View Full Version : If you buy 2 new tires and have 2 old tires...
If you buy 2 new tires and put them on a car that has 2 old tires, do you put them on the front or back?
Car is FWD
2 old tires are the same brand and 2 new are same brand, but new and old are different from each other.
The 2 old tires are still in good condition.
So... front or back? And does season affect your decision?
If you buy 2 new tires and put them on a car that has 2 old tires, do you put them on the front or back?
Car is FWD
2 old tires are the same brand and 2 new are same brand, but new and old are different from each other.
The 2 old tires are still in good condition.
So... front or back? And does season affect your decision?
The tire places say to put them in the back. I personally would put them in the front as long as the remaining ones have good tread. Based on the explanations from the tire people I think they assume the remaining two tires don't have much tread
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 11:31
Put the new tire on the front.
The front tires wear out quicker.
Second if you do have a blow out with the old tires you want them on the back a blow out on the back is a lot more controllable.
Ga Shooter
03-08-10, 11:32
You should always put your best tread on your steering tires so that means put them on the front.
The standard answer is put them on the back. Understeer is easier for a poor/inexperienced driver to control vs. oversteer.
For our RWD vehicles, we put the new tires on the front, older tires on the back. Tire places don't want to do it, and we'll sign the waiver for it. I don't take much stock in the tire place's knowledge anyway, considering they often overtorque the lugnuts...
Season doesn't change for me because I'm in the deep South, so I cannot advise much on winter driving.
The suggestion for the rear is to cover their asses. It is the correct thought, as oversteer is harder to control than understeer. This is more important with winter tires, as the rear tires of a FWD car need to be as good or better to keep the rear behind you. The thought there is if you cant even get going, can you safely stop, and the correct process is to use 4 snows.
Now what I do, and what most will do is balance the wear to minimize cost, and this means toss em on the front. Talk to the driver and be done with it.
theblackknight
03-08-10, 11:41
The standard answer is put them on the back. Understeer is easier for a poor/inexperienced driver to control vs. oversteer.
but oversteer is more fun:D
Thanks for the responses. This is the info I wanted.
but oversteer is more fun:D
I can think of no argument for this statement :cool:
ForTehNguyen
03-08-10, 12:02
the axle getting the power and/or steering should receive the best tires out of the set. Car is worthless without traction. Put newer tires on the front of a FWD vehicle.
the axle getting the power and/or steering should receive the best tires out of the set. Car is worthless without traction. Put the tires on the front.
To this point, lets assume 2 new tires and 2 tires at 2/32" left. With the new tires on the front, in the snow, you can get going no problem. The issue comes when you go to make a turn and the rear of the car slides out due to poor traction. If you try to stop suddenly, the rear of the car will break traction sooner than the front, and it cannot push the car so it will move laterally and the rear will slide out.
All of this is minimized when you rotate the tires properly to balance the wear, as you will never have 2 bald and 2 good. I strongly suggest that people get a tread depth guage and keep track of tire wear, it is very telling of the vehicle, and only takes a minute to check.
GeezerHood
03-08-10, 12:20
On a front wheel drive vehicle I would much rather have the bald tires on the rear. I find it very easy to correct a skid with good tread on the front driving tires.
On a front wheel drive vehicle I would much rather have the bald tires on the rear. I find it very easy to correct a skid with good tread on the front driving tires.
How do you handle stopping if the rear of the car swings out? We have tons of hills around here, so this isnt always an option.
To this point, lets assume 2 new tires and 2 tires at 2/32" left. With the new tires on the front, in the snow, you can get going no problem. The issue comes when you go to make a turn and the rear of the car slides out due to poor traction.
On the flip side to that (with two worn tires in front and the new tires in the rear), The issue comes when you go to make a turn and...the car doesn't turn and instead the front end just pushes straight off the road into the ditch. :cool:
Besides planning your tire placement around the presence of snow makes little sense to me (I'm from the south). If you live in an area that gets very much snow, get snow tires, otherwise you're pretty much screwed anyway you slice it on snow. If I'm going to be concerned with the weather (especially since it is now March), I'm going to be more concerned with wet pavement, which is nowhere near as bad as snow.
I would think about the forces being exerted on the tires and what they are expected to control. The front axle in FWD vehicle has to deal with forces from acceleration, braking, AND turning (usually some combination of the three). The rear axle is just along for the ride! Sure it has to deal with the accel/decel/turning forces to some extent, but not to the same extent as the front as it is the one actually accelerating & turning the car.
On the flip side to that (with two worn tires in front and the new tires in the rear), The issue comes when you go to make a turn and...the car doesn't turn and instead the front end just pushes straight off the road into the ditch. :cool:
As others have suggested, that (understeer) is easier for most drivers to correct out of than oversteer.
As others have suggested, that (understeer) is easier for most drivers to correct out of than oversteer.
I would think that if your tires are bad enough to worry about your car spinning out, you should be replacing all 4. If all 4 tires are in good condition with 2 being a bit newer, I see no reason to ever put the 2 old ones on the wheels that see more wear, unless you are a tire salesman and want to sell new tires to your customers sooner.
I think it was Car & Driver that went to Michelin's testing facility to test this because they received so many questions about it over the years. They did tests with different drivers in FWD and RWD cars under different driving conditions. All of the testing confirmed what Michelin told them beforehand: the best tires go on the rear, regardless of vehicle. Like others said, understeer is easier to correct than oversteer. I've witnessed two accidents on the interstate in the last couple of years, and both involved drivers in front wheel drive cars that had the rear end break free in a curve. I don't know their tire situation, but it definitely reinforced the opinion of putting the best tires on the back, even on front wheel drive cars.
I think it was Car & Driver that went to Michelin's testing facility to test this because they received so many questions about it over the years. They did tests with different drivers in FWD and RWD cars under different driving conditions. All of the testing confirmed what Michelin told them beforehand: the best tires go on the rear, regardless of vehicle. Like others said, understeer is easier to correct than oversteer. I've witnessed two accidents on the interstate in the last couple of years, and both involved drivers in front wheel drive cars that had the rear end break free in a curve. I don't know their tire situation, but it definitely reinforced the opinion of putting the best tires on the back, even on front wheel drive cars.
What was the condition of the 'bad' tires in the test? Bald or just a lower tread?
As others have suggested, that (understeer) is easier for most drivers to correct out of than oversteer.
Easier to correct - yes.
Easier to induce - no.
I can't count how many times I've applied too much/too many inputs and overpowered the front tires resulting in understeer in normal driving (albeit mild understeer). But I can remember exactly how many times I've induced too much oversteer - ONCE - and it was on the track, not the street.
Having autocrossed a FWD car, it took some REAL shenanigans for me to get the rear too far around that I could not correct with a little throttle. I'll stick to keeping the best tires on the wheels doing the most work. ;)
pilotguyo540
03-08-10, 16:14
You should always put your best tread on your steering tires so that means put them on the front.
This is absolutely correct!!! I am a service engineer. I am the guy they call when no one else can solve a problem. No BS. Steering is more important for safety than drive traction in the event of a blow out.
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 16:31
I used to work at Firestone until I got feed up with how the consumer is screwed every which way to Sunday. If you happen to have catastrophic tire blow out the last place you want it to happen is on the front wheels it has the possibility to torque steer the steering wheel right out of your hand more true on a Front wheel drive. And if you are in a turn and it blows out well you can fig that out.
MILD under-steer is more controllable most cars are built with mild understeer in them MASSIVE under-steer will put you in a ditch, wall or tree you can crank the wheel to lock and it wont do squat. I have experienced 2 blow outs in front wheel drive cars first on I was Lucky and held on to the steering wheel and got it into the grass median I was also lucky because I was not going but 55mph at most. The second one I was a back seat passenger and the driver was going 85+mph lucky day because it was a rear blow out even though the back end got loose the very inexperienced driver was able to keep the back end facing the right way toward the back. If it would have been a front tire that completely let go I am positive he would have put the car into the wall big time.
I also replace the front tire first on my Rear wheel drive vehicles and swap the fronts to the back the front wheel wear out faster than the rears UNLESS you are doing John Force BURN OUTS!! or you have a serious alignment issue.
The front has the most weight does 70-80% of your braking steers your car and on a front wheel drive car it does the driving put your best tires where most of the work is happening.
On the flip side to that (with two worn tires in front and the new tires in the rear), The issue comes when you go to make a turn and...the car doesn't turn and instead the front end just pushes straight off the road into the ditch. :cool:
Besides planning your tire placement around the presence of snow makes little sense to me (I'm from the south). If you live in an area that gets very much snow, get snow tires, otherwise you're pretty much screwed anyway you slice it on snow. If I'm going to be concerned with the weather (especially since it is now March), I'm going to be more concerned with wet pavement, which is nowhere near as bad as snow.
I would think about the forces being exerted on the tires and what they are expected to control. The front axle in FWD vehicle has to deal with forces from acceleration, braking, AND turning (usually some combination of the three). The rear axle is just along for the ride! Sure it has to deal with the accel/decel/turning forces to some extent, but not to the same extent as the front as it is the one actually accelerating & turning the car.
The forces exerted on the rear are more than you would think, but again, the idea is to not have 2 bad tires.
As others have suggested, that (understeer) is easier for most drivers to correct out of than oversteer.
Most drivers yes, place the tires based on experience...
I would think that if your tires are bad enough to worry about your car spinning out, you should be replacing all 4. If all 4 tires are in good condition with 2 being a bit newer, I see no reason to ever put the 2 old ones on the wheels that see more wear, unless you are a tire salesman and want to sell new tires to your customers sooner.
You need to balance the wear. You should never have the situation discussed.
Easier to correct - yes.
Easier to induce - no.
I can't count how many times I've applied too much/too many inputs and overpowered the front tires resulting in understeer in normal driving (albeit mild understeer). But I can remember exactly how many times I've induced too much oversteer - ONCE - and it was on the track, not the street.
Having autocrossed a FWD car, it took some REAL shenanigans for me to get the rear too far around that I could not correct with a little throttle. I'll stick to keeping the best tires on the wheels doing the most work. ;)
On dry pavement, yes, it took me a shit load to get any oversteer with bald rears, and when it finally gave loose I couldnt maintain it. In the snow, its different. The vehicle cannot always be corrected with the throttle, nor to people truly know this. Thats more of an issue.
I used to work at Firestone until I got feed up with how the consumer is screwed every which way to Sunday. If you happen to have catastrophic tire blow out the last place you want it to happen is on the front wheels it has the possibility to torque steer the steering wheel right out of your hand more true on a Front wheel drive. And if you are in a turn and it blows out well you can fig that out.
MILD under-steer is more controllable most cars are built with mild understeer in them MASSIVE under-steer will put you in a ditch, wall or tree you can crank the wheel to lock and it wont do squat. I have experienced 2 blow outs in front wheel drive cars first on I was Lucky and held on to the steering wheel and got it into the grass median I was also lucky because I was not going but 55mph at most. The second one I was a back seat passenger and the driver was going 85+mph lucky day because it was a rear blow out even though the back end got loose the very inexperienced driver was able to keep the back end facing the right way toward the back. If it would have been a front tire that completely let go I am positive he would have put the car into the wall big time.
I also replace the front tire first on my Rear wheel drive vehicles and swap the fronts to the back the front wheel wear out faster than the rears UNLESS you are doing John Force BURN OUTS!! or you have a serious alignment issue.
The front has the most weight does 70-80% of your braking steers your car and on a front wheel drive car it does the driving put your best tires where most of the work is happening.
A front tire blow out on the highway is scary and unpredictable. Any turning could result in an uncontrollable jerk to either side, regardless of the direction turned. You also lose some controlled braking, coasting is probably the best case.
I've had the dubious honor of being in the passenger seat in a vehicle that had a front blowout, passenger side. At 85 mph on the freeway. It was one of those older mid 80s Chevy conversion vans, topheavy. Thank God Dad was driving, or me and my whole family would most likely be dead. THAT was scary, and for the longest time I was not comfortable at all with getting on an interstate highway.
4thPointOfContact
03-08-10, 18:10
So far...
The number of opinions = gazillions.
The number of tests that have been done .... one, by Car and Driver.
Which number do you trust more, opinion or test?
I think it was Car & Driver that went to Michelin's testing facility to test this because they received so many questions about it over the years. They did tests with different drivers in FWD and RWD cars under different driving conditions. All of the testing confirmed what Michelin told them beforehand: the best tires go on the rear, regardless of vehicle. Like others said, understeer is easier to correct than oversteer. I've witnessed two accidents on the interstate in the last couple of years, and both involved drivers in front wheel drive cars that had the rear end break free in a curve. I don't know their tire situation, but it definitely reinforced the opinion of putting the best tires on the back, even on front wheel drive cars.
If the tires that we are putting in the back are really worn down (and the new ones on the front). But if they have plenty of usable tread still, it should not have the effect that Michelin claims. If it does, then the tires suck and need to be replaced anyway. If they are still usable tires then they should be usable in the back and not create problems. Otherwise even when NOT replacing tires you should replace them when they get to whatever level is showing this effect.
So far...
The number of opinions = gazillions.
The number of tests that have been done .... one, by Car and Driver.
Which number do you trust more, opinion or test?
we need to see the actual test that C&D did to see what they were really testing. I maintain that if you see the effect Michelin claims on tires, they need to be replaced anyway and should be replaced, no matter if you are buying 2 new ones or not.
Just prevent the situation from happening with proper maintinence.
You should always put new tires on the rear of the vehicle, no matter if it is front or rear wheel drive. You never want your vehicle to have more traction in the front than the rear, at least not until the rear tires have some wear on them.
Edited to ad that Michelin released a video showing their findings with regards to this several years ago. I don't know if it is available to the public or only LE but it puts any argument to rest.
Ga Shooter
03-08-10, 20:28
If the tires that we are putting in the back are really worn down (and the new ones on the front). But if they have plenty of usable tread still, it should not have the effect that Michelin claims. If it does, then the tires suck and need to be replaced anyway. If they are still usable tires then they should be usable in the back and not create problems. Otherwise even when NOT replacing tires you should replace them when they get to whatever level is showing this effect.
I have been selling tires for over 25 years. What he said!!! If the tires are that bad they need to be replaced and all of this is really an argument over how to skate by on less than safe tires. A good set of tires is cheap insurance.
Smuckatelli
03-08-10, 21:04
We pay $$$$$ for a car.
Some will claim that it is a tire salesman that is attempting to get the customer to buy something that he or she doesn't need.
Keep in mind the $$$$$ will only perform where the rubber meets the road. No matter how good the car is, it will only be as good as the tires allow it to be.
Would you run marginal or unsafe ammo through your weapon, if you're comfortable with this.......does it really matter if you put the tires on the front or the back?
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 21:24
You should always put new tires on the rear of the vehicle, no matter if it is front or rear wheel drive. You never want your vehicle to have more traction in the front than the rear, at least not until the rear tires have some wear on them.
Edited to ad that Michelin released a video showing their findings with regards to this several years ago. I don't know if it is available to the public or only LE but it puts any argument to rest.
The rear tire do have some wear on them they are used??? [TYPO?]
That test was more than likely done with drivers that do not know how to control over-steer You do the same test with drivers that know how to control over-steer the results would be different.
Maybe I am old as petrified wood I remember learning how to drive without locking the brakes down and how to control over-steer and under-steer. What do they teach drivers know days how to text and talk on the phone while driving WTF over??
I read a lot here, but never really post. This topic caught my attention though because I design tires at Michelin.
I've driven the half-worn rear, new front "demo" at our proving grounds--drive two identical cars (RWD) back to back on a track with about 3mm of standing water. The first has half-worn front, new rear tires and the other has half-worn rear, new front tires. For me, the handling characteristics of these two cars were drastically different. The oversteer of the car with worn rear tires was much less controllable for me (untrained driver). This "demo" left no doubt in my mind--if I ever buy two new tires, I'll put them on the rear axle.
I doubt an untrained driver would see much of a difference in dry conditions. In fact, in dry conditions, a car with worn rear tires and new fronts would likely become more understeering since the lower tread depth would provide more cornering stiffness at the rear axle.
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 21:52
I read a lot here, but never really post. This topic caught my attention though because I design tires at Michelin.
I've driven the half-worn rear, new front "demo" at our proving grounds--drive two identical cars (RWD) back to back on a track with about 3mm of standing water. The first has half-worn front, new rear tires and the other has half-worn rear, new front tires. For me, the handling characteristics of these two cars were drastically different. The oversteer of the car with worn rear tires was much less controllable for me (untrained driver). This "demo" left no doubt in my mind--if I ever buy two new tires, I'll put them on the rear axle.
I doubt an untrained driver would see much of a difference in dry conditions. In fact, in dry conditions, a car with worn rear tires and new fronts would likely become more understeering since the lower tread depth would provide more cornering stiffness at the rear axle.
What speed ? And was fast enough to hydroplane?
That test was more than likely done with drivers that do not know how to control over-steer You do the same test with drivers that know how to control over-steer the results would be different. M
No, the tests were done with trained LE driving instructors.
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 22:15
No, the tests were done with trained LE driving instructors.
Thats great you can put the new ones on the back and have the front hydroplane.
For me Ill put them on the front and stay in my lane.;)
What speed ? And was fast enough to hydroplane?
The track is much like an autocross track. It's fairly short with several tight corners. The max speed is probably around 45mph (they don't want untrained dirvers going too fast). I would imagine at higher speeds, the car would have been even more difficult to regain control after initiation of oversteer.
At that water depth and speed, most tires will experience a significant loss in contact area and traction because water cannot be evacuated from the contact quickly enough. In this specific case, it was apparent that hydroplaning was occuring. Otherwise, such a drastic difference in handling characteristics would not have been seen.
Thats great you can put the new ones on the back and have the front hydroplane.
For me Ill put them on the front and stay in my lane.;)
I'll think you're missing what's being stated here. If you're front tires hydroplane and rear maintain traction, the vehicle can still be steered to prevent complete loss of control of the vehicle.
If the rear tires hydroplane and the front have (HAD) traction, you have no control of the vehicle, it will go into a spin before you can prevent it or react to it. That goes for anyone, trained driver or not.
The concept is alien to a lot of people at first but is really quite simple when understood.
Thomas M-4
03-08-10, 22:38
The track is much like an autocross track. It's fairly short with several tight corners. The max speed is probably around 45mph (they don't want untrained dirvers going too fast). I would imagine at higher speeds, the car would have been even more difficult to regain control after initiation of oversteer.
At that water depth and speed, most tires will experience a significant loss in contact area and traction because water cannot be evacuated from the contact quickly enough. In this specific case, it was apparent that hydroplaning was occuring. Otherwise, such a drastic difference in handling characteristics would not have been seen.
So I am safer having the front end hydroplane not being able to stay in my lane:confused:
Autocross track doesn't have traffic you can use as much of the road as you need to get around it.
So I am safer having the front end hydroplane not being able to stay in my lane:confused:
Autocross track doesn't have traffic you can use as much of the road as you need to get around it.
hydroplaning isnt as dependent on tread depth as you think.
pilotguyo540
03-09-10, 06:43
You should always put new tires on the rear of the vehicle, no matter if it is front or rear wheel drive. You never want your vehicle to have more traction in the front than the rear, at least not until the rear tires have some wear on them.
Edited to ad that Michelin released a video showing their findings with regards to this several years ago. I don't know if it is available to the public or only LE but it puts any argument to rest.
Sorry pal, you are dead wrong. I cant believe this thread is still open.
Lets put our thinking caps on and pay attention to the front of the class.
The front tires are responsible for 70-75% of breaking and all of steering.
The rears are either idle, or they are responsible for DRIVE traction. Drive traction is only important for propulsion. Steering traction is important for stopping and control.
Ignorance is okay if you are willing to see your err and listen to the truth;)
It is just carry over from when all cars were RWD, where the drive wheels and the best location for new tires were the same. Assuming you have bald front tires, you also will not be able to go as fast in the snow, so the rear will remain behind you. If you have the new tires in the front, you can go like a bat out of hell on the sloppy roads, and when you go to make a turn, the ass end comes around because there is no traction. If you think you can control oversteer better, go ahead, but you are among a very small percentage of people who can. If you go down a hill and have to brake, what is worse? Going faster down the hill because the fronts allow you to steer but the rears cannot keep the car straight, or going slower from the get go and having the rear of the car behind you? I have done both, and the best solution was 4 good tires, the second best solution was the better tires to the rear. Why would you want to go like a bat out of hell and not turn? The better compromise is to not be able to go like a bat outta hell, but still retain the ability to turn. Pilotguy mentioned control, and the this gives the large majority of drives greater control between two dangerous situations (situations that probably could have been avoided to begin with).
People are also overlooking what the rear tires do. They are stationary, but they are also subject to greater lateral forces than you think in a turn, and for the cars in question, they have less weight and therefore less ability to create friction between the tires and the road. This fact alone should make you consider balancing the traction so to speak by placing the slightly better tires to the rear.
The other thing that is missed is proper rotation and alignment. Keeping the car aligned keeps the tires wearing even, and should be checked on a machine (not by letting the wheel go on the highway) a few times a year. Rotating the tires will balance the wear, and if you do it properly, you will only have a marginal difference in traction between the front and the rear of the car. Any new tire purchase will be in sets of 4, further avoiding having a great difference in handling capabilities between the front and the rear.
And on "mechanics" at garages and their opinions, they should be held in the same regard as gun shop employees, it is hard to find a really good one, and often times what they say should be forgotten as soon as possible.
Also, take a driving class. There is a local track that offers an adverse weather driving class with fwd and rwd vehicles. This topic is covered to great lengths, and arguments are settled on the track.
Video is on the bottom of the page:
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-care/how-to-buy/
Tire rack:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=52
Popular Mechanics:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/how_to/4243992.html
Tire industry.org:
http://www.tireindustry.org/default.aspx?id=976&LangType=1033
Thomas M-4
03-09-10, 08:06
It is just carry over from when all cars were RWD, where the drive wheels and the best location for new tires were the same. Assuming you have bald front tires, you also will not be able to go as fast in the snow, so the rear will remain behind you. If you have the new tires in the front, you can go like a bat out of hell on the sloppy roads, and when you go to make a turn, the ass end comes around because there is no traction. If you think you can control oversteer better, go ahead, but you are among a very small percentage of people who can. If you go down a hill and have to brake, what is worse? Going faster down the hill because the fronts allow you to steer but the rears cannot keep the car straight, or going slower from the get go and having the rear of the car behind you? I have done both, and the best solution was 4 good tires, the second best solution was the better tires to the rear. Why would you want to go like a bat out of hell and not turn? The better compromise is to not be able to go like a bat outta hell, but still retain the ability to turn. Pilotguy mentioned control, and the this gives the large majority of drives greater control between two dangerous situations (situations that probably could have been avoided to begin with).
People are also overlooking what the rear tires do. They are stationary, but they are also subject to greater lateral forces than you think in a turn, and for the cars in question, they have less weight and therefore less ability to create friction between the tires and the road. This fact alone should make you consider balancing the traction so to speak by placing the slightly better tires to the rear.
The other thing that is missed is proper rotation and alignment. Keeping the car aligned keeps the tires wearing even, and should be checked on a machine (not by letting the wheel go on the highway) a few times a year. Rotating the tires will balance the wear, and if you do it properly, you will only have a marginal difference in traction between the front and the rear of the car. Any new tire purchase will be in sets of 4, further avoiding having a great difference in handling capabilities between the front and the rear.
And on "mechanics" at garages and their opinions, they should be held in the same regard as gun shop employees, it is hard to find a really good one, and often times what they say should be forgotten as soon as possible.
Also, take a driving class. There is a local track that offers an adverse weather driving class with fwd and rwd vehicles. This topic is covered to great lengths, and arguments are settled on the track.
Video is on the bottom of the page:
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-care/how-to-buy/
Tire rack:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=52
Popular Mechanics:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/how_to/4243992.html
Tire industry.org:
http://www.tireindustry.org/default.aspx?id=976&LangType=1033
Well I guess I am in the small percentage that can control over-steer so is my wife, my mother , my father , my grandmother bless her departed soul , and all of my friends. You make over-steer into the big bad boogie man race care drivers use over-steer to steer the car from just past the apex of the corner all the way out. Its not a uncontrollable condition.
Well I guess I am in the small percentage that can control over-steer so is my wife, my mother , my father , my grandmother bless her departed soul , and all of my friends. You make over-steer into the big bad boogie man race care drivers use over-steer to steer the car from just past the apex of the corner all the way out. Its not a uncontrollable condition.
No, it can be very controllable, but not for everyone. My dad taught me how to drive in shit in a snowy parking lot, as he learned. Im sure lots of us learned the same way and have driven rwd cars. Im only 26 and my first car was still rwd, my dad wanted me to know how to drive. When I got a newer fwd car I hated it. I still prefer rwd for most conditions. I was also fortunate enough to have spent some time with a driving instructor who teaches adverse condition driving.
My fiance has taken some time to learn how to drive in crappy conditions, and at this time, her better tires are on the rear, she has less trouble this way. I do the reverse, and just pay attention to the car. Some people cant focus on the car, some people never notice their headlights are out or if they have a flat rear tire.
EzGoingKev
03-09-10, 11:44
This made me think of something funny.
About 20 years ago I helped a friend install two new tires on his father's car, an old Caprice Classic. He told me the plan was to put the two best used tires on the RH side of the car and then put the new tires on the LH side of the vehicle.
Having worked as a mechanic I had never heard of RH vs LH deal. People either put both new tires on the front or the rear depending on their school of thought. I was like WTF? you are doing it wrong.
He looked at me like I was an idiot and said "My father is 86 years old and rides the curb, do you think I am going to put a new tire on the curb side?"
I then saw the wisdom of his ways.
I read a lot here, but never really post. This topic caught my attention though because I design tires at Michelin.
I've driven the half-worn rear, new front "demo" at our proving grounds--drive two identical cars (RWD) back to back on a track with about 3mm of standing water. The first has half-worn front, new rear tires and the other has half-worn rear, new front tires. For me, the handling characteristics of these two cars were drastically different. The oversteer of the car with worn rear tires was much less controllable for me (untrained driver). This "demo" left no doubt in my mind--if I ever buy two new tires, I'll put them on the rear axle.
I doubt an untrained driver would see much of a difference in dry conditions. In fact, in dry conditions, a car with worn rear tires and new fronts would likely become more understeering since the lower tread depth would provide more cornering stiffness at the rear axle.
In a RWD car I would also put the new tires in the back.
I've never seen or heard of a FWD car oversteering. I can understand if you are going at high speeds on the highway and change lanes drastically, your back end could whip and you could lose control. But I think the chances of this happening are lower than the chances of needing to brake quickly, and this is where good tires on the front are better.
Because of the combination of oversteer problems on RWD and the wear being greater on the rear tires, I would put older tires on the front of the RWD.
The suggestion for the rear is to cover their asses. It is the correct thought, as oversteer is harder to control than understeer. This is more important with winter tires, as the rear tires of a FWD car need to be as good or better to keep the rear behind you. The thought there is if you cant even get going, can you safely stop, and the correct process is to use 4 snows.
Now what I do, and what most will do is balance the wear to minimize cost, and this means toss em on the front. Talk to the driver and be done with it.
The standard answer is put them on the back. Understeer is easier for a poor/inexperienced driver to control vs. oversteer.
I would much rather have a car that oversteers than understeers. When I auto-x'ed I would always setup for tighter rear suspention then front. It would make like easier to rotate the car around a turn rather then plow strait ahead with understeer. [car was RWD]
I'm sorry, but I happen to disagree with you guys on this.
With FWD cars [like my beater] I have found that controlling oversteer is rediculously simple. W/O raction controll, when the rear steps out, you simply point in the direction you want to go and open the throttle. I have driven both cars in the snow, and have had both cars get the rear out of shape, and I would much rather bring the rear back in line then not have controll of where I am steering.
I find understeer to be much much worse.
I would put the new tires on the front.
but oversteer is more fun:D
Not a lot of fun with a 28x10 bias ply slick on the back and 26x5" tires on the front at 130mph lol
To this point, lets assume 2 new tires and 2 tires at 2/32" left. With the new tires on the front, in the snow, you can get going no problem. The issue comes when you go to make a turn and the rear of the car slides out due to poor traction. If you try to stop suddenly, the rear of the car will break traction sooner than the front, and it cannot push the car so it will move laterally and the rear will slide out.
All of this is minimized when you rotate the tires properly to balance the wear, as you will never have 2 bald and 2 good. I strongly suggest that people get a tread depth guage and keep track of tire wear, it is very telling of the vehicle, and only takes a minute to check.
In a FWD car is like putting the horse in front of the carrige [as it should be I suppose lol]. Simply point where you want to go and... go. I have driven in quite a bit of snow, maybe not as much as some of the northern midwest guys, but still. In the snow, I would never want understeer and would want all the traction I can get on the front tires [if i was driving a FWD car]
It also sounds like you are far from a zoned out driver. Your experience should make up for the tire placement.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.