"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/22/2014 at 16:09 • Filed to: None
0
22|
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/22/2014 at 16:09 • Filed to: None | 0
| 22 |
I bought two new tires for my VW Golf last week, since I got a puncture that couldn't be patched and I can't afford 4 tires right now. The tire guy said that conventional wisdom has changed, and that the two new tires should go on the back, rather than the front. Why the change in placement? In the old days, the two new shoes were always put on the front.
Brian Silvestro
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:12 |
|
I would assume because FWD you'd put the two new ones on the front? That's what I've always thought.
mcseanerson
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:12 |
|
Rear breaks loose and you spin out.
DatASSun
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:12 |
|
Maybe that's why he changes tires for a living?
RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:13 |
|
I sure haven't heard that. Maybe the theory is that the tires need to wear in/break in before you trust possible greasy or unevenly treaded hard tires to the front? I would definitely think going used the better tread would go to the front, but new might have some reason.
Sweet Trav
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:13 |
|
If you live where it snows, I agree with the tire guy. if you live where it doesn't snow, you want your best rubber on the front wheels.
PatBateman
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:14 |
|
I was told the same thing when I got tires on my wife's last car (Enclave).
Alfalfa
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:15 |
|
The thought is that when traction is lost in the back wheels, it typically results in more control loss than in the front. Even if your car is FWD, you still have a good possibility of getting the back end out when the road gets slippery.
CAR_IS_MI
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:15 |
|
six in one hand, half dozen the other...
|
DatASSun
> DatASSun
09/22/2014 at 16:16 |
|
to elaborate. A FWD car is the easiest car to recover from any type of over steer (steer the opposite way and floor it) so putting the old tires on the back makes perfect sense. If you were to put baldys on the front and freshys on the rear you'd have a epic understeering monster which you'd be more likely to wreck.
desertdog5051
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:17 |
|
Tire Rack has a reasonable explanation. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech…
lonestranger
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:20 |
|
Wut? Weird. The only think I can think of is that.. now how do I explain what I'm thinking...that a driver can "feel" how much traction is available at each tire, but the front tire's information is more easily transmitted to the driver. The driver may then estimate the total traction based on the front tires. If the fronts are newer than the rears, the driver may overestimate how much overall traction there is.
jariten1781
> Sweet Trav
09/22/2014 at 16:21 |
|
Yep, it's exactly this. They don't want you losing the rear in the snow. Follows the normal tire chain advice.
|
ttyymmnn
> lonestranger
09/22/2014 at 16:22 |
|
That's an interesting thought. Now that I think about it, I seem to remember one tire guy saying something that since the rear is so much lighter, you want your better traction back there.
|
ttyymmnn
> desertdog5051
09/22/2014 at 16:24 |
|
Interesting. Thanks for the link. I wonder, though, just how much of that is theory and how much of it is practice.
|
RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
> desertdog5051
09/22/2014 at 16:29 |
|
Reasonable, but seems to depend overmuch on the driver having significant wear differences between the two pair, and not being used to oversteer. For a novice in a FWD, they'll have enough weight over the front so that understeer loss will in theory be more gradual, but even so... I guess I'm just not convinced that an experienced driver won't do better with functioning brakes and some steering via the front wheels in the mix. Anyone who's done RWD winter driving or similar is used to having the tail come out a little - sacrifice directional control just so loss of traction is "less scary"? No thanks. I've understeered badly in the rain three times, and that was three times too many.
|
lonestranger
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:34 |
|
That makes sense, too. My theory is really just that - a theory. desertdog's Tire Rack explanation makes the most sense. Understeer is easier to recover from than oversteer, so if you have to choose one, choose understeer.
|
desertdog5051
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 16:55 |
|
Don't know. I have not had a FWD vehicle in a loong time. RWD and AWD. I remember having new tires on the front of a Pontiac Sunbird and hitting some serious water on the freeway going through Toledo. It oversteered bad in a curve and the back end started to come around. Luckily I had room to chase it into the adjoining lane.
|
desertdog5051
> RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
09/22/2014 at 17:00 |
|
My guess is that they try to figure in the idiots that can't drive on anything but dry pavement.
Luc - The Acadian Oppo
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 17:42 |
|
The reason being is that when you brake in slippery conditions you do not want the back of the car to suddenly be in front of you. if anything you want the front to lock up first and not the other way around.
Yes you won't get as much traction but at least it should keep the car going straight should shit hit the fan.
bradleyjames518
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 18:53 |
|
Here is my two cents -At minimum, the front tires have to stop and steer...Two very important actions, why would you not put the best tread on the front to aide in stopping and steering, especially with FWD (three actions). I understand Tire Rack's argument, but you'd lose ~60% of your stopping power and steering while understeering out of your lane....I would rather oversteer every time.
bhardoin
> ttyymmnn
09/22/2014 at 22:33 |
|
Answer from my experience as a tire installer:
Either the front or the rear of your car is going to have better grip than the other, due to the two new tires gripping better than the two worn ones. This will cause understeer if the new tires are on the back (the fronts are more likely to lose traction first) or oversteer (the rears are more likely to lose traction). Understeer is a less "scary" way to crash than oversteer, and less likely to bite a tire installer in the ass legally. So even though the front of your car (your front heavy car whose front tires are responsible for braking, acceleration and turning) needs more traction, its less likely for a tire shop to get in trouble putting new tires on the rear.
If you're a decent driver and you're aware of the issue, I'd put the new tires on the front so that they wear down to the level of the rears and you can rotate them. If you're an average customer, I'd assume you're an idiot behind the wheel, and put them on the back, let you get a new pair for the front next time and then continue on that cycle of having your tires wear shittily and unevenly, resulting in more work for me and more "safety" for you.
|
ttyymmnn
> bhardoin
09/22/2014 at 22:56 |
|
Good points all. I usually buy my tires in sets, but seeing as this car is going to tick over to 200k miles in the next few weeks, I'm not putting that much money into it. If I can get out with two, I'm going for two. Based on what you say, I may go ahead and swap them, though my wife drives the car more than I do. So it might be better to leave them where they are.