Strange tyre story ? - Page 2

I won't go over the details again, but the only serious accident I had
was when the back end broke away on my Cavalier and fishtailed until it
hit and demolished a stone wall.

This was within a week or two of fitting new tyres on the front, and I
admit I did back off instead of powering through it, but at 55-60mph
that was VERY counter-intuitive!
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

 in garage told me the when they replace front tyres, they swap them
with the
 rear tyres as standard practice so the newest tyres are on the rear.

 I'm curious, is there any truth in what he was saying ? The garage
certainly
 had Michelin posters explaining this policy but it seems to go
against
 common sense ?

I was looking through the Volvo handbook out the wife`s car for
something tonight and noticed in the tyre section a box headed
IMPORTANT.
It stated "Tyres with the greatest tread depth should always -
irrespective of rear or front wheel drive - be fitted at the rear"

mark wrote:


Common sense should always be questioned, because sometimes it'll
lead you astray.

Here's a video explaining why the good rubber should go on the
rear:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5YsQ_a_ijA


It's one of those lowest-common-denominator things.  Many
experienced drivers can handle oversteer competently. But your
average driver will likely make a nasty mess of it.  Because my
wife and daughter also drive my car, the new tyres go on the
rear.

John

John Henderson wrote:

And that *ought* to be an end to the matter.  What's the betting it isn't
though? ;-)

Tim

wrote:


Could be interesting on something like a Lotus Esprit that has
different size rims and tyres front and rear :)


--

The Other Mike wrote:

they do know about cars with different sizes and will fit appropriately

On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 11:50:27 +0100, "Mrcheerful"


...so they might refuse to sell you some new fronts if your backs are
a bit worn :)


--

The Other Mike wrote:


That doesn't sound like free capitalism to me.

John