivoted back and forth about 4 times like a pendulm. Disaster averted. Would have the new tires on rear mattered? Yes, it would have more stable in a sense, not getting to the situation I was in because I would have had to baby it at 10 mph to just go down the road. My rears were about 1/2 tread Kumho ASX and fronts new Eagle ResponseEdge. The lesson is more to slow down and not run low tread tires at all in the winter. I have new mounted snows and will probally use them soon.
Driving home on light packed snow over ice, I was going too fast on the big sweeper turns. Just as I was just thinking: if this is frozen, I'm going too fast, I was, and the rear stepped out about a 1/2 foot at 70mph. This is just as 2 cars were on-coming on the inside of a left sweeper. I had to wait for them to pass to deal with the oversteer, as my correction (or over-correction) would shoot me over the yellow line. I had to keep or let the wheels continue to slide in order to kill some time as the other cars went past me and maybe bleed off some speed.
Then I did my "half-correction", not steering entirely into the skid only half-way, so my counter swing was not so great. It worked, but BARELY. The trick is to only partly correct at first, then commit more exactly as the tires start to bite down and the car is looking for it's new direction. The manouver "eats" up a bunch of momentum and sends the car back strait when done right. However, I still pivoted back and forth about 4 times like a pendulm. Disaster averted. Would have the new tires on rear mattered? Yes, it would have more stable in a sense, not getting to the situation I was in because I would have had to baby it at 10 mph to just go down the road. My rears were about 1/2 tread Kumho ASX and fronts new Eagle ResponseEdge. The lesson is more to slow down and not run low tread tires at all in the winter. I have new mounted snows and will probally use them soon.
- Status
