New tyres back or fronts ?

I thought it was you, shielding your head from the FBI and their conspiracies.

Then let us examine the evidence. For a start, we are not talking about bald rear tyres, I assume that people here are law abiding and change somewhere before 1.6 mm. Hence there are still plenty of grip on the rear tyres. I also assume that people here are not boy racers, they just want to use the roads to go safely about their normal business within legal speed limits. So, as others also have pointed out, there isn't much in it. From a practical point of view, let's say that front tyres wear twice as fast as rear tyres. Hence, you can change the front tyres when the back ones are half worn, next time, you can change all four. That's 2 visits to the tyre fitter. If you renew the back tyres and put the half worn back tyres on front, then the tyre cycle comes out of sync and you need 3 visits to the tyre fitter instead of 2. Obviously, the trade like that you visit them many times, then they might temp you with other offers...

That depends on how long they're on there, most tyres are less grippy after a couple of years independent of their tread depth.

But they don't get to sell you 4 tyres in one go.

The guy who was following the tyre manufacturers instructions? Here are a few examples you can read:

I've also seen (in the last month) a similar statement from Continental tyres but I can't find that link now.

There's even a YouTube video for those who can't read and understand what the tyre makers are now all saying:

It's a simple rule. For normal road use, I don't understand why some people seem to have such difficulty with it and far less understand why they would want to perpetuate old fashioned, unsafe and discredited advice.

If you disagree, feel free to take this up with your tyre manufacturer

- I don't have their wealth of knowledge.

My local ATS has a big sign up saying that new tyres should always go on the back. However ...

Ian

On the French car I was driving today you can leave one of the rear wheels off and it doesn't make much difference.

Ian

On 2008-04-14, Duncan Wood wrote: [...]

I haven't noticed that particularly but there is quite a significant grip difference between 1.6mm and 4+ mm when it's wet.

Zathras (Zathras ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

That's exactly the problem. It's a massive over-simplification. It has to be, so f****it tyre fitters can understand it.

Perhaps because some of us know damn well that our cars wear front tyres at about two to three times the rate of rear tyres, and have the intelligence to take the small step of logic from that fact to the fact that the rear tyres are therefore contributing very little grip. Again, from there it's only a small step for a reasonably intelligent person to conclude that the better tyres go on the front.

That, and the fact that some cars left the factory with narrower tyres on the back than the front.

The front tyres wear quicker on a FWD car because not only do they have to drive and steer the car, they also do most of the braking, and they usually carry more load than the rears. To conclude from that, that the difference in wear means that the rear tyres contribute little grip is false IMO. It may be less than the fronts, but it's still critical. Their grip might not matter much on a straight road, but it matters a lot when cornering, especially if the road is wet or slippery.

Again,

That conclusion does not agree with the opinion of most car and tyre manufacturers. Mike.

If only. A lot (I'd actually take a guess and say *most*) of them don't know anything about the current advice.

My fronts wear at closer to 1.5 times that of the rears..you don't have a Vauxhall do you? :-)

..to ignore research that has changed the minds of every tyre manufacturer in the world? Somebody's wrong and since this advice appears from New Zealand to the US, I'll go with what the makers say on this one and not your out-dated opinion.

The point is that, what grip there is provided by the rear tyres is critical and the more of it the better. The aim is to *ensure* that the fronts loose grip *first* - don't you understand what the tyre makers have said? I thought it was even pretty clear even in the video myself - even down to seeing the under steering car go wider. *Your* aim is to ensure the rears loose grip before the fronts which is not something I would be brave enough to advise a *normal* road driver to do.

All you're showing here is that a "reasonably intelligent person" can be misguided and fail to see the bigger picture. What valid research have you done to disprove the manufacturers claims?

In any case, if you're more intelligent than the tyre manufacturers, feel free to explain to them the error of their ways and how their research is bollocks and their advice unsafe. Before you do, remember that this advice is for an *average* driver who is unlikely to have been trained or know how to deal with over steer but is much more likely to have experienced mild under steer and be able to cope with it - that is the main point.

I know of no *recent mainstream* car to have this. What ones are you thinking of?

Duncan Wood ("Duncan Wood" ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Oh, indeed. If we're talking about four good tyres, it becomes much less significant.

If we're talking about two good tyres and two shit 'uns, though, you may well have something that will just understeer straight on at every opportunity - and, more significantly, will take much much further to stop.

If there's no risk of the back end breaking loose, then braking's got to take priority.

If you're prepared to have two 'shit' tyres on your car then, surely, you are putting cheapness above safety. Incidentally, I don't see where the tyre manufacturers said anything about fitting 'shit' tyres in their advice about putting the best tyres on the rear.

A huge difference, which is why you won't find me driving on tyres with only 1.6mm tread depth.

yes but many had quite interesting handling characteristics....AX GT and 205 GTI....

Having taught at least four of the fitters at the depot I use most, I

*know* how thick they are!

Our Previa, though RWD, wears fronts out fairly quickly. Because of its size and layout, I have *never*, no matter how I drive it, managed to make the rear end break away (I've seen Japanese videos of these things being "drifted" though!) I *have* managed to get the front end to lose it on wet roads though. The new tyres always go on the front for me. No tyre fitter has ever suggested otherwise.

I still can't. The guy in the black car was provoking the oversteer.

Surely, you get shorter braking distance with the new tyres on front.

Three wheeler cars with the single wheel at front are considered inferior to cars with the single wheel at the back.

Most cheap consumer cars have limited handling capabilities, but that is alright because they were never intended as track cars.

On 2008-04-15, Chris Bartram wrote: [...]

A lot depends on the car. Most shopping cars from the early 90s understeered like mad because that was considered safer than the alternatives (and probably was). Newer cars are more neutral with much better front grip, but are also easier to control generally.

Most new cars are designed with understeer at the limit so that when you crash you go in front first and the frontal crash structure saves you, when you hit a tree / bridge support / lamp post front on is the best way to do it, sideways tends to rip the car apart and take its occupants with it.