Of course they wouldn't have any other motivation to sell four tires rather than two, right? Costco wouldn't sell two snow tires, some years back. All tires had to be matched. I let my membership lapse shortly after.
FWD is quite different.
agree. btdt a few times.
Having driven competetively I'd have to dissagree. But the BEST is to have all 4 tires up to snuff.
rote:
=3D=3D A blow-out at 110 MPH can still be quite jolting when it happens...especially so with a front tire. I have had them run right off the rim...not for the faint of heart while driving in the mountains. =3D=3D
That was true with rear wheel drive and no ABS As far as hydroplaning, yes it can be an issue with the over-width tires on todays cars if they are bald. But driving in the rain in not the majority of your driving - and hydroplaning conditions occur only a few times a year for a few minutes at a time. A sensible driver just slows down under those conditions. The REST of the time, better traction on the front is more advantageous.
The video showing the hydroplaning shows drivers driving WAY TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS.
Oh? What happens when you hit trash on the road and it slices the sidewall?? One of the most common causes of sudden tire failure - and it USUALLY affects the front tires. Also, radial tires are not terribly forgiving of curb scuffs to the sidewall - which can cause premature failure of the sidewall, and again affect the front wheels more than the rear. Granted, these situations are no respector of tread depth, but the new tire is most likely to be in better condition, structually, than the old tire. I will continue to keep the best tires on the front of my front wheel drive vehicles, and drive sanely in adverse conditions.
I stand corrected. Michelin says the better tires go on the back.
Bottom of the page - with video:
I experienced a rear tire blowout as a kid. Pretty wild ride - off the highway, over a barbed wiree fence. Both bumpers folder back 90 degrees on the right end. I'm not sure I'd recommend it.
Then there's this.
I've been driving FWD since about 1969 (a few RWD thrown in for good measure, including rear engine, as well as 4wd - including rallying FWD for a few years.
Have you suffered and survived a front wheel blowout???
Only when it snows in Las Vegas.
People here cannot drive when it snows eight inches.
They canceled work here on the mere prediction of snow.
"Self-destruct"
They rarely, if ever, suddenly explode. Even with major damage they tend to go flat gracefully (i.e. don't just dissappear).
Suit yourself, but you're wrong.
Actually, an evenly worn tire that still has adequate tread often has better traction than a brand new tire.
I agreed with that until i saw the video derbydad posted the link to. Watching the video I was thinking-- 'so just slow down, stupid'. But then the narrator pointed out that with the more-likely-to-hydroplane tires on the front, you get some warning that the road is bad because you feel it in the steering wheel. With them on the back-- you've already started a skid when you realize the road conditions changed.
I'm still a 4-tires-at-a-time guy, but know that lots of folks like to save some pennies-- and I'm now a put-the-new-ones-on-the-rear-guy.
Jim [and what was the FWD you had in 1969? I didn't have the pleasure until 1984]
Here is my experiance, had Michelins 3 yrs old, 30000 miles, one front broke a belt, so I got 2 fronts, went around a corner in snow and fishtailed. Immediatly went and bought 2 new rears went around same corner and all was fine. I find my tires get noticably worse traction at about 30000 and at 60000 are to dangerous to keep. This is in my opinion and has more to do with age of tires, oxidation-hardening of rubber from the environment, then loosing tread. So new tires in front where you have 65 % breaking and need steering and the rears can go and fishtail, new tires in rear and the fronts might hydroplane and you might not stop or stear through a corner. All 4 should be equal if you drive in snow or wet is my opinion. Mixing new and old will lead to unknown handling just when you need stability, in emergencys. Put on 4 good ones that are equal
Living in snow country, and driving rear wheel drive. I put the newer tires on back for traction.
Last year, I had a tire blow out. The left rear tire of my van picked up a nail. The first I knew anything was wrong, the van wasn't handling right. I pulled over. Find out that the sidewall on both sides had sheared. The rim had a little rubber on it, and there was a peel that resembled a tire, wrapped around the hub.
It was a Walmart tire, with warranty. I got a flatbed ride home. The next day, I pulled the tire, and took it to another Walmart. $2.50 later, I had a new tire mounted and balanced. Just used up about five hours or six, between the two days. Blow out, wait for tire guy, wait for tow truck, jacking up the van, going to the store, wait for the tire to be mounted, and replacing tire and all that.
Yes, I think it very much depends on the vehicle (FWD or RWD, manual or slushbox, weight distribution etc.) and the road conditions. A couple of my RWD cars showed a lot of natural oversteer, but were quite controllable whenever the back end did decide to get out of line - for those I think I would have put as much grip as I could get on the front rather than the back.
Or five if you're carrying a spare ;)
cheers
Jules
What's snow got to do with hydroplaning??????
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.