Re: AWD car needs a new tire; Replace one or all 4

that was probably an unrelated aftermath of the incident.

with mismatched tires i'd expect the damage localized to the center diff and possibly rear diff (which impreza ts normally does not have anyway, so that's off the plate)

like you implied it's hard to imagine how torque bound center diff could propagate the strain through the

HUH?? ALL of the AWDs have rear diffs. You have a front differential inside the trans, That feeds power to the front wheels. The same shaft that turns the front ring gear also turns the center differential/vicuous coupling, hydraulic/electronic clutch (model dependent on what you have)that is located at the output shaft housing. From that power goes back through the drive shaft to the rear differential. Without a rear diff. they would eat tires like crazy.

Your response is exactly reminiscent of John the novice, riding companion in Robert Pirsig's "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"

See

I'm aware of tubes, I'm also aware that they cause friction, therefore heat, therefore increased risk of a bigger failure at the exact moment that you don't want it (that is, loaded down and haulin' ass.)

I'm not that guy that insists on factory replacement parts - in fact, I'm a big believer in "friends don't let friends drive stock." Machines were made to be modified, to be made better. But I still am made a little nervous by any mods that would result in the derating of a stock component...

nate

Perhaps you'll be shocked to learn that automotive radial tires and tubes have existed for decades. As I've clearly, previously addressed, in a non racing or ultra high speed environment, the heat buildup will NEVER be an issue or noticed other than the tires possibly providing a negligble few less miles of wear. In a passenger car application, running tubeless is more about the wheels on which they're mounted that it is about the tires.

Even when spoonfed, you show no indication of being able to grasp even the most simple of concepts. This isn't exactly rocket science. Good luck to you.

if you're driving domestic, that's a reasonably sound policy because original quality is so low. but on imports like honda and toyota, for the most part, aftermarket is inferior quality and thus a downgrade where "made better" simply doesn't apply.

right, so you need to qualify your "stock" position wrt the manufacturer.

On 01/11/2012 07:14 PM, Hoof Headed bleated:

i see that you didn't inherit the "sense of irony" gene.

anyway, nate is right on this one. we're not driving bias ply tires on unbeaded rims any more. we're driving low profile radials on beaded [j-spec or better] rims with heavier vehicles at high speeds. tubes are simply inadequate - and more to the point, he has stated precisely why.

i stand corrected. the last part of my missive should've read: "... and, possibly, a NON-OPEN (limited slip) type rear diff (impreza ts has an open rear diff anyway, so that's off the plate)"

toyodas (and most subarus) come with the noodle soft springs. i;'m not implying the (fat) swaybars would cure ALL the ills of misguided approach towards suspesion tuning at the toyoda but they sure help you from going postal in every single turn cursing the team responsible for that roll the car is taking at the slightest provocation

maybe most americans like soft suspension and the resulting body roll, brake dive and acceleration squat so that suspension on am market imports is tuned to please them?

I do like to give at least as good as I get.

The bead of bias ply passenger tires were also mounted on safety rims, albeit of slightly different shape and dimensions (which in practice proved to be of no consequence) than radials. Hell, even Harley m/c tube rims sported them. And the bead of a tire with insufficient pressure will ride off either type. When radials became more common in the 60's and

Passenger cars are actually on average less massive today, with domestic speed limits, on average (except at times for very few rural localities like Montana and Nevada), actually lower than in previous decades.

Sorry, but no, Nates arguments alone (which were completely removed from your own) expose that he clearly doesn't begin to have a clue and hasn't expressed or presented the slightest evidence to suggest otherwise. And it would also seem to have escaped your notice as well that in the case presented, we're talking about the very same tires mounted on the very same, currently existing wheels (but with the addition of tubes) anyway. So your argument doesn't start to hold water, or air for that matter, either, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Perhaps the two of you might desire to instead attempt yet another approach ;^)

I have literally no experience with Japanese cars, save for occasional oil changes. Most of my vehicles have been German, with a few American ('67 Dart, '93 F-150, and hopefully tomorrow a '99 Cherokee.) I will commonly do things like replace rubber hoses with AN stainless braided; replace rubber bushings with either heavier-duty ones or poly, replace mild steel parts with stainless, etc. etc. etc. I do take a pretty skeptical view of claims of increased performance and tend not to buy the "racey" type parts unless my spidey sense and/ or independent corroboration says that it's logical that the part as described will result in an increase in both performance and durability. (e.g. I don't really have a problem buying a mandrel-bent stainless aftermarket exhaust, so long as it's emissions legal, because often they're comparable in price to parts store stuff and offer measurable advantages.)

Well, in the case we are discussing, I would think that a new stock tire vs. a damaged tire with an inner tube is a no brainer. If we were talking about a farm truck I wouldn't hesitate to agree that the tube is the way to go; really, the only consequences of failure are simply having to replace the tire, possibly in a muddy and/or unpleasant location. Not a big deal. But if we are talking about a vehicle that is presumably going to be driven at high speed on the highway, I'd prefer to have the good stuff between my butt and the pavement.

nate

you're an idiot.

Witty rejoinder there, supercilious poseur. But really, as previously addressed regarding those of your risibly pretentious ilk, how might any rational person possibly rebut such a well delineated, reasoned, fact filled and convincing argument? So I'll instead invoke a response more along the lines of your own, truly brain dead approach, namely: "I know you are but what am I".

I have literally no experience with Japanese cars, save for occasional oil changes. Most of my vehicles have been German, with a few American ('67 Dart, '93 F-150, and hopefully tomorrow a '99 Cherokee.) I will commonly do things like replace rubber hoses with AN stainless braided; replace rubber bushings with either heavier-duty ones or poly, replace mild steel parts with stainless, etc. etc. etc. I do take a pretty skeptical view of claims of increased performance and tend not to buy the "racey" type parts unless my spidey sense and/ or independent corroboration says that it's logical that the part as described will result in an increase in both performance and durability. (e.g. I don't really have a problem buying a mandrel-bent stainless aftermarket exhaust, so long as it's emissions legal, because often they're comparable in price to parts store stuff and offer measurable advantages.)

Well, in the case we are discussing, I would think that a new stock tire vs. a damaged tire with an inner tube is a no brainer. If we were talking about a farm truck I wouldn't hesitate to agree that the tube is the way to go; really, the only consequences of failure are simply having to replace the tire, possibly in a muddy and/or unpleasant location. Not a big deal. But if we are talking about a vehicle that is presumably going to be driven at high speed on the highway, I'd prefer to have the good stuff between my butt and the pavement.

nate

Thanx for the never failing, always speciously illuminating flummoxed input, "John".

Sadly, whether you're right or not, that is at least the perception of domestic manufacturers as well. American cars with "heavy duty" or "police package" suspensions are usually pretty decent; my (limited) experience has been that the standard suspension packages are just as you describe.

nate

And you don't put "just any tube" in a tubeless radial tire - but the right tube, properly installed, is a good solution for MANY drivers. Going to drive across country at 130kph? Mabee better buy new tires.

There are aftermarket parts for every taste or pocketbook. Some are grossly inferior to OEM in many if not all aspects, while some excede OEM in one or more parameters - and others are clearly superior - whether you are talking Korean, Japanese, German, French, British or American brands.

we don't like soft suspension - we just don't like losing our fillings on concrete freeways and potholes.

evidently you're not aware of anti-dive/squat geometry, etc. you can still have soft suspension and mostly eliminate these things.

exactly. I like the option of being able to do that if I have to. It's certainly not something out of character for me to do. (maybe not quite

That, and while the odds of having that tire fail on you while the tube is installed are small, the odds of that failure actually causing an incident are small, etc. etc. etc. most tire mfgrs. will recommend against use of any tire with a sidewall puncture so they won't hold any liability in the vanishingly small chance that you do run into that busload of nuns.

If you're OK with the increased risk - and I will grant you it's small - then more power to ya.