Went to Tire Kingdom to have my tires rotated. It had been 16,000 miles since the last rotation. The tech told me that my front tires were more worn then my back (no surprise since I have a front wheel drive car and there is more weight up front) and that it was the policy of tire kingdom that the tires with the best tread be on the back. This was news to me. Any thoughts?
Tire rotation
- Thread starter outoforder
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: outoforder
Went to Tire Kingdom to have my tires rotated. It had been 16,000 miles since the last rotation. The tech told me that my front tires were more worn then my back (no surprise since I have a front wheel drive car and there is more weight up front) and that it was the policy of tire kingdom that the tires with the best tread be on the back. This was news to me. Any thoughts?
The argument is that this prevents the back end for coming out on you in a slide. The idea is having less chance on the back end sliding out is better than the extra control in the front. More grip on the front means you could over steer.
I know it goes contrary to most people's beliefs. However, this would be more of a issue when you are nearing the end of your tire life. 16,000 between rotations is a lot of miles, depending on the vehicle you drive.
Quote:
Source - Tirerack.com http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=52
Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will provide more wet and wintry 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 partially 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 since deeper treaded tires are better at 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 challenges 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 in a heavy downpour will hydroplane at lower speeds than a heavyweight vehicle equipped with new, narrow, properly inflated tires in drizzling rain.
If the front tires have significantly less tread depth than the rear tires, the front tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the rear tires. While this will cause the vehicle 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 significantly 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 oversteer (the vehicle will want 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.
Experience
Members of 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 and the worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!
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!
Recommendations
Tires should be serviced periodically following the rotation patterns provided in the vehicle's owner's manual or as established by the industry to help enhance wear quality and equalize front-to-rear and side-to-side wear rates. The minor differences in tread depth between tires that might be encountered immediately after periodic tire rotations at 5,000-7,500 mile intervals won’t upset the vehicle's hydroplaning balance and should not preclude rotating tires. For that matter, any differences in wear rates actually indicate that tire rotations should be done more frequently. Ideally tires should be replaced in complete sets. However when tires are replaced in pairs, the new pair of tires (assuming the vehicle is equipped with the same size tires all of the way around) should always be installed on the rear axle and the existing partially worn tires moved to the front axle.
While insufficient tire rotation intervals and/or out-of-adjustment wheel alignment angles often caused the differences in front-to-rear and side-to-side tire wear rates in the first place, the need to keep deeper treaded tires on the rear axle to resist oversteer conditions caused by wet road hydroplaning is important. Unfortunately this precludes the future possibility of ever rotating tires.
Once a pair of tires has been installed, the only way to escape being forced to drive on mismatched tires continually is to install a complete set of new tires (especially on front-wheel drive vehicles).
Went to Tire Kingdom to have my tires rotated. It had been 16,000 miles since the last rotation. The tech told me that my front tires were more worn then my back (no surprise since I have a front wheel drive car and there is more weight up front) and that it was the policy of tire kingdom that the tires with the best tread be on the back. This was news to me. Any thoughts?
The argument is that this prevents the back end for coming out on you in a slide. The idea is having less chance on the back end sliding out is better than the extra control in the front. More grip on the front means you could over steer.
I know it goes contrary to most people's beliefs. However, this would be more of a issue when you are nearing the end of your tire life. 16,000 between rotations is a lot of miles, depending on the vehicle you drive.
Quote:
Source - Tirerack.com http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=52
Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will provide more wet and wintry 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 partially 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 since deeper treaded tires are better at 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 challenges 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 in a heavy downpour will hydroplane at lower speeds than a heavyweight vehicle equipped with new, narrow, properly inflated tires in drizzling rain.
If the front tires have significantly less tread depth than the rear tires, the front tires will begin to hydroplane and lose traction on wet roads before the rear tires. While this will cause the vehicle 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 significantly 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 oversteer (the vehicle will want 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.
Experience
Members of 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 and the worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!
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!
Recommendations
Tires should be serviced periodically following the rotation patterns provided in the vehicle's owner's manual or as established by the industry to help enhance wear quality and equalize front-to-rear and side-to-side wear rates. The minor differences in tread depth between tires that might be encountered immediately after periodic tire rotations at 5,000-7,500 mile intervals won’t upset the vehicle's hydroplaning balance and should not preclude rotating tires. For that matter, any differences in wear rates actually indicate that tire rotations should be done more frequently. Ideally tires should be replaced in complete sets. However when tires are replaced in pairs, the new pair of tires (assuming the vehicle is equipped with the same size tires all of the way around) should always be installed on the rear axle and the existing partially worn tires moved to the front axle.
While insufficient tire rotation intervals and/or out-of-adjustment wheel alignment angles often caused the differences in front-to-rear and side-to-side tire wear rates in the first place, the need to keep deeper treaded tires on the rear axle to resist oversteer conditions caused by wet road hydroplaning is important. Unfortunately this precludes the future possibility of ever rotating tires.
Once a pair of tires has been installed, the only way to escape being forced to drive on mismatched tires continually is to install a complete set of new tires (especially on front-wheel drive vehicles).
Points well taken. The tires are near the end of their life. I drive a 1997 Mercury Sable. It's basically a beater car, but it runs well and is paid off. I don't drive it hard (my friends say I drive like their grandparents). 16,000 is alot between rotations, I've just kind of lost track of time (we recently moved out of state). That, and I bought them local in Ohio so I cannot get them rotated for free in South Carolina. I was going to rotate them myself since tire king won't, just wondering if I was taking a big chance in doing so.
How many miles/years do you have on these front tires? How much tread is left? I'd probably just buy two new tires.
I understand the logic/theory behind the thinking. However, if the tires in the front are still legal then I call bullhockey.
If that is the "strict" policy then theoretically TK might never have to rotate front wheel drive vehicles, since the fronts generally tend to where faster.
Sounds like they don't want to do the rotation and/or they want to sell new tires. If there's still good tread left up front, go elsewhere. Not sure where you are in SC but DT will do it for free. Or, if you have the equipment/tools do it yourself.
Now if the fronts are at the wear bars or very close, then that's another matter, perhaps need 2 new tires. That said, I hate buying only two, but that's just me.
If that is the "strict" policy then theoretically TK might never have to rotate front wheel drive vehicles, since the fronts generally tend to where faster.
Sounds like they don't want to do the rotation and/or they want to sell new tires. If there's still good tread left up front, go elsewhere. Not sure where you are in SC but DT will do it for free. Or, if you have the equipment/tools do it yourself.
Now if the fronts are at the wear bars or very close, then that's another matter, perhaps need 2 new tires. That said, I hate buying only two, but that's just me.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
I understand the logic/theory behind the thinking. However, if the tires in the front are still legal then I call bullhockey.
+1. Slide theory aside, I'd rather have a blowout on the rears than the fronts. I've experienced both, and believe me, the front blowouts were much less controllable.
I understand the logic/theory behind the thinking. However, if the tires in the front are still legal then I call bullhockey.
+1. Slide theory aside, I'd rather have a blowout on the rears than the fronts. I've experienced both, and believe me, the front blowouts were much less controllable.
The front tires are still legal, but at the point where it wouldn't hurt to start looking at replacements. I was going to do one more rotation before buying new ones. I don't believe in driving tires bald, but I don't see the point in buying tires before they are necessary. Yes, Tire Kingdom wanted to sell me two new tires. My philosophy is: I'm not in nascar. I don't do two tire changes..... Does measuring tire tread with a penny still hold true? If so, I'm good for a bit longer
Last edited:
Oh, and let me tell you what they tried to sell me. They had a buy two, get two free special. In order to gets this special, I had to purchase their alignment package and tire warranty. After all that, I was still paying the average cost of 4 tires.
Yes, measuring tread depth with a penny is still valid. All tires have built-in tread depth measurement in the rain grove, if it is at the same level with the tread then the tread is at 2/32".
In my experience, chain tire stores are sketchy.
Originally Posted By: PRND3L
Originally Posted By: sayjac
I understand the logic/theory behind the thinking. However, if the tires in the front are still legal then I call bullhockey.
+1. Slide theory aside, I'd rather have a blowout on the rears than the fronts. I've experienced both, and believe me, the front blowouts were much less controllable.
I agree. We've had this argument before on an older thread.
I care much less about sliding or hydroplaning in wet weather than I do of a catastrophical failure. I'm not sure WHY I feel this way, other than I've experienced blowouts and I believe I'm smart enough to slow down during wet weather, especially driving on low-tread tires.
We get rain here so often that most people purchase tires for rain/summer weather, so I think it happens much less here.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
I understand the logic/theory behind the thinking. However, if the tires in the front are still legal then I call bullhockey.
+1. Slide theory aside, I'd rather have a blowout on the rears than the fronts. I've experienced both, and believe me, the front blowouts were much less controllable.
I agree. We've had this argument before on an older thread.
I care much less about sliding or hydroplaning in wet weather than I do of a catastrophical failure. I'm not sure WHY I feel this way, other than I've experienced blowouts and I believe I'm smart enough to slow down during wet weather, especially driving on low-tread tires.
We get rain here so often that most people purchase tires for rain/summer weather, so I think it happens much less here.
Much of the new tires in the rear mantra came about years ago when Ford was having their trouble with the Explorers and tires blowing out. Most of the major crashes occurred when a rear tire blew, causing the car to move around, in many cases the drivers over correcting with the result being flipped vehicles. When a front blew the vehicles seemed to settle down quickly and were more controllable with less chance of swerving and or driver error.
New tires on the rear wouldn't have saved the Explorers - the problem wasn't lack of tread. It was lack of pressure leading to overheating.
Michelin has been touting "better tires on rear" as far back as 1980s with their instructional videos that can be found on youtube, etc. But it's true that many auto tire shops only recently started adhering to it...
Michelin has been touting "better tires on rear" as far back as 1980s with their instructional videos that can be found on youtube, etc. But it's true that many auto tire shops only recently started adhering to it...
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
New tires on the rear wouldn't have saved the Explorers - the problem wasn't lack of tread. It was lack of pressure leading to overheating.
It was a combination of low air pressure and cheap tires. While true that Michelin has been touting the best tires on the rear for a long time, other manufactures as well as many shops did not really get into this mode until the Explorer tire fiasco....especially with FWD vehicles
New tires on the rear wouldn't have saved the Explorers - the problem wasn't lack of tread. It was lack of pressure leading to overheating.
It was a combination of low air pressure and cheap tires. While true that Michelin has been touting the best tires on the rear for a long time, other manufactures as well as many shops did not really get into this mode until the Explorer tire fiasco....especially with FWD vehicles
I know I'm going OT...There were lots of contributory causes in the Explorer - a low recommended pressure (26 PSI Front on the '96 I owned), owners that didn't check, high load, often high heat, all on tires that may not have been built to spec, and drivers that over-reacted to the situation.
I think Firestone got blamed, when the actual situation was more complex. For the record, I have had a blowout, while pulling a trailer. It was caused by a piece of metal in the road that was flipped up by the front tire and sliced open the rear, big bang, car settled and started pulling, lots of flapping noise...
I eased off the gas, steered, gently braked and pulled over. No big deal...but it's easy to see how someone might over-react to the noise and sudden pull on the car...
But the Explorer case was more about all those factors than the better tires on the front/rear discussion.
Also, on the '96, I ran 32 PSI F/R - well above Ford's recommended pressure on the 235/75R15 tires.
I think Firestone got blamed, when the actual situation was more complex. For the record, I have had a blowout, while pulling a trailer. It was caused by a piece of metal in the road that was flipped up by the front tire and sliced open the rear, big bang, car settled and started pulling, lots of flapping noise...
I eased off the gas, steered, gently braked and pulled over. No big deal...but it's easy to see how someone might over-react to the noise and sudden pull on the car...
But the Explorer case was more about all those factors than the better tires on the front/rear discussion.
Also, on the '96, I ran 32 PSI F/R - well above Ford's recommended pressure on the 235/75R15 tires.
Last edited:
CapriRacer did an extensive writeup on the whole Explorer issue, if anyone is interested:
http://www.barrystiretech.com/fordfirestone.html
http://www.barrystiretech.com/fordfirestone.html
- Status
