newer tire in the back arguement

[08sienna]

so I have about 1/2 worn 2 Michellin Radial X and 2 new Defenders. I thought mounting 2 new in the front would be nice because they will wear even at the end if I don't rotate them. But Costco insisted that I must install new ones in the back. I know about the better traction arguement for the rear tires but how much of difference in thread depth will make meaningful traction panalty if newer tires are mounted in the front?
It is a Sienna van. BTW, Radial X and Defenders' road noise is horrible, in the same degree. I don't remember any tire I used before made this much of road noise.

 

[Chris142]

ya americas tire says the same thing. id drive it a few weeks then go in for the free rotation

 

[asand1]

Front ends don't spin out and cause crashes.

That said, a 50%a tire is really no more dangerous. Have t hem rotate the rears to front and replace the worn ones. Thee go home and rotate if you wish.

 

[Kira]

Hello, In addition to the traction argument there is the point that any "worse" tire is going to go flat/blow out more readily than a "better" one.

During such an event, the front wheels can be more directly controlled. Kira

 

[tomcat27]

the theory is that severe understeer is more dangerous than severe oversteer and that the average driver can handle oversteer better than understeer. but certainly if you put the new tires on the front they will wear down to the level of the others faster... and more of a concern in heavy rain and snow

 

[Wolf359]

Basically with good tires in front, the rears will hydroplane first before the front meaning you fishtail and it's much harder to control. With the good ones in the back, the fronts start to hydroplane first and when you notice that, you can slow down.

 

[Quest]

typically, with 70/30 weight distribution on FWD automobiles, coupled with understeering, it's much easier to correct when sudden traction loss (when new/fresh tires are at the back of the FWD vehicles), than fresh new tires at the front.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa9hzcjdi5Q

Q.

 

[michaelluscher]

The reason they do it is..............
If you haven't followed the subreddit /r/justrolledintotheshop by now, You'll soon realize ****THE MAJORITY**** of people are stupid, inept, and ignorant.

Try explaining to Suzie Soccer mom or Donny the DJ about Lift off oversteer
Especially since everything's FWD these days, people don't expect & can't handle the rear snapping out. Hence putting the gripper, sipier tires on the rear is what the Lawyer's have said must go.
A graphic representation for your comprehending pleasure

 

[08sienna]

Thank you for the informative replies. One question not covered yet is that how much difference of wear will start to make my car behave like the blue one?

 

[Michael_P]

Unless you plan on drifting that Sienna at the local autocross event.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: tomcat27
the theory is that severe understeer is more dangerous than severe oversteer and that the average driver can handle oversteer better than understeer. but certainly if you put the new tires on the front they will wear down to the level of the others faster... and more of a concern in heavy rain and snow


I think you have that exactly backwards. Oversteer is much more dangerous than understeer and in this case, we are talking about loosing traction on the rear - ie, spinning out - as opposed to plowing forward.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: 08sienna
Thank you for the informative replies. One question not covered yet is that how much difference of wear will start to make my car behave like the blue one?


Although you won't find this documented anywhere, Michelin reports that anything within 2/32nds can be considered the same.

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: michaelluscher
The reason they do it is..............
If you haven't followed the subreddit /r/justrolledintotheshop by now, You'll soon realize ****THE MAJORITY**** of people are stupid, inept, and ignorant.

Try explaining to Suzie Soccer mom or Donny the DJ about Lift off oversteer
Especially since everything's FWD these days, people don't expect & can't handle the rear snapping out. Hence putting the gripper, sipier tires on the rear is what the Lawyer's have said must go.
A graphic representation for your comprehending pleasure

Thank you for this picture, I can't understand why it's recommended to have new tires on the rear. They obviously haven't been on a slick road and made a quick turn and just kept going straight.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Originally Posted By: Quest
typically, with 70/30 weight distribution on FWD automobiles, coupled with understeering, it's much easier to correct when sudden traction loss (when new/fresh tires are at the back of the FWD vehicles), than fresh new tires at the front.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa9hzcjdi5Q

Basically American drivers can't cope with oversteer. It's why Porsches, VW Beetles, Renault Dauphines, and a host of other cars that sold and did well in Europe were overrepresented in accidents in the USA.

That being said, this Michelin video rigs the deal. First, anyone who's worked with these skid pads knows they are hardly representative of most driving conditions, where patches of deep wet and hardly wet commingle. Second, anyone who is driving in conditions like that who has not slowed down deserves, IMHO, exactly what they get. You cannot fix stupid.

The commands "Hammer down!" and "Stand on that brake pedal!" on Vehicle 2 pretty much precludes this exercise as an objective look at what happens to a real driver in the real world. Vehicle 1 probably would not have done much better with driving like that.

 

[IndyIan]

You can switch them yourself and do some testing to see if it matters. 1/2 worn maybe the point where wet traction does start to drop significantly. Go to an industrial park in the rain and try to put it sideways in the corners, you'll know then for sure.
If you do run the tires in the snow, then probably you will find the rear end could come around more easily. Again, you'll have to test to see if it matters or not to you.

 

[CELICA_XX]

If I am buying tires in pairs, I tell them where I want each tire.

There is no discussion, nor do they ever argue.

Its your car and your money !!!




Originally Posted By: tomcat27
the theory is that severe understeer is more dangerous than severe oversteer and that the average driver can handle oversteer better than understeer.

This is not correct.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: CELICA_XX
Its your car and your money !!!

But it is the tire shop's business and their money at stake if a customer would decide to sue them because he spun out and crashed due to having worse tires on the rear.

Out here, most shops will refuse to mount new tires on the the front only, and I can certainly understand their point of view and legal liability implications. We live in a very litigious society.

 

[Ken2]

Quote:
Basically American drivers can't cope with oversteer.

Exactly. Most drivers don't have a clue what to do when the rear end swings out. They haven't been correctly taught what to do, if at all, and haven't practiced. Anyone else remember being taught, "steer into the skid?" Ask around, and half will say to turn right for a right skid, and the other half will say turn left for a right skid.* Plowing straight off the road is no problem---mash the brakes, close your eyes, death grip on the wheel, and call AAA.

My wife's cousin found out what happens with snow tires on only the front of a FWD car. She reached the wrong conclusion--she won't have FWD again after pinwheeling in an intersection.

Is the practice of buying just two tires at a time a regional practice? I don't know of anyone I've heard of, nor any talk I've overheard in a tire shop, of people just buying two in this neck o' the woods.

*Teach people to "steer in the direction you wish the car was going," and it becomes much more clear to them.

 

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted By: Ken2
......Is the practice of buying just two tires at a time a regional practice? I don't know of anyone I've heard of, nor any talk I've overheard in a tire shop, of people just buying two in this neck o' the woods.......


I don't think this is regional in any way.

In the days when RWD's were the common configuration, it wasn't much of an issue - the fronts and the rears wore at about the same rate. But when FWD's started becoming common, it was quickly discovered that the fronts wore much, much faster than the rears.

Given that the average consumer neglects vehicle maintenance - particularly tire rotation - this surfaced as an issue. It continues to be an issue. In other words, the average consumer STILL neglects tire rotation.

I do wonder how the use of winter tires has impacted things. It wasn't that long ago that the use of winter tires wasn't really that common. Things have changed over time.

 

[faramir9]

Originally Posted By: CapriRacer
Originally Posted By: Ken2
......Is the practice of buying just two tires at a time a regional practice? I don't know of anyone I've heard of, nor any talk I've overheard in a tire shop, of people just buying two in this neck o' the woods.......


I don't think this is regional in any way.

In the days when RWD's were the common configuration, it wasn't much of an issue - the fronts and the rears wore at about the same rate. But when FWD's started becoming common, it was quickly discovered that the fronts wore much, much faster than the rears.

Given that the average consumer neglects vehicle maintenance - particularly tire rotation - this surfaced as an issue. It continues to be an issue. In other words, the average consumer STILL neglects tire rotation.

I do wonder how the use of winter tires has impacted things. It wasn't that long ago that the use of winter tires wasn't really that common. Things have changed over time.


I think it's more an economic issue, and a sign of the non-Recovery in most places. My lady insisted on getting two tires rather than four last year, even though I suggested getting a set of four new ones, then selling the two that had some life left. It was a classic case where she bought the car used from a private seller, for a great price, but the tires were mismatched pairs with different treadwear. (That could happen even to someone who had the cash for four good new tires, too.)

I would bet a Macanudo that the cost of tires has risen faster than the rate of inflation the past 10 years. Most folks know nothing of the great rebate deals you can get online from DTD and other tire sites. For those who only know to go to B+M tire shops and are oblivious to rebates, buying a set of four new tires can be a very big deal, financially. Thus, if they have two in front at the wear bars but two in rear with some tread left, (who needs rotation?) they just get the fronts replaced. Like what my honey did last year.

And what if one tire gets punctured and can't be repaired when the tires are in mid-life? Had that happen, too. Buying a set of four tires is almost always best, I am sure, but there are good reasons why it is not always practical.