Shot down at tire shop due to dumb rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
All of the above, but I would not assume "stupidity" as being the same as a missjudgment or error, as I have admitted to. The post is not about my driving skill, or lack or it (which actually seems to offset nicely) it's about the consequence of tire tread distribution. Instead of the 70f/30r like I have claimed is best, maybe 60f/40r is better....definately not the reverse.
 
Originally Posted By: mpvue
anyone that uses costco and walmart for tires;
06.gif
? why use a GROCERY STORE for your tires?!? buy tires from a TIRE STORE. as for the whole low cost/good deal pinkydinky, well, you get what you pay for. for me, my local tire guy (10th st tire in Easton, PA) is local, fast, has great prices (low overhead, only 2 employees)last time he was CHEAPER than tire rack, and I don't deal w/ any of that 'liability issues' dingus. but I don't buy roasted chickens from him either (THAT'S what sam's club is for).
.....very true.....
 
Please reply if Wal-Mart mounts your carry-in tires. One store manager says it's against company policy to mount any used tires, while another store regularly mounts my winter tires.
 
the Walmarts near me will mount them....but they no longer carry road-hazard on tires....sucks, why buy from walmart then!
 
All you have to do is go to the Michelin site and they also have a video explaining why new tires need to be on the rear. Understeer vs. Oversteer.

Oh, if the video was from Michelin, I apologize. The link is no longer good.
 
Does the video compare strait line braking in snow or wet? How about slalom course or accident avoidance? It's almost like people are not reading the whole thread. Driving had and fast on a wet curve UNTIL the vehicle lets loose is the the end-all example of how tires work in every days use. Remember, weight transfers forward, making something like 80% of the braking force through them and the fronts do all the directional changes too. It just boggles the mind how a tire set-up that leaves the drive stuck in snow, longer wet stopping and reduced directional control is "better". What about blow-outs too? Old rotted tires with low tread to protect from road debris....yeah....DEFINATELY on the front is where you want a blow out. I can't believe I have to type this stuff for like the 3rd time in this thread. Can people address those points instead of linking again to the dumb Michelin video that every mush-brain on the web is accepting as fact?
 
Quote:
Does the video compare strait line braking in snow or wet?

If the tread difference between the front and rear makes any appreciable difference in stopping distance, then one pair belongs in the trash.
Quote:
How about slalom course or accident avoidance?

Just using those two terms in the same sentence tells me you are probably eliciting more accident avoidance from slaloming in traffic than the typical prudent driver.
Quote:
weight transfers forward

Right. That's why you want the rears to have the tread advantage "if" you choose to compromise your vehicle's handling in that manner.
Quote:
fronts do all the directional changes

Wrong. Not when the rears let loose, they don't.
Quote:
Old rotted tires with low tread to protect..

Again, they belong in the trash, not on the car. Go ahead and type it for the fourth time if you like, but your reasoning is just not making sense. How many people have to disagree with you before you realize that?
 
If I may offer some advice to folks who are trying to convince AJ that he is wrong about where to put new tires.

First, there is enough information in this thread. Reiterating it doesn't help.

Second, it is apparent that AJ has "dug in his heels". Hammering on him isn't going to convince him.

I have found that the best tactic in these situations is to give a guy some breathing room and let him make up his own mind. Either he will come around - or he won't!
 
lol @ "come around".

Answers that avoid the question are lame and distracting.

Of course new tires all around work better, that's not the premise.

If my Mother-in-Law can't afford 4 new tires for her minivan, should she just stay home and bag it? Should she throw away her 2 half-good tires? Use the new ones on the rear, so she is stuck in snow, has no wet braking, increased hydroplaning, blow-out protection and reduced ability to change the vehicle direction?

Come on Capri, you're a good poster. You are skirting the subject too. How about you address just the single issue of blow-outs on front vs rear? We can tear apart my assertions one at a time, I don't mind, but to dismiss them as not worthy of direct answers makes no sense.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
How about you address just the single issue of blow-outs on front vs rear?


I know you weren't addressing me, but a blow-out in the rear is certainly more dangerous than a blow-out in the front. Therefore, I'd say one should have the tire that is less likely to blow out in the rear.

As for the where-to-put-the-new-tires debate, I have changed my position after many years of putting the new tires on the front. However, I have to add that my quattro only allows a tire circumference difference of 3%, so the issue is pretty much a non-issue, especially since I throw out tires with less than 1/4 inch tread. I buy four new tires and rotate them back and forward, always with only a marginal difference in tread depth.

But yeah, I'm sure this thread can be debated for many more pages. And then again next year.
wink.gif
 
Blowout on rear is more dangerous??? Isn't that maybe more of a SUV thing? I think we still have to attribute somthing to driver skill. I can't imagine blowout on front to be "better". Maybe it's me?

I'm sort of remembering something from older owner's manuals calling from better tires up front....maybe Mori could reference his manual for us?

Maybe we could say that the two approaches have various pluses and minuses. With the good ones on front, you have a series of scenarios where it's a benfit from the moment you begin moving the vehicle in snow, smoother and more responsive driving the whole time, the continual safety of blow-out protection and better (strait) stopping in wet/hydroplaning resistance as well as more control turning. Now on the other hand, you have a single instant where rear control might be compramised with lowered tread tires in rear, the "curve of death" where the driver is plainly exceeding responsible driving.

I guess it's up to the driver to choose....no wait...I'm not ~allowed~ to choose how I can mount my tires.
 
AJ, a blowout in the rear is more dangerous because it's more probable that fishtailing will occur. I've had a front tire blow out at over 200 km/h, and while it was a very noisy event, (running on the rim with the tire spinning on the rim and getting shredded) I didn't get close to losing control. I've had a rear tire grenade on my Buick wagon going 60 or so and it wasn't much fun and could have easily ended badly. I also had a rear tire lose all pressure in my A4 quattro, and if it hadn't been for the atrocious rumbling, I wouldn't have noticed it as long as the tire didn't fall off! (I believe all quattros should have a tire pressure monitoring system because of this).

My '89 Scirocco's manual said to always put the tires with more tread on the front (in case of a FWD car). Back then the recommendation was to put the tires that had more tread left on the powered axle.

Quote from my '96 Audi quattro manual:

Quote:
If the front tires are more worn than the rear tires, then you must rotate the front tires with the rear tires as shown in the illustration. By doing this, all tires will have approximately the same service life


Audi says this because the tire circumference on a quattro must be within 3% of all other tires to prevent excessive wear in the Torsen differential. I don't think that 3% more or less tread make a big difference in traction, unless the tires are nearing their end of life, so I don't think the whole issue applies to a quattro or other AWD car (as long as the tires are all reasonably new).

I asked my German dealer last year about the tread issue. He said opinions were split, but the newer recommendation was to mount the tires with more tread on the rear. Th dealership does that, and it is in line with what the TÜV and DEKRA recommend.

Michelin in Germany elaborated by saying that the predictability by how the car will behave is not changed when tires with more tread are mounted in the rear. Contrary to that, loss of control in the rear with increased traction due to considerably more tread on the front wheels leads to unpredictable and probably unrecoverable behavior of the car. They also said that more tread on the rear tires means that the car will remain more stable ("track better") when braking in curves.
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman

I asked my German dealer last year about the tread issue. He said opinions were split, but the newer recommendation was to mount the tires with more tread on the rear. Th dealership does that, and it is in line with what the TÜV and DEKRA recommend.

Michelin in Germany elaborated by saying that the predictability by how the car will behave is not changed when tires with more tread are mounted in the rear. Contrary to that, loss of control in the rear with increased traction due to considerably more tread on the front wheels leads to unpredictable and probably unrecoverable behavior of the car. They also said that more tread on the rear tires means that the car will remain more stable ("track better") when braking in curves.



I agree with Mori's assessment. This is exactly why in my opinion most car manufacturers intentially set-up suspensions and choose tires (in the case of some rear wheel drive staggered set-ups) that will result in understeer. Understeer, which results essentially from more grip in the rear than in the front, as Mori pointed out is viewed to be more controllable.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
Finally, a solution!


Now that that is solved, let's figure out which end of an arrow to put the feathers on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top