Is it just BMW that does not recommend tire rotation?

Page 2 of 3  
Dean Dark wrote:


It's highly optimized for handling purposes, and if you think about it, the front tires are doing different work than the rears, so it makes sense from a performance point of view. The outside of the tire also does different work than the inside...
But yeah, it can kinda suck if you get a nail in one tire and they happen to be back ordered on the left front tire for two weeks... and your only spare is the donut... especially because cars like Vettes look absolutely silly on the spare. Imagine a Viper with two donuts on the back.... now imagine trying to drive it. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ray wrote:

That's just one of the reasons why most people who own them never use either a Viper or NSX for basic transportation without a backup car. Worse than that, imagine getting a flat on a cross-country trip in the middle of nowhere...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve wrote:

Well, I don't own a Viper, but I don't run a spare either. The Nitrous bottle is there. :) And it's doubly crazy because I attract nails in my new tires. 6 month old Goodyears on my Trans Am in 2001 - nail. 3 month Kumhos on my Trans Am in 2004 - nail. Whereas my stupid truck had the same Hankook junktires forever... they wouldn't die, nor did they wear...
(I would take the bottle out and put the spare in before going on a long trip tho... but both flats have been close to home.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RichieP wrote:

No, but when you have different size front and rear tires in combination with unidiriectional tires, then a MOUNTED tire/wheel combo is unique to each corner of the car. You COULD dismount the front tires and swap them side to side and re-mount them, but SHEESH! Why bother?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Some, like both of my Jeep owners manuals also recommend only front to back rotation with the spare going to the main drive wheel, the RR and the RF going to the spare.
Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Shaft Drive wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tyre rotation hasn't made much sense since ever.
--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I thought that was the operative principle behind automobiles, that the tires should rotate. Wouldn't they get flat spots otherwise?
-- Fred
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree. So does BMW. Even for same size unidirectional tires on all four corners.
According to BMW, the only time tire rotation makes sense on a rear-wheel-drive performance vehicle is if you do it yourself every 3000 miles (before any wear becomes too great to affect handling).
On rear-wheel-drive performance automobiles, once you pass the 3000 mile mark, you start noticeably wearing the rears in the center and the fronts on the side. At this 3000-mile point-of-no-return, adverse handling will occur if you rotate.
If you do rotate within the 3000 mile limit, make sure you readjust the pressure differential between the rears and the front or you'll have other handling problems you didn't bargain for.
Also, if you do rotate, use any pattern you like (crossing sides at random, using the fifth tire, changing rotation direction, etc). Studies have shown that none of these rotation patterns adversly affect anything and none are any better than any other rotation pattern. Again, if you pass the 3000 mile point of no return, stop rotating for the life of those tires (should get you at least 30,000 miles depending on how aggressively you drive).
If you have a front-wheel-drive econobox (all fwd cars are compromises for the sake of costs), things might be different though I've no experience with low-performance fwd cars.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason for this?
message wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dunno. The last UK car driver's handbook I can find (and I've got a fair old collection) where tyre rotation - including spare - is recommended dates from the mid '50s, when crossply tyres were the norm. And 3000 mile oil changes.;-)
Perhaps the US isn't as up to date as most think? ;-)
--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

Come to that, 3000 mile tyre changes on a Mini Cooper 'S' ISTR
--
Paul Mc Cann

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The *wheels* didn't last that long on the first Minis running crossplies. Seems the designers thought the buyers of this tiny car would slow down for corners. Of course they might have if the brakes worked. ;-)
--
*Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour?

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Huh? We're at least 50% Japanese, whether Euro or American, japanese create all these headaches. My both Nissan and Oldsmobile had rotation in service manual as required
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The main rationale is to maximize tire mileage/life. On a FWD car, the fronts always wear more and won't last as long as the rears. On a RWD car, the rears wear more. And the spare tire doesn't wear at all.
Floyd
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

On both my E34 and E39, all tyres wore out pretty well at the same time without rotation. It of course depends on driving style and power of the vehicle. But with a 50/50 weight distribution it's what you'd expect, in theory.
--
*Snowmen fall from Heaven unassembled*

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
fbloogyudsr wrote:

Well, sort of... I've said this before, but I'll say it once more; Rotating tires is is not, not has it ever been, about increasing the total mileage of a tire, *except* when considered as a set.
By rotating tires one can even out the wear at the 4 corners and thereby equalize the wear so that the set of 4 all wear-out at the same time.
Or to state it another way, it will not extend the life of any single tire, but rather will allow the 4 to be spent at the same time and be replaced as a set.
The value in that is especially evident when considering how often a particular tire model is obsoleted and replaced with a new one in any particular brand.
Some folks advocate replacement of the spare tire after a certain amount of age regardless of how much wear it has attained, for safety reasons. Obviously, any scheme that allows the spare into the rotation will extend the life of the "set" by ~20%.
OTOH, if you have a brand/model of tire that is readily available over a long time period (or if you wear them out quickly due to high annual mileage) just replacing the axle that wear quickest would be equally as economical as replacing the set.
-Fred W
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Here's what I've been told.
Dealers don't like doing rotations because very often people come back to complain of vibration, noise, etc. Dealers suggest doing an alignment and dynamic balancing (tire mounted on car), but customers balk at the cost and infer that the dealer is just trying to charge for unnecessary work.
The upshot is poor ratings for the dealers, who need to maintain their customer satisfaction indexes under pressure from BMW NA or CA, so they would rather just not do a job that doesn't make them much money, especially when the car is in for service and the customer requests a rotaion, expecting to pay very little or nothing if the wheels are off for say, a brake inspection.
Never mind the fact that the whole concept of rotating tires is open to discussion at best.
So I've been told by a BMW tech.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 May 2005 00:34:49 -0400, "tech27"

Hmm... But new BMWs have all routine maintenance included in the price of the car (notice I didn't say "free") - so what price is there for the customer to balk at?
--
Life is short - drive fast!
http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

maintenance - so the customer must pay for these services.
Tom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The cost of a dynamic balancing after the rotation, not the cost (if any) to rotate the tires.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.