Is it just BMW that does not recommend tire rotation?

Page 3 of 3  
tech27 wrote:


There is no need to dynamically balance the wheel unless the tires are removed and reinstalled on different wheels for some reason. Dynamic balancing is not done "on the car", but rather, on a dynamic balancing machine.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malt_Hound wrote:

Actually, dynamic balancing can be done either on the car (using a machine made for that purpose) or with just the wheel/tire combo on a balancing machine. "Dynamic" merely means that the tire is spun on the machine and balance is measured in 2 axes, as opposed to the old static balance using a bubble level.
Really, "on the car" balancing should never show much improvement over off-the-car balancing unless the hub is out of balance or the wheel doesn't index properly onto the hub- both mechanical defects that SHOULD be repaired.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 19 May 2005 08:16:42 -0400, Malt_Hound

Well we sure had the ability to dynamically balance tires on the vehicle when I was in school. I know you don't see them very often, but you can do it both ways.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DTJ wrote:

Yes, it is a possibility to do "on the car" balancing, but that is not (necessarily) what is meant by dynamic balancing. Dynamic balancing only refers to the idea that the wheel is rotated (either on or off the car) during the balancing.
I'm of the mind that "on the car" balancing is only a band-aid approach to some other problem with the wheel, hub or axle. You should be able to balance a wheel&tire and then mount it on any axle and be good to go.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
tech27 wrote:

Tech,
Makes sense to me. I think this falls under the old adage of; "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
The more time you let someone (including one's self) change things, the more opportunities there are for problems and mistakes.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 May 2005 17:59:32 -0400, Malt_Hound

Mine cannot be rotated as I have different sizes on the fronts! pete
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm glad you see that. I've given this explanation before and lots of people thought it was ludicrous. Your point is bang on. Tire rotation may possibly increase the tread life of tires (especially if you throw the spare into the rotation). But even if it makes sense for this reason alone, a dealer gets absolutely no benefit from your extra tire life, but potentially has all the grief to deal with if you end up with shimmy and shake as a result. I've even hear that service reps will tell a customer, in low tones with a wink "You know, I just can't give you a reasonable deal on a rotation because (insert some stupid justification here), but (and please don't say you heard it from me), Bobby down the street will do it lickety split for next to nothing".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The idea is to have all tires wear approximately evenly, so that they all wear out at the same time. Then you can replace them with a matched set of new tires, rather than have two new tires and two partly worn old tires (or having to waste some of the tread life of the old not worn out tires).
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Timothy J. Lee wrote:

It all depends on what you're trying to maximize.
If you're trying to extract the utomost performance from every tire, then don't rotate because once a wear pattern is established, switching it to a different corner of the car would result in a sub-optimal contact patch.
On the other hand, if you don't expect to push your car to its absolute lateral G limit all the time (as in the case of 99.9% of daily driven cars!) then rotating the tires and tolerating a slightly sub-optimum contact patch right after rotation WILL get longer service life out of each tire.
The vast majority of cars on the road- ESPECIALLY front-drive vehicles- benefit a lot from tire rotation in the long run.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve wrote:

I don't uderstand the theory of this statement. If you are running a tire which has worn a particular way, and now has a sub-optimal contact, wouldn't you think that the "high spots" (the areas with greater pressure in the new location) would wear faster and therfore negate the total tire life assertion?
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malt_Hound wrote:

Yes, but the tire thus lasts longer than it would if you left it where it was so that it wore through to the cord in the first high-wear area.
Frankly, most cars don't wear tires that badly except some FWD vehicles. Its entirely possible to wear two sets of front tires on an FWD down to the wear indicators without showing significant overall wear on a single set of rear tires. But by that time the rear tires are so aged that they don't have the grip they should and are subject to tread separation and other problems. It seems to me, based on several experiences now, that modern tire designs are more sensitive to the aging of the rubber compounds than the tires of the 70s. Even if you had a set of tires stored in a dark, dry garage for 6 years, the odds of them lasting a full lifetime when you put them on the car will be VERY small- they'll probably develop cracks or separations long before they wear out.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve wrote:

I agree, rotation will lengthen the life of the individual tire, but the tires will still wear at the same rate as a set.
Here's an example: Because of the large amount of rear camber, my Z3 wears the rear tires (on the inboard edges) twice as fast as the fronts (which wear pretty evenly) . I can either replace the rears only at ~20k miles and get a total of 40k miles out of 6 tires, or I can rotate the fronts to the back and thereby get a bit less than 30k miles out of the original set of 4, and then have to buy 4 new tires.
Plus you either have to swap the wheels yourself or pay someone to do it.
-Fred W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/17/2005 1:49 PM, Malt_Hound wrote:

I have noticed most BMWs have a lot of rear camber. Why is this?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The negative camber tends to keep the loaded wheel upright when cornering fast and the car rolls slightly. To prevent oversteer.
--
*Why is it considered necessary to screw down the lid of a coffin?

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
On 5/14/2005 4:15 AM, Thomas & Sons Cycle Shop wrote:

Can you point me to the BMW site the recommends no tire rotation?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Says so in my driver's handbook.
--
*Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject

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

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.