First Scheduled Service and Unexpected Rear Tire Wear - 2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata Convertible Long-Term

Edmunds.com

First Scheduled Service and Unexpected Rear Tire Wear - 2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata Convertible Long-Term Road Test

Our 2016 Mazda MX-5 Miata was ready for its first scheduled service with a hair over 10,000 miles on the odometer.

Read the full story here

barich1

A reasonable price and not only no upsells, but not performing a service you'd agreed to that wasn't needed and explaining why? It's unfortunate that this is remarkable, but good for them.

stever

Looks like the '92 sold already.

kirkhilles1

Am I the only one that gets shocked by these numbers. I KNOW, I KNOW. Its California. $60 for something that I'd imagine is pretty simple? The cost for 0w20 Castrol Full Synthetic at Walmart is $22.47, so AT LEAST a $8 profit added there. The Oil filter is reasonable, but still a few bucks profit there and then $15 labor? I mean, you can get a coupon commonly for $20 oil changes.

I get some of the more complicated changes and my 2000 Miata's oil filter is a PITA to get to, but come on. An estimated Hour and a Half also just for a simple oil change? No express service?

I just don't get it. I just don't.

nate001

Did I miss something here? They skipped the rotation because the tires were not wearing the same front to rear... which is when they should have been rotated. Was the wear even across the width of the tires?

Shouldn't the Mazda dealer be checking in to this for you if they think it's an issue, since the car is still under warranty

kirkhilles1

Isn't it normal for the rears to wear much more aggressively on a RWD car like the Miata. It seems like that always is the case with my 2000, although I rotate quite frequently (every 6k or so).

texases

You're surprised oil costs more at a dealer for oil than at Walmart? Really?

And I don't understand the reason not to rotate. It's precisely because tires wear unevenly that one rotates them. This is the perfect example of why TO rotate tires. ???

bankerdanny

nate001 said:

Did I miss something here? They skipped the rotation because the tires were not wearing the same front to rear... which is when they should have been rotated. Was the wear even across the width of the tires?

Shouldn't the Mazda dealer be checking in to this for you if they think it's an issue, since the car is still under warranty

My exact thought. The whole purpose of the rotation is to even out wear. Not rotating because the rears were worn more (as one would expect on a RWD car) defeats the whole purpose.

stever

Apples to oranges perhaps, but in the FWD minivan world, you want your better tires on the rear. Maybe it's the opposite with RWD cars?

capriracer

stever said:

Apples to oranges perhaps, but in the FWD minivan world, you want your better tires on the rear. Maybe it's the opposite with RWD cars?

No, it's the same regardless of drive configuration - best tires on the rear to prevent spinouts..

stever

Thanks @capriracer - so, just based on what's been described here, it sounds like the tires have been rotated and the worn ones put up front.

thecardoc3

kirkhilles1 said:

Am I the only one that gets shocked by these numbers. I KNOW, I KNOW. Its California. $60 for something that I'd imagine is pretty simple? The cost for 0w20 Castrol Full Synthetic at Walmart is $22.47, so AT LEAST a $8 profit added there.

You cannot judge prices that way, WalMart often sells items at or below cost to drive customers into their stores. If it works for you to buy from them for yourself and you want to do this yourself that's fine. If you want and or need someone to do it for you, then they need to charge correctly in order to be successful to do so.

kirkhilles1 said:

The Oil filter is reasonable, but still a few bucks profit there and then $15 labor? I mean, you can get a coupon commonly for $20 oil changes.

I get some of the more complicated changes and my 2000 Miata's oil filter is a PITA to get to, but come on. An estimated Hour and a Half also just for a simple oil change? No express service?

I just don't get it. I just don't.

So open a business doing these services and find out for yourself if you can run it successfully when people try to force you to endure costs that are greater than your sales.

thecardoc3

The tire rotation. This is a subject that has been discussed over and over again. Tire manufacturers want the worst tires on the front because an under-steering condition is less likely to get the average driver into trouble than an over-steering condition. The expectation is that the driver will feel the under-steer occurring before losing the car and slow down in bad conditions. If the rear end gives up, by the time the driver realizes there is a problem it's already too late.

Otherwise there are still a number of potential factors to consider, some of which are not known at this time.

One factor is that with extended oil service intervals, tire maintenance is getting overlooked until its often too late to address without creating a problem. (Think the pulling Jeep) The tires should have been rotated at 6000 miles, which would have allowed for less variance between the tread conditions then they have now at 10,000.

Another problem is, we can't see the tread wear ourselves at this point. But in keeping with the demands by the tire manufacturers, the worst tires should now move to the front so they should have rotated them. However, what if the wear patterns that the rear tires have now would result in a lead, or some other undesirable sensation if they were moved to the front? Then the dealer would be wrong in everyone's opinion for rotating them.

By extending this service interval too far the dealer now has to contend with the very real possibility that they get to be wrong for not rotating the tires, and they might just be wrong if they do depending on the outcome. That makes choosing to do nothing the easier of the two choices.

stever

What about just not rotating the tires?

The time and expense of replacing the tires (or just those on one axle) may not be much more than just leaving a set in place until they wear.

texases

I did the 'don't rotate' routine for several years, worked OK, except the tire models change and I couldn't keep 4 matching tires on the car. So now I have them rotated.

thecardoc3

stever said:

What about just not rotating the tires?

There are cars on the road today that have tires that a tire rotation isn't possible. Any wear issues have to be addressed by replacement.

stever said:

The time and expense of replacing the tires (or just those on one axle) may not be much more than just leaving a set in place until they wear.

No matter what this is a moving target where the "correct" answer changes with each situation. I know what works for me and my driving habits. It might not be correct for you.

s197gt

the reasoning specified by the dealer for not rotating makes no sense. i drove rwd vehicles almost exclusively for years (still have 3) and the rears always wear faster than the fronts.

cardoc3 brings up a good point about extended service intervals. most bmw dealers don't recommend tire rotations. makes sense when you consider we go 18k miles between oil changes. tires are wearing in a very specific pattern at that point.

and before you call me crazy for following that oil change interval we are at 163k miles and counting.

PF_Flyer

The fronts on a front wheel drive wear faster than the rear. That's a reason to DO the rotation in my book. Now the decision not to rotate may have been based on the rears being down to 5/32's vs the 7/32's on the front, but that's the only thing I can even guess was being thought. I rotate every 5-6K miles and I'm never more than 1/32 difference front to back. Spread the wear out among all 4 tires, isn't that the point?

stever

You left out the part where you go and hang out with your buddies at Tire Town two or three days a week. They probably comp you.