I want to know if it is really a good idea to have your wheels balance at each rotation. I relgously rotate my wheels every 5k, and I get the best tire wear this way, but the tire shop tells me you only need to balance them every 4th or 5th rotation. Is there any truth to this and will the tires wear as well if I don't balance them as ofte?
balancing wheel at time of rotation
- Thread starter mvg72
- Start date
- Status
I don't rotate much, if any, unless there is some wear problem. It's also DIY, but if you are in the shop already, why not just rebalance the tires going in front? That is a good compramise, and will keep everyone happy.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
why not just rebalance the tires going in front? That is a good compromise,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Rotate the tires first and if you experience any vibration, rebalance.
I have had shops do a poor balance job so I like them to keep their hands off!
A Haines
NJ
why not just rebalance the tires going in front? That is a good compromise,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Rotate the tires first and if you experience any vibration, rebalance.
I have had shops do a poor balance job so I like them to keep their hands off!
A Haines
NJ
Originally Posted By: mvg72
I want to know if it is really a good idea to have your wheels balance at each rotation. I relgously rotate my wheels every 5k, and I get the best tire wear this way, but the tire shop tells me you only need to balance them every 4th or 5th rotation. Is there any truth to this and will the tires wear as well if I don't balance them as ofte?
If you don't feel any vibration on a smooth road at highway speed, don't waste your money.
Rotating every 5000 miles sounds excessive unless you have a problem, then the problem should be fixed so you don't need to rotate every 5k miles.
Edit: Carbuff has a good point. If your tires don't need balancing, the probability of them being worse after a tire shop "balances" them are real.
I want to know if it is really a good idea to have your wheels balance at each rotation. I relgously rotate my wheels every 5k, and I get the best tire wear this way, but the tire shop tells me you only need to balance them every 4th or 5th rotation. Is there any truth to this and will the tires wear as well if I don't balance them as ofte?
If you don't feel any vibration on a smooth road at highway speed, don't waste your money.
Rotating every 5000 miles sounds excessive unless you have a problem, then the problem should be fixed so you don't need to rotate every 5k miles.
Edit: Carbuff has a good point. If your tires don't need balancing, the probability of them being worse after a tire shop "balances" them are real.
Last edited:
I agree with the above comments regarding balancing.
I believe rotation every 5 to 7 thousand miles is mandatory for longest tire life. Even if the the wheels are in perfect alignment, the engine weight and turning forces encountered on the front tires will result in wear different than the backs. Rotation keeps the wear more even between all tires. and probably prolongs good balance.
I'm experiencing my best (longest) OEM tires ever on my current mini van. 60 k and still going. I attribute it to practicing correct rotation and tire pressure better this time around. I've NEVER re-balanced these tires!
I believe rotation every 5 to 7 thousand miles is mandatory for longest tire life. Even if the the wheels are in perfect alignment, the engine weight and turning forces encountered on the front tires will result in wear different than the backs. Rotation keeps the wear more even between all tires. and probably prolongs good balance.
I'm experiencing my best (longest) OEM tires ever on my current mini van. 60 k and still going. I attribute it to practicing correct rotation and tire pressure better this time around. I've NEVER re-balanced these tires!
Thanks for the imput guys...much apreciated....
In regard to those who nevery rotate and only replace tires and front tires as needed..yo uare spending more money in the long run..but because not only do the front tires need to go on back do to engine wight and turning wear, but the rear tires also do not wear properly if you leave them on the back too long. My in-laws only replace front tires when needed...which is a lot more often that I replace a set of 4 tires. I put 12k on my vehicle per/hear and and my tires are 70k tires..., and I still have about another year or two before they need to be replaced per the tire shop..so you do the math.... I'm more than getting my moneys worth by rotating them every 5k.
In regard to those who nevery rotate and only replace tires and front tires as needed..yo uare spending more money in the long run..but because not only do the front tires need to go on back do to engine wight and turning wear, but the rear tires also do not wear properly if you leave them on the back too long. My in-laws only replace front tires when needed...which is a lot more often that I replace a set of 4 tires. I put 12k on my vehicle per/hear and and my tires are 70k tires..., and I still have about another year or two before they need to be replaced per the tire shop..so you do the math.... I'm more than getting my moneys worth by rotating them every 5k.
Originally Posted By: mvg72
Thanks for the imput guys...much apreciated....
In regard to those who nevery rotate and only replace tires and front tires as needed..yo uare spending more money in the long run.....
Who let that strawman in the room.
Quote:
I put 12k on my vehicle per/hear and and my tires are 70k tires..., and I still have about another year or two before they need to be replaced per the tire shop..so you do the math.... I'm more than getting my moneys worth by rotating them every 5k.
People say the same about a 3k mile OCI.
I've run over 80k miles on OEM tires (2000 Acura TL and a 1991 Honda Accord) with a 20k mile rotation cycle. One or two off anecdotal events are meaningless
Thanks for the imput guys...much apreciated....
In regard to those who nevery rotate and only replace tires and front tires as needed..yo uare spending more money in the long run.....
Who let that strawman in the room.
Quote:
I put 12k on my vehicle per/hear and and my tires are 70k tires..., and I still have about another year or two before they need to be replaced per the tire shop..so you do the math.... I'm more than getting my moneys worth by rotating them every 5k.
People say the same about a 3k mile OCI.
I've run over 80k miles on OEM tires (2000 Acura TL and a 1991 Honda Accord) with a 20k mile rotation cycle. One or two off anecdotal events are meaningless
If you are PAYING to have them rotated,hmmmm, that's another story.
In 60,000 miles......12 times $25(?) equals $300 added to the ownership cost of the tires.
XS650, is your anecdotal event the meaningless one, or is mine???? Maybe both! Usually my tires get destroyed by pot holes before they wear out.
I do think 5K is a bit too often. Suppose it depends on the circumstances, like all things here.
In 60,000 miles......12 times $25(?) equals $300 added to the ownership cost of the tires.
XS650, is your anecdotal event the meaningless one, or is mine???? Maybe both! Usually my tires get destroyed by pot holes before they wear out.
I do think 5K is a bit too often. Suppose it depends on the circumstances, like all things here.
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
If you are PAYING to have them rotated,hmmmm, that's another story.
In 60,000 miles......12 times $25(?) equals $300 added to the ownership cost of the tires.
XS650, is your anecdotal event the meaningless one, or is mine???? Maybe both!
Both
Quote:
Usually my tires get destroyed by pot holes before they wear out.
I do think 5K is a bit too often. Suppose it depends on the circumstances, like all things here.
The 2005 VW Jetta I just bought with 19k miles on it would have benefited from more frequent rotations. The were never rotated. The fronts have maybe 5k miles left on them before they are done, the rears are in great shape. I would have done about 10k rotations if I had that car from new, just by looking at the tires as they wore.
I will get a lot more miles out of the OEM tires by moving the spare from it's steel wheel to one of the front alloy wheels and buying one new OEM tire for the other front wheel. Tire rack still has the OEM model tire. The rears have over 75% of their usable tread left.
I don't have a pothole problem, but with 80k tire life on some of my cars, the age of the tire becomes a concern.
If you are PAYING to have them rotated,hmmmm, that's another story.
In 60,000 miles......12 times $25(?) equals $300 added to the ownership cost of the tires.
XS650, is your anecdotal event the meaningless one, or is mine???? Maybe both!
Both
Quote:
Usually my tires get destroyed by pot holes before they wear out.
I do think 5K is a bit too often. Suppose it depends on the circumstances, like all things here.
The 2005 VW Jetta I just bought with 19k miles on it would have benefited from more frequent rotations. The were never rotated. The fronts have maybe 5k miles left on them before they are done, the rears are in great shape. I would have done about 10k rotations if I had that car from new, just by looking at the tires as they wore.
I will get a lot more miles out of the OEM tires by moving the spare from it's steel wheel to one of the front alloy wheels and buying one new OEM tire for the other front wheel. Tire rack still has the OEM model tire. The rears have over 75% of their usable tread left.
I don't have a pothole problem, but with 80k tire life on some of my cars, the age of the tire becomes a concern.
I rotate and balance every 5k. Keep it in line with my OCI. I usually get free Lifetime Rotations/Balances so I use it. I got 45K+ out of my Goodyear Eagle F1's (260 treadwear) this way.
I rotate for seasons. Sometimes I'll leave beat tires up from for summer to use them up or move to the rear when rainy seasons commands.
As far as "even wear" wth is that? Even between tires or even across the tread? If it means even across the tread, I get flat wear on the rear and some feathering on the edges in the front. I know that going into it and when I need more grip, ditch the feathered fronts.
If it means even wear between tires, I'd contend that 50%f and 50% rear is not the ideal configuration. IN hard rain or snow, more like 60f/40r, even better 70f/30r gives the best performance.
As far as "even wear" wth is that? Even between tires or even across the tread? If it means even across the tread, I get flat wear on the rear and some feathering on the edges in the front. I know that going into it and when I need more grip, ditch the feathered fronts.
If it means even wear between tires, I'd contend that 50%f and 50% rear is not the ideal configuration. IN hard rain or snow, more like 60f/40r, even better 70f/30r gives the best performance.
There is no "free lunch" or bonus to rotating obsessively. In fact, I think that when a tire is worn-in it's in it's lowest wear mode/mile. Move it onthe car and it has to re-bed, wear goes UP not down. BMW recommends against rotating at all. I do it to address wear issues like cupping.
Kestas
Staff member
Here's a suggestion from a lazy man (myself)... I rotate once (front to back) halfway through the life of the tires. This way, the tires typically wear out all at once. I use up the tires, get my money's worth, and buy 4 new tires... which is one of the goals of rotating.
I rotate (DIY) when I do an OCI (DIY) which is every 10K. I also give the "inside" of the aluminum wheels a good cleaning with a wheel cleaner and a coat of paint sealant.
One thing that irks me is that my $18K Mazda wheels were given a dynamic balance and my $37K Dodge are on the outide rim edge which will most certainly leave a lovely corrosion spot when the old weights are removed.
I'm debating having a shop do a dynamic balance on them before the issue gets too bad (corrosion wise). Perhaps even have them refinished where the weights were after they are removed. I know it sounds OCD, but I may have this car for a loooong time if the new CAFE reg's actually happen in 2012!
Any thoughts on dynamic vs tradional balancing?
One thing that irks me is that my $18K Mazda wheels were given a dynamic balance and my $37K Dodge are on the outide rim edge which will most certainly leave a lovely corrosion spot when the old weights are removed.
I'm debating having a shop do a dynamic balance on them before the issue gets too bad (corrosion wise). Perhaps even have them refinished where the weights were after they are removed. I know it sounds OCD, but I may have this car for a loooong time if the new CAFE reg's actually happen in 2012!
Any thoughts on dynamic vs tradional balancing?
Kestas
Staff member
I'm missing something here. How is a dynamic balance different from a traditional balance, and how does a dynamic balance not use rim edge weights (conversely, where must a traditional balance use rim edge weights)?
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I'm missing something here. How is a dynamic balance different from a traditional balance, and how does a dynamic balance not use rim edge weights (conversely, where must a traditional balance use rim edge weights)?
Think what he meant was some of the newer balance machines will "place" tape weights on the exact spot needed. Machines using "traditional" method, the operator bangs the rim weights on where the balancer tells him/her they should go. Either method/ machine gives the same results with the difference being the type of weight used, tape-on or bang-on.
I'm missing something here. How is a dynamic balance different from a traditional balance, and how does a dynamic balance not use rim edge weights (conversely, where must a traditional balance use rim edge weights)?
Think what he meant was some of the newer balance machines will "place" tape weights on the exact spot needed. Machines using "traditional" method, the operator bangs the rim weights on where the balancer tells him/her they should go. Either method/ machine gives the same results with the difference being the type of weight used, tape-on or bang-on.
Originally Posted By: shortyb
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I'm missing something here. How is a dynamic balance different from a traditional balance, and how does a dynamic balance not use rim edge weights (conversely, where must a traditional balance use rim edge weights)?
Think what he meant was some of the newer balance machines will "place" tape weights on the exact spot needed. Machines using "traditional" method, the operator bangs the rim weights on where the balancer tells him/her they should go. Either method/ machine gives the same results with the difference being the type of weight used, tape-on or bang-on.
Not quite,,Shorty.
The closer weights are placed to extreme outer edge the more accurate balance will be. Moving inner or outer weight closer to center helps to defeat the effectivenes of dynamic balance (as delivered by all computer balancers), turning it into static balance(as done with a simple bubble balancer).
As a tire dealer, I really hate the new trend toward no outer rim edge to add weights to, as it causes me more problems with customer complaints. Course I prefer function over form. When your wheels get too blemished from weight placement, buy new ones to really rejuveniate your tired old ride.
Any hard and fast rule on rotation, or rebalance is moot. Different treads,vehicles,driving styles, road surfaces all change needs. Rotate when tread edges begin to "feel" feathered,re-balance when slight vibration is felt 50-70mph.
Bob
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I'm missing something here. How is a dynamic balance different from a traditional balance, and how does a dynamic balance not use rim edge weights (conversely, where must a traditional balance use rim edge weights)?
Think what he meant was some of the newer balance machines will "place" tape weights on the exact spot needed. Machines using "traditional" method, the operator bangs the rim weights on where the balancer tells him/her they should go. Either method/ machine gives the same results with the difference being the type of weight used, tape-on or bang-on.
Not quite,,Shorty.
The closer weights are placed to extreme outer edge the more accurate balance will be. Moving inner or outer weight closer to center helps to defeat the effectivenes of dynamic balance (as delivered by all computer balancers), turning it into static balance(as done with a simple bubble balancer).
As a tire dealer, I really hate the new trend toward no outer rim edge to add weights to, as it causes me more problems with customer complaints. Course I prefer function over form. When your wheels get too blemished from weight placement, buy new ones to really rejuveniate your tired old ride.
Any hard and fast rule on rotation, or rebalance is moot. Different treads,vehicles,driving styles, road surfaces all change needs. Rotate when tread edges begin to "feel" feathered,re-balance when slight vibration is felt 50-70mph.
Bob
Originally Posted By: alreadygone
....
Any hard and fast rule on rotation, or rebalance is moot. Different treads,vehicles,driving styles, road surfaces all change needs. Rotate when tread edges begin to "feel" feathered,re-balance when slight vibration is felt 50-70mph.
Bob
It's nice to hear that from someone in the tire business. Integrity in business isn't completely dead yet
On a front drive car, I will also rotate the tires if the front has worn down significantly more than the rear.
....
Any hard and fast rule on rotation, or rebalance is moot. Different treads,vehicles,driving styles, road surfaces all change needs. Rotate when tread edges begin to "feel" feathered,re-balance when slight vibration is felt 50-70mph.
Bob
It's nice to hear that from someone in the tire business. Integrity in business isn't completely dead yet
On a front drive car, I will also rotate the tires if the front has worn down significantly more than the rear.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Originally Posted By: alreadygone
The closer weights are placed to extreme outer edge the more accurate balance will be.
I always get clamp-on weights on the inside an tape weights on the outside of the rim. I never bother with fine balancing (with wheels on car -- dunno whatcha call it here) here due to low highway speeds. Back home I always sprung (and still spring) for fine balancing.
The closer weights are placed to extreme outer edge the more accurate balance will be.
I always get clamp-on weights on the inside an tape weights on the outside of the rim. I never bother with fine balancing (with wheels on car -- dunno whatcha call it here) here due to low highway speeds. Back home I always sprung (and still spring) for fine balancing.
Mori,
The stick on on outside is perfectly acceptable, as it still places weight near outer edge. It's the people who want all weight inside spoke/center of wheel who are defeating the purpose of dynamic balance.
Haven't seen a modern on-the-car balancer available anywhere here. Probably due to the liabilities of having employees that near high speed rotating assemblies. Modern computer balancers are fully capable of balancing down to .10 gram. On the car balance is to compensate for imbalance in other assemblies such as hubs,rotors,axles,etc. Most late model cars don't really need this, plus it makes rotation impossible without complete re-spin of all rotating assemblies again. Might be worth while though at autobahn (sp?) speeds.
Best,
Bob
The stick on on outside is perfectly acceptable, as it still places weight near outer edge. It's the people who want all weight inside spoke/center of wheel who are defeating the purpose of dynamic balance.
Haven't seen a modern on-the-car balancer available anywhere here. Probably due to the liabilities of having employees that near high speed rotating assemblies. Modern computer balancers are fully capable of balancing down to .10 gram. On the car balance is to compensate for imbalance in other assemblies such as hubs,rotors,axles,etc. Most late model cars don't really need this, plus it makes rotation impossible without complete re-spin of all rotating assemblies again. Might be worth while though at autobahn (sp?) speeds.
Best,
Bob
- Status
