Permabanned
Just slow down fella simple. Being in a situation where you have pushed the car beyond its limits is your fault.
Last edited:
Age old question: Pair of new tyres, fit on front or rear?
- Thread starter Combat squirrel
- Start date
That's a pointless argument though, you can say 'just slow down' for anything.
Running bald tyres? No worries, just slow down a bit.
Brake pads running a bit low? No worries, just slow down a bit.
Haven't checked the pressure for 6 months? No worries, just slow down a bit.
Windscreen wipers don't clear the screen properly anymore? No worries, just slow down a bit.
It does nothing to actually address the point of why you'd knowingly prefer to run your car in a configuration that would make it less controllable if you did come across poor conditions. Especially so when hitting some unexpected standing water and potentially aquaplaning has got absolutely sod all to do with 'pushing the car beyond it's limits'.
I'm quite happy that I won't be in the situation of having passed the limits though, because I don't actively choose to compromise the wet weather stability of my car by fitting my tyres against the advice of virtually every reputable tyre company in existance.
Exactly, it is nothing to do with driving fast.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,339
Oldest tyres on the driven axle and newest on undriven.
For a fwd that means move the rears to the front and put fresh on the rear.
Given that over time the driven axle is guaranteed to have worn tyres at some point (right before you change them ofc) then it would be kind of stupid to have bad rubber on the undriven axle too.
For a fwd that means move the rears to the front and put fresh on the rear.
Given that over time the driven axle is guaranteed to have worn tyres at some point (right before you change them ofc) then it would be kind of stupid to have bad rubber on the undriven axle too.
So you want to reduce grip on the front under heavy braking in the wet in that scenario?
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,339
So you want to reduce grip on the front under heavy braking in the wet in that scenario?
Better to have at least one pair of tyres on the vehicle with good tread
Why would you be heavy braking when you hit standing water.So you want to reduce grip on the front under heavy braking in the wet in that scenario?
The front will get more grip anyway under heavy braking so it kind of goes against any point you are making. If you are heavy braking there’s less weight on the rear so you would want as much tread as possible !
ive got a tissue here. You seem to have something in your eye
Associate
Again this is flawed logic though. Its the same argument people use to justify ditch finder tyres instead of high quality ones (which interestingly it seems you are suggesting you dont). Tyres, and tyre setups are always good enough, until they arent. 99% of the time chinese ditch finders will be good enough. The car will stop, go, and turn, just like it did before. Until that one time you need to do an emergency stop in the wet from 70 and you crash into the back of the car in front of you still doing 30mph when your michelens etc would have had you stopped inches or even feet away.
Running your best tyres on the front will of course by good enough 99.9% of the time. Until that one day something unexpected happens, your going round a roundabout in the wet and something occurs on the road in front of you that you didnt expect, you have no choice but to slam on the brakes, the back end goes light, and you end up backwards with no control. Where as if your new tyres had been on the back you would likely have been better off.
The simple issue is you are wrong. Factually. From a safety perspective your best tyres should be on the rear, always. The fact that you have always been alright is irelevant.
I could even understand this viewpoint if there was additional cost involved but I've never had a garage charge me for tyre rotation. Every time I've only had two tyres and there needed on the front, I've took it in gone "two of this tyre on the front please, but can you swap them to the back" and I've never had a response other than "yes mate". Its zero effort for me, makes my car safer, and as you come across as someone who clearly has some care about the quality of tyres, I just can't fathom why you wouldn't do this.
Soldato
Science aside for a moment, I put the new ones on the end that wears quickest and then rotate when they wear past the tyres on the other end. This does mean all 4 occasionally need replacing together, but at least I don't have to replace cracked & perished tyres with plenty of tread left.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,339
what that means is you spend time driving with 4 worn tyres on your car, which is the principle part of this argument.
not having tyres age before they wear is why you move the rears to the front (to wear them down) and put fresh on the back. if you don't drive enough that you're having tyres age before you've worn out a set of fronts then evidently you're not doing enough miles for tyres to be a significant cost factor.
Soldato
There's a difference between worn and worn out.
I regularly check the tyres for damage and change them when they're worn out or need replacing. Simple.
Can't remember the fitter but last time I needed new tyres on the front the garage recommended I swapped them round. I told them fine and they said they "had to balance them and it would cost £xx per wheel" so I told them not to bother. I bought through Blackcircles so maybe they were just trying to make up some of the extra revenue they'd normally have got on the tyre mark up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,339
i'm using the term worn somewhat loosely defined as "however low the tread is before you replace it"
Associate
That would seem odd to me. The point of balancing is blancing variations in the weight of the tyre on the wheel itself. Taking the wheel off the car is irrelevant to the balancing process so moving it from one end of the car to the other would have no effect. If it would you would have to balance the wheel on the car itself surely?
Seems like a garage trying to pull a fast one to me. Conversely the experience I was describing where I've neer had them raise a charge has also been from black circles. I've certainly had it done twice at two different garages without issue.
Soldato
You're much more likely to to come a gutser if you lose the back end after hitting some standing water on a roundabout for example, than if you understeer a bit. Driving god or School Run Karen, the latter is far easier to recover from.
Associate
Holy thread revival batman.
Cheers for the advice above guys and good explanations, the mrs car is down to 3mm on front so was going to replace and put new on the back.
I was getting some strong resistance against doing this from family, but all my google foo suggested I wanted the new on the back. I knew it would be a discussion point on here somewhere.
Cheers for the advice above guys and good explanations, the mrs car is down to 3mm on front so was going to replace and put new on the back.
I was getting some strong resistance against doing this from family, but all my google foo suggested I wanted the new on the back. I knew it would be a discussion point on here somewhere.
New on back as that's the bit you can't control on an fwd if you lose it.