In low traction (or no traction) situations, the rear tires on a FWD vehicle will break loose in a turn. No matter what the front tires are telling the rear tires, that car is gonna spin out.
The reason it's smart to place new tires on the REAR of a FWD vehicle is to minimize the loss of rear tire traction. If the front tires lose traction first, the car will plow ahead (aka understeer). Most drivers can control a car that's plowing ahead.
If the rear tires lose traction first, the car will come around in a spin. It'll take a pretty good driver to maintain control of that car, and we all have clear opinions of drivers on today's roads, right?
bretfraz is right It is equally as dangerous to have a blowout on the front or the rear. Just depends where it happens. They just shouldn't be on the car at all. There is NO safe place for a blowout. (or even saf-ER). The only factor that has any bearing on the tire position is the life of the tire itself. Front tires will wear quickly, rear tire will cup badly (eventually) on a FWD car.
I had a '71 Volvo during my college years in Syracuse and I made it thru the winters up there fine with snow tires only on the rear wheels. Now, I have a BMW 325i. The OEM tires are grippy Goodyear Eagles and I am heading into my first winter with it (but in downstate NY). There seems to be considerable debate on whether a correct winter tire setup reguires snows on the front as well as the rear. Of course, tire makers and sellers recommend the full set method, but I think that is a bit self serving.
With a RWD car you can get away with just two snows on the rear. Four is still better but you'll brake straight with rear snows and front all-seasons and you'll get the traction advantage when accelerating.
With FWD, however, you MUST get four as two on the front only will lead to poor braking with the back end braking loose first, yielding oversteer and spins. Putting snows just on the back won't help you with traction in this case so four is the only answer with FWD.
because with all vehicles the front brakes do more than half of the total vehicle braking. Therefore, for the shortest, safest stopping on snow, you would benefit from snow tires on all four wheels, RWD or FWD.
I've lived most of my life in the western New York snow belt, and have had either RWD or 4WD drive vehicles. 2 snows on the rear, and 2 good all seasons on the front will get you around reasonably well, but 4 snows will give you better steering control. It will be noiser for sure, but safer, IMHO.
Look at it this way, would you prefer to slide off the road nose first or tail first? 4 snows might help prevent the situation from happening at all.
I really can't answer the road noise question at this point.
I will say the MXV4+ was a very very quiet tire.
unfortunately, about 2 weeks before I purchased the hydoedge I hit some road debris on route 80 in NJ and damaged the muffler on my car. Have not brought it in yet for repairs so all I hear now is a motor boat.
Since I am not an engineer and know nothing of tires other than what I have seen in articles I would say there is no right answer to the question on where the tires should go.
Based on what I have read the purpose of putting the new tires on the rear is to prevent loss of control of the car by providing better information to the driver based on the tires with the least grip. For example and in theory entering a hard turn with new tires on the front the driver has good road feel that the tires are gripping and only when he is hard into the turn do the rear tires lose grip. Now if the new tires are on the rear the driver enters the turn and has the road fell of the front tires slipping and thus slows down.
The problem I have with this analysis is that I thought that as a tire loses tread its dry road grip increases while its wet road grip decreases. Therefore applying the reasoning above the new tires should be on the front in dry weather and in the back in wet weather.
Hey guys does any of this pass the smell test???
Just repeating all the stuff thrown around on this topic.
Check tirerack for a lot of info on why or why not. Many dealers(including Tirerack and E-tires) won't sell only 2 due to the difference in traction and liability from lawsuit due too it. Most accidents I see as a Volunteer fireman in snow are due to the fact 1) lack of common sense driving to fast! 2) not being able to stop or turn (due to #1) 3) rear end sliding out causing spin due to lack of traction. Deductible for insurance $500? Cost of 4 snows mounted on dedicated rims $300 to $2,000 pending vehicle. Rental car, Hospital, Funeral (god forbid), Guilt of permanent damage to Family or others? I have 8 dedicated snows and rims (2 cars)in my shed that last 4-5 years and get replaced. My family and yours is worth more than $500 to $600 every 4 years to me.
Other people are perfectly happy putting their life on 4 for $79.99 tires and using them until the steel belts show in 7 years and then complain that they had to buy new ones. They also have no issue spending $150 on a new pair of sneakers every 3 months to be in style also. Different strokes!
I think somewhere in all of the overheated hyperbole you stated that your opinion, as a volly, parent, consumer advocate and style maven, is that four snows are better than two.
Thanks for your opinion.
To the rest of the tire experts out there, my question still stands. Living in downstate suburban New York, where the roads are plowed rapidly, I have a BMW with all-season tires on it. It has handled very well in the one storm I drove it in, but that was in March. I lived in Syracuse for several winters with an old Volvo rear-wheel drive with two snows on the back, and non of the modern handling features that my BMW has -- ABS, DSC, EBD, etc., and survived quite nicely.
So, is the push for snows on four wheels more of a marketing ploy, or is it really necessary?
In my reply, I said 4 snows are always better and they are. You'll stop, steer and start better with 4. I also said you _can_ get away with just 2 in a RWD vehicle, which you've experienced for yourself. You'll be able to drive more confidently with 4 and most BMW owners I know drive confidently, not sheepishly.
It isn't a marketing ploy. Most people don't put any snow tires on so if they thought more people would put them on if they could get away with 2 then that's what they'd say except that just on the front of FWD cars they would soon be in trouble, perhaps with a low-inflated Firestone Explorer type fiasco. 4 works better and is required with FWD which the majority of cars have today.
4 is better. We've all said that. What more can we say to convince you?
ABS, ASC, DSC, EBD and CBC can't do much without road traction except try to keep you in control WHILE MAKING THE STOPPING DISTANCE LONGER. ABS will work more, stability control will work more and braking control will work more. This will cause braking and engine retarding at some times which slows you down and extra ABS to lengthen stopping distances at other times.
the Kleen Wheels work fine for what they're designed for, but I've had friends who said they cause the brake caliper and rotor temperatures to climb sky high, causing brake fade, premature pad wear and rotor warpage.
They obviously block airflow while they're blocking the black stuff from your wheels.
I'd rather have slightly dirty wheels or have to hose the wheels off twice a week than worry about extra costs for brake parts and fading brakes.
We've put almost 2,000 miles on the Hydroedge since replacing the Symmetrys on an '01 EX Odyssey. Very impressed so far, quieter and much more responsive than the OEM's. 1-2 mpg improvement as well, which is a big deal for an Odyssey. I don't think you can go wrong with an 85,000 mi. treadwear rating for a tire that performs this well. Definitely worth the few bucks more.
What causes tires to get out of round is irregular wear.
And the causes of irregular wear are:
Alignment, inflation, rotation (not enough).
Vehicles like a little bit of toe in for stability. Vehicles with toe out feel "darty" and don't feel like they are going in a predictable direction.
Toe in causes the tire to always act like it is being dragged a bit sideways (In fact, it is!), basically grinding off the tread. Because of minuscule irregularities in the road surface, in the wheel and in the tire, over long periods of time, the tire will develop areas of high wear and areas of low wear.
Some folks like to use the term "flatspot", but I prefer to avoid that term in this context, and reserve it for brake lock skidding and when a vehicle sits for a long period of time.
Low inflation pressure aggravates the situation by making the tire less stiff and more susceptible to wear mechanisms in general.
Each wheel position has its own wear characteristics. The fronts do all the steering, most of the braking, carry most of the load, and on FWD's, do all the accelerating. the rears are doing something else. So rotating the tires forces the tire to wear off the old pattern and wear a different pattern, and in the process, tends to even things out.
Irregular wear can not be eliminated, but you can stay ahead of it. Obviously with tires that wear more slowly, you have to be especially vigilant.
high mileage tires wear out of round. My last long term tire was HX4, an 80K tire. It wore out the first two at 115K. I put on two used tires to trade the car. The tires were rotated at 7-8K regularly by NTB and rebalanced often. They were on a LeSabre 93.
I had other Michelins, but traded the cars before they wore out. Currently have Xones and Symmetrys on two LeSabres.
I just bought a new 2003 Tiburon GT. I had a slight shimmy at 60-65 and brought it to my trusted mechanic to check the balance. I didn't have the time to take it back to the dealer. While the left front wheel was in fact out of balance, he said the tires were out of round. Could this be from sitting in one spot on the dealer lot for a year? When I picked up the car there was only 20 lbs. in each tire. Some dealer prep. huh? By the way I only have 600 miles on the car. Should I go directly to a Michelin dealer for replacement?
Tiburon dealer. My Buick dealer handles tire problems under warranty. The tires may be damaged or they may come round when driven. I guess it's a question of how much they are out of round. I think you're back to the road force balancing to see if that will fix them if that's not the balancer the mechanic used...
I'd hit the dealer pleasantly but hard. I'd think Michelin would handle it for the dealer. Out of curiosity which tire is it on the Tib?
I have a 1999 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 extra cab v6 with 67,000 miles on it. I am looking to replace the original tires (Firestone Wilderness AT's) as they are showing their age. Does anybody have any recomendations for a good all purpose tire? I need a tire that gives me good traction in snow and rain.
My Nissan 92 300zx needs tires ... doing awful currently on old set of comp t/a v rated - plenty of tread but brittle/dry. I need much better wet traction and am thinking of Bridgestone 950's, or possibly the new BFG traction/s v rated tire. The Z is not a daily driver and sits a lot, especially in winter ... so tires need to hold up to wet and stored conditions. Any comments? Suggestions? My limit is about $125 per tire, mounted etc ... and these 2 tires fall in that range. thanks!
Michelin Cross Terrain, LTX M/S, Bridgestone Dueler A/T Revo all seem to be very popular choices for dry, wet and decent snow. Also look at Nokian WR SUV. Check Tirerack and E-tires for reviews also.
My opinions yes, expert never. Just hate seeing $$ figure put on safety (not that you did) your just looking for the best advice / experience which is excellent. hpulley covered more also. Definitely refer to tirerack and check reviews on your Eagles in snow. All the traction aids on your vehicle are dependent on the ACTUAL traction the 4 tires (or 2 and 2) provide. I think it was CR that had rated their worst snow tire in testing to provide 40 to 50% better traction than their best all season in the same tests. Reality means that's probably 10 feet better stopping. My neighbor runs Eagle RSA's year round on his BMW and gets bye in Long Island winters with plowed roads. He also complains that he doesn't feel that safe and his aids seem to not work as well when it does snow even lightly. Went to BMW and complained they were malfunctioning, didn't want to listen to the Service manager tell him the RSA's are performance (dry and wet) tires. When I buy I refer to here at Edmunds, Tirerack, CR, and friends as the experts (and even then don't believe it at times).
If best for you try just the Eagles for first snow, find a parking lot or other open area and have fun. Floor it, stomp on the brakes etc. If too slippery go for 2 snows on the rear, if problems on next snow stopping and turning (but none starting) go for 2 more. Personal opinion stay away from studded tires if you do, the decrease in dry traction for "normal" conditions is not worth it. Studs are great for ice and hard packed snow (which we don't see much of) on the roads.
STS tire now carries Nokian also. Excellent all weather (all season) tire is the WR. High performance NO, excellent dry, wet, and snow and H-rated YES.
Thanks, this is the type of opinion/information I was looking for. I wanted to hear from someone running the same setup (3-series/eagles) as me. My experience with snow in this car was limited to one March storm and the car felt pretty good. In fact, I was able to motor up a hill that most other cars were sliding down (thanks to RWD). Here on LI, they do clear the roads quickly, so I figure that I will head into the winter with the all-seasons and see what happens.
FWIW, the reviews of the new Conti ExtremeContact all-seasons on Tirerack and CR have been glowing, and for snow, too. Maybe those are the next tires for this car (though, I understand the Eagles wear a long time).
Just bought 4 Michelin X-Radial with 80K warranty from Costco mounted, balanced, and out the door for $315.96 plus sales tax of $34.76. They convinced me that this was essentially the same tire as the Michelin Harmony...they had both tires side by side and the tread pattern was just ever so slightly different.
Do any of you tire gurus have any experience with these tires? It just seemed like a heck of a deal for a Michelin 80K tire.
I got a set of X Radial Plus's back in '00 from Costco for my Quest. The tread pattern then was similar to the Michelin X-One :-).
Mine worked great through two winters but didn't inspire a lot of confidence after that. I had one that was damaged by a flat and tread separation was setting in so I dumped them with ~50,000 miles on them.
The Harmony's were a bit expensive here when I was shopping so I went with Toyo this time around from a nearby shop.
I have 10,000 miles on my Sorento LX 4X4 and I just replaced the tires !! My Sorento came with Kuhmo 798 Radials. They were all wore down to less than 2/32 " tread ... I contacted a KUHMO distributor and found out that the 798 model does NOT have a manufactures limited warranty. These are "ECONOMY TIRES" ususally used in Korea as "Spares". This information was given to me by the tire rack website(distributor). I had a set a Bridgestone Dueler REVO's installed yesterday... Huge improvement on the ride ! I went up a size to a P255/70/16 ! They look great. Bring on the Minnesota snow !!!!!
Then you have to follow thru with what you want. I go with best tires on drive wheels. I don't plan for extreme circumstances when I buy tires, I plan with years of what I felt were successful decisions to get me out of everyday situations, so drive wheels get it. If you're only buying 2 tires, Costco (Canada) will not put them on the front. They site manufacturers' recommendations. Gave up arguing... put 'em on the rear of my Neon, have a coffee, get 'em rotated for free under their free service plan (apparently no time/mileage restrictions for free rotation; only recommendations hahaha). Couldn't they just make me sign a large lettered waiver and skip the game?
Like many things in our litigious world, I think the correct answer is based on the last lawsuit, current legal consultant, day of week, weather, cost of malpractice insurance, and how many people subscribe to this forum. And more than once, the next lawsuit reverses the current wisdom.
Well, I finally got tired of the poor traction and performance of the Good Year Integrities on my Isuzu axiom and had some Michelin Cross Terrains installed yesterday morning. Their handing and ride were fantastic as I drove it yesterday. I couldn't believe how much difference a set of tires could make. So that was the good news.
The bad news is that my right rear went flat on my way to work this morning. I had to drive a few blocks to get to the side of the road so I could change it. Of course, this means that the side walls are all scuffed up on a brand new tire. I took the tire to Big O where I bought them. They inspected the tire and found nothing wrong with it. I want a new tire since it hadn't even been installed for 24 hours before it goes flat and looks like crap. They say they won't give me a new tire since they say the integrity of the tire is fine and they don't warranty for cosmetic issues. I say that it must have been a faulty installation that led to the flat considering there was less than fifty miles on the tire and so they should stand by their service and replace the tire regardless on whether it is under warranty or not. I am fuming right now. The sad thing is that I bought the road hazard warranty and if I just simply driven a few miles on the flat, the tire would have been ruined and they would have had to replace it under warranty. If this had happend at a few thousand miles I could understand their argument, but this happend in less than 50 miles.
I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a new tire considering I just spent almost $800 for the tires and an alignment at Big O. Anybody ever have such an issue before that could offer advice on any recourse I may have? Thanks
I already posted my questions in Isuzu Rodeo area but I think this will also be a good place to get an advice.
I'm urgently looking to replace my stock Duelers that came with the truck (245/70-16) and narrowed down my search to three tires: Michelin LTX M/S, Michelin Cross Terrain and Bridgestone Dueler Revo. I mostly do City/Highway driving but my key concern is that I don't want to have any major problems in the snow/ice and some very minor off-roading. By off-roading I basically mean not-paved grovel roads, dirt roads and some sand driving. My stock Duelers did a good job for two years but now even with 6/32 thread left they have lost their grip. I have been recommended to get Michelin over Revo's by Discount Tires and Revo's over Michelin by Firestone (who are Bridgestone Dealers). One of my concern is durability: Michelins are known to go for over 60K mi with no problems, while Bridgestones are normally not that durable. I am, however, not too impressed with the thread design on Michelins (both LTX's and Cross Terrain). They remind me of the design Michelin is using on their Bus tires - straight deep threads that go around the tire. I was also getting mixed reviews on LTX's and Cross Terrain snow performance. Michelin rated CT much better than LTX's in virtually every category, but all the salespeople I've been talking to say the opposite. Another concernt that I have about Bridgestones is that they are A/T tires and might be hard to ballance and might provide rather bumpy ride because of that. All the reviews, however, say opposite and claim that they provide even softer ride than most of the all-season highway tires.
Please help!!! It's getting really close to winter and those Duelers that I have now will not give me a good grip. It'll also take about a week to get Revo's in stock if I do go with them. Firestone do have them at their warehouse but I'd rather go with Discount Tire as their customer satisfaction and performance are far superior over anybody else. But since they are not Bridgestone direct store (and I guess that's why they normally don't recommend Bridgestone tires) it'll take them a while to get those tires in stock.
I already posted my questions in Isuzu Rodeo area but I think this will also be a good place to get an advice.
I'm urgently looking to replace my stock Duelers that came with the truck (245/70-16) and narrowed down my search to three tires: Michelin LTX M/S, Michelin Cross Terrain and Bridgestone Dueler Revo. I mostly do City/Highway driving but my key concern is that I don't want to have any major problems in the snow/ice and some very minor off-roading. By off-roading I basically mean not-paved grovel roads, dirt roads and some sand driving. My stock Duelers did a good job for two years but now even with 6/32 thread left they have lost their grip. I have been recommended to get Michelin over Revo's by Discount Tires and Revo's over Michelin by Firestone (who are Bridgestone Dealers). One of my concern is durability: Michelins are known to go for over 60K mi with no problems, while Bridgestones are normally not that durable. I am, however, not too impressed with the thread design on Michelins (both LTX's and Cross Terrain). They remind me of the design Michelin is using on their Bus tires - straight deep threads that go around the tire. I was also getting mixed reviews on LTX's and Cross Terrain snow performance. Michelin rated CT much better than LTX's in virtually every category, but all the salespeople I've been talking to say the opposite. Another concernt that I have about Bridgestones is that they are A/T tires and might be hard to ballance and might provide rather bumpy ride because of that. All the reviews, however, say opposite and claim that they provide even softer ride than most of the all-season highway tires.
Please help!!! It's getting really close to winter and those Duelers that I have now will not give me a good grip. It'll also take about a week to get Revo's in stock if I do go with them. Firestone do have them at their warehouse but I'd rather go with Discount Tire as their customer satisfaction and performance are far superior over anybody else. But since they are not Bridgestone direct store (and I guess that's why they normally don't recommend Bridgestone tires) it'll take them a while to get those tires in stock.
Well, you've got yourself into quite a twist over this. Let's see if we can help untie you.
First, look at the tires you're comparing and decide which performance characteristics are most important to you.
The Bridgestone is a new tire from them incorporating their latest technology from car performance tires into a LT tire. The Dueler A/T Revo is an All-Terrain tire which means it will work well on and off road. If you plan to use your truck off road on a regular basis, and you want very good traction, then an A/T is an excellent choice. The downside is a usually rougher, noisier ride. So, you've got to decide what is more important - ride quality or off road traction. Mileage isn't a big issue with this tire as Bridgestone warrants it for 50,000 miles.
The Michelin LTX M/S is an excellent all around tire. It's been in their lineup for many years so most Michelin dealers are very familiar with it and have confidence in it. I consider it an "80/20" tire; good for 80% on-road and 20% off-road use. For occassional light duty off road use, the LTX M/S is fine.
The Michelin Cross Terrain (C/T) is designed to offer a car-like ride for trucks and SUVs. It will give you long life, a smooth ride, and good 4 season traction. It's perfect for those luxo-SUVs that almost never see off road use. I have a friend that has C/T's on his Chevy Tahoe and the truck rides like a Cadillac with them. The C/T is a very high quality tire using Michelin's most advanced production technology so it may be the best made LT tire you can buy. It's a fairly new tire in the Michelin line so some dealers may not have a lot of experience with it just yet.
So, what tires do I think you should buy? Based on your post, I think the Michelin LTX M/S is your best choice. It will do exactly what you want it to and should be a good match to your Rodeo.
I hope this was helpful. Let us know if you have more questions.
Steve: Funny, I asked the sales guy the same question. They said there wasn't any puncture so I asked if it wasn't a punture, what else could cause a flat other than a faulty installation (especially within 24 hours of installation)? The salesguy said "tons of things" but wouldn't elaborate and avoided further inquiry by me.
The good news is that Big O did the right thing and replaced the tire on a non-warranty claim.
I was a little surprised. The salesperson said at the beginning that it is impossible to replace a tire since cosmetic issues aren't covered under either the tire warranty or road hazard warranty. I brought up that Big O has a 90 day installation warranty and it should be covered under that. He said I would have to talk with the manager who was not there at the time. I left the tire/rim there and went to work on the spare. I called several times to speak with the manager but he was never there. Towards the end of the day I called and spoke with the salesman again and asked if I should just leave the tire there overnight. He said he went ahead and replaced the tire. I had to ask him to repeat that because I was gearing up for a long fight. My guess is that once the manager was told of the situation, he realized I had a right to be very upset and replaced the tire in good faith.
Bottom line is that Big O lived up to their advertised customer service policy and did the right thing. I bet that if the manager was there when I brough the tire in he would have replaced it with a lot less conflict than what I had with the salesman.
I had a problem similar with a chain franchised in this area Tire Discounters. But they never really went beyond their inital follow up. The store manager was short, talked down to me about physics of tires and alignment, and dismissed me. If he had a button to open the exit door, he would have pushed it for me to leave!!!
I wrote the Cincinnati franchise headquarters and wrote to the friend of the franchise owner who does an auto talk show on radio. Got attention!!!
But no real closure on the problem. You were lucky. Needless to say I talk down the stores to everyone in our cirle of acquaintances...
I agree, I was lucky. Probably 2 out of 3 tire shops would have simply shown me the door, afterall, they had their sale and plenty of customers already. Previously, I have always gotten my tires at Sears. They do seem to have an outstanding customer service policy. The reason why I went with Big O this time is that they beat Sears by $20/tire to purchase and $5/tire for installation and stems. Essentially $100 in savings.
If Big O didn't do the right thing, I would have spoken of them very poorly to everyone I know and try to spread the word that they don't live up to their advertised customer service.
I will consider Big O in the future because I was lucky and in the end they did treat me right.
I just found this web site and would greatly appreciate help in selecting the next set of tires for my 99 Chrysler 300M. Right now I have Pilot Sports in 225/55 on 17 inch wheels (I think this is the size that the original tires were). My priorities are that I want a tire that isn't a waste in snow, that is quiet (very important), and that also handles well with pretty good mileage. So I have 2 questions: 1) I managed to lose the owners manual; I'm wondering what sizes I can switch to that are safe and not affect the speedo more than 2.5 mph. The Avid T4 tires are made in my size, which I could get. 2) Any suggestions on what I could consider besides the Avids? On Tire Rack the Pirelli Pzero Neros and ContiExtreme Contacts were both appealing to me and rated well, but neither is made in my exact size. So I guess a third question would be if there is a size in the PZero Neros or the Conti Extreme Contacts that would work for my standard wheel. I am not about to change wheels. Thank you very much for any help with this.
You're kinda all over the map with what you want in a tire vs. what you're looking at. We need to get more focused here.
I did a search on Tire Rack (Tire Decision Guide on their website) using your preferences and they suggested 12 tires, first choice being the Michelin Hydroedge. Based on your comments I think this tire would be a good choice. It'll do what you want it to perhaps with the exception of sharp handling.
The yokohama Avid isn't a bad tire but they never seem to do well in snow so I'd take a pass on it.
I'd also pass on the Pirelli. It's a max performance summer-only tire; not what you need based on your post.
The Continental would be a good choice but, as you know, they don't offer it in your size. You could go to a 235/45-17 but since there are plenty of tires in your OE size, I see no reason to change unless you've just got to have a set of Continentals on your car.
That's my 2 cents based on your post. Hope this helps.
Thanks for the input. I wasn't clear in my original post; the PZero Nero I'm interested in is the M&S (mud and snow) model (they make more than one Nero), which on Tire Rack is rated #1 among All Season Ultra High Performance models. Also, I'm only looking at All Season Ultra HP or All Season HP--therefore I wouldn't want the hydroedge. The Avid T4s are of interest as quite a few people on the 300M board bought them and are very happy with them. Good all-around tire at a happy price. Anyway, I'm curious how you knew that a 235/45-17 would be an acceptable size. I'd like to find out what sizes are acceptable, and what the tradeoffs would be. I would really like to get the Pzero Nero M&S or ContiExtreme Contact as they are ultra high performance with some winter capability, and both very quiet, which is what I want. My top choice is the Nero.
OK, I understand better now. Thanks for the added context. You didn't post the "M+S" part originally so I missed it on my product search.
I misspoke about the 235/45 size. It should be more like 235/50. There are several online tire calculators that you can play with to see what sizes are acceptable. A quick internet search will reveal them.
Comments
The reason it's smart to place new tires on the REAR of a FWD vehicle is to minimize the loss of rear tire traction. If the front tires lose traction first, the car will plow ahead (aka understeer). Most drivers can control a car that's plowing ahead.
If the rear tires lose traction first, the car will come around in a spin. It'll take a pretty good driver to maintain control of that car, and we all have clear opinions of drivers on today's roads, right?
It is equally as dangerous to have a blowout on the front or the rear. Just depends where it happens. They just shouldn't be on the car at all. There is NO safe place for a blowout. (or even saf-ER). The only factor that has any bearing on the tire position is the life of the tire itself. Front tires will wear quickly, rear tire will cup badly (eventually) on a FWD car.
Opinions from the tire experts are welcomed.
With FWD, however, you MUST get four as two on the front only will lead to poor braking with the back end braking loose first, yielding oversteer and spins. Putting snows just on the back won't help you with traction in this case so four is the only answer with FWD.
Look at it this way, would you prefer to slide off the road nose first or tail first? 4 snows might help prevent the situation from happening at all.
I really can't answer the road noise question at this point.
I will say the MXV4+ was a very very quiet tire.
unfortunately, about 2 weeks before I purchased the hydoedge I hit some road debris on route 80 in NJ and damaged the muffler on my car. Have not brought it in yet for repairs so all I hear now is a motor boat.
Get back to you when its fixed.
Based on what I have read the purpose of putting the new tires on the rear is to prevent loss of control of the car by providing better information to the driver based on the tires with the least grip. For example and in theory entering a hard turn with new tires on the front the driver has good road feel that the tires are gripping and only when he is hard into the turn do the rear tires lose grip. Now if the new tires are on the rear the driver enters the turn and has the road fell of the front tires slipping and thus slows down.
The problem I have with this analysis is that I thought that as a tire loses tread its dry road grip increases while its wet road grip decreases. Therefore applying the reasoning above the new tires should be on the front in dry weather and in the back in wet weather.
Hey guys does any of this pass the smell test???
Just repeating all the stuff thrown around on this topic.
Other people are perfectly happy putting their life on 4 for $79.99 tires and using them until the steel belts show in 7 years and then complain that they had to buy new ones. They also have no issue spending $150 on a new pair of sneakers every 3 months to be in style also. Different strokes!
Thanks for your opinion.
To the rest of the tire experts out there, my question still stands. Living in downstate suburban New York, where the roads are plowed rapidly, I have a BMW with all-season tires on it. It has handled very well in the one storm I drove it in, but that was in March. I lived in Syracuse for several winters with an old Volvo rear-wheel drive with two snows on the back, and non of the modern handling features that my BMW has -- ABS, DSC, EBD, etc., and survived quite nicely.
So, is the push for snows on four wheels more of a marketing ploy, or is it really necessary?
It isn't a marketing ploy. Most people don't put any snow tires on so if they thought more people would put them on if they could get away with 2 then that's what they'd say except that just on the front of FWD cars they would soon be in trouble, perhaps with a low-inflated Firestone Explorer type fiasco. 4 works better and is required with FWD which the majority of cars have today.
4 is better. We've all said that. What more can we say to convince you?
ABS, ASC, DSC, EBD and CBC can't do much without road traction except try to keep you in control WHILE MAKING THE STOPPING DISTANCE LONGER. ABS will work more, stability control will work more and braking control will work more. This will cause braking and engine retarding at some times which slows you down and extra ABS to lengthen stopping distances at other times.
They obviously block airflow while they're blocking the black stuff from your wheels.
I'd rather have slightly dirty wheels or have to hose the wheels off twice a week than worry about extra costs for brake parts and fading brakes.
my 2 cents...
Steve, Host
No air to blow it out OR cool your brakes.
Most 80k tires are $$$$$$ and some get out of round while there is still traed on them
And the causes of irregular wear are:
Alignment, inflation, rotation (not enough).
Vehicles like a little bit of toe in for stability. Vehicles with toe out feel "darty" and don't feel like they are going in a predictable direction.
Toe in causes the tire to always act like it is being dragged a bit sideways (In fact, it is!), basically grinding off the tread. Because of minuscule irregularities in the road surface, in the wheel and in the tire, over long periods of time, the tire will develop areas of high wear and areas of low wear.
Some folks like to use the term "flatspot", but I prefer to avoid that term in this context, and reserve it for brake lock skidding and when a vehicle sits for a long period of time.
Low inflation pressure aggravates the situation by making the tire less stiff and more susceptible to wear mechanisms in general.
Each wheel position has its own wear characteristics. The fronts do all the steering, most of the braking, carry most of the load, and on FWD's, do all the accelerating. the rears are doing something else. So rotating the tires forces the tire to wear off the old pattern and wear a different pattern, and in the process, tends to even things out.
Irregular wear can not be eliminated, but you can stay ahead of it. Obviously with tires that wear more slowly, you have to be especially vigilant.
Hope this helps.
I had other Michelins, but traded the cars before they wore out. Currently have Xones and Symmetrys on two LeSabres.
Rotation is the key.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
tires may be damaged or they may come round when driven. I guess it's a question
of how much they are out of round. I think you're back to the road force balancing
to see if that will fix them if that's not the balancer the mechanic used...
I'd hit the dealer pleasantly but hard. I'd think Michelin would handle it for the
dealer. Out of curiosity which tire is it on the Tib?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Any comments? Suggestions? My limit is about $125 per tire, mounted etc ... and these 2 tires fall in that range.
thanks!
If best for you try just the Eagles for first snow, find a parking lot or other open area and have fun. Floor it, stomp on the brakes etc. If too slippery go for 2 snows on the rear, if problems on next snow stopping and turning (but none starting) go for 2 more. Personal opinion stay away from studded tires if you do, the decrease in dry traction for "normal" conditions is not worth it. Studs are great for ice and hard packed snow (which we don't see much of) on the roads.
STS tire now carries Nokian also. Excellent all weather (all season) tire is the WR. High performance NO, excellent dry, wet, and snow and H-rated YES.
FWIW, the reviews of the new Conti ExtremeContact all-seasons on Tirerack and CR have been glowing, and for snow, too. Maybe those are the next tires for this car (though, I understand the Eagles wear a long time).
Do any of you tire gurus have any experience with these tires? It just seemed like a heck of a deal for a Michelin 80K tire.
Mine worked great through two winters but didn't inspire a lot of confidence after that. I had one that was damaged by a flat and tread separation was setting in so I dumped them with ~50,000 miles on them.
The Harmony's were a bit expensive here when I was shopping so I went with Toyo this time around from a nearby shop.
Steve, Host
At least for purely matters of safety.
One of the main problems with FWD.
Like many things in our litigious world, I think the correct answer is based on the last lawsuit, current legal consultant, day of week, weather, cost of malpractice insurance, and how many people subscribe to this forum. And more than once, the next lawsuit reverses the current wisdom.
The bad news is that my right rear went flat on my way to work this morning. I had to drive a few blocks to get to the side of the road so I could change it. Of course, this means that the side walls are all scuffed up on a brand new tire. I took the tire to Big O where I bought them. They inspected the tire and found nothing wrong with it. I want a new tire since it hadn't even been installed for 24 hours before it goes flat and looks like crap. They say they won't give me a new tire since they say the integrity of the tire is fine and they don't warranty for cosmetic issues. I say that it must have been a faulty installation that led to the flat considering there was less than fifty miles on the tire and so they should stand by their service and replace the tire regardless on whether it is under warranty or not. I am fuming right now. The sad thing is that I bought the road hazard warranty and if I just simply driven a few miles on the flat, the tire would have been ruined and they would have had to replace it under warranty. If this had happend at a few thousand miles I could understand their argument, but this happend in less than 50 miles.
I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a new tire considering I just spent almost $800 for the tires and an alignment at Big O. Anybody ever have such an issue before that could offer advice on any recourse I may have?
Thanks
I'm urgently looking to replace my stock Duelers that came with the truck (245/70-16) and narrowed down my search to three tires: Michelin LTX M/S, Michelin Cross Terrain and Bridgestone Dueler Revo. I mostly do City/Highway driving but my key concern is that I don't want to have any major problems in the snow/ice and some very minor off-roading. By off-roading I basically mean not-paved grovel roads, dirt roads and some sand driving. My stock Duelers did a good job for two years but now even with 6/32 thread left they have lost their grip.
I have been recommended to get Michelin over Revo's by Discount Tires and Revo's over Michelin by Firestone (who are Bridgestone Dealers). One of my concern is durability: Michelins are known to go for over 60K mi with no problems, while Bridgestones are normally not that durable. I am, however, not too impressed with the thread design on Michelins (both LTX's and Cross Terrain). They remind me of the design Michelin is using on their Bus tires - straight deep threads that go around the tire. I was also getting mixed reviews on LTX's and Cross Terrain snow performance. Michelin rated CT much better than LTX's in virtually every category, but all the salespeople I've been talking to say the opposite.
Another concernt that I have about Bridgestones is that they are A/T tires and might be hard to ballance and might provide rather bumpy ride because of that. All the reviews, however, say opposite and claim that they provide even softer ride than most of the all-season highway tires.
Please help!!! It's getting really close to winter and those Duelers that I have now will not give me a good grip. It'll also take about a week to get Revo's in stock if I do go with them. Firestone do have them at their warehouse but I'd rather go with Discount Tire as their customer satisfaction and performance are far superior over anybody else. But since they are not Bridgestone direct store (and I guess that's why they normally don't recommend Bridgestone tires) it'll take them a while to get those tires in stock.
So what could cause a tire to go flat when there's nothing wrong with it? Incorrect installation? Leaky valve stem? Bad or damaged wheel?
Steve, Host
I'm urgently looking to replace my stock Duelers that came with the truck (245/70-16) and narrowed down my search to three tires: Michelin LTX M/S, Michelin Cross Terrain and Bridgestone Dueler Revo. I mostly do City/Highway driving but my key concern is that I don't want to have any major problems in the snow/ice and some very minor off-roading. By off-roading I basically mean not-paved grovel roads, dirt roads and some sand driving. My stock Duelers did a good job for two years but now even with 6/32 thread left they have lost their grip.
I have been recommended to get Michelin over Revo's by Discount Tires and Revo's over Michelin by Firestone (who are Bridgestone Dealers). One of my concern is durability: Michelins are known to go for over 60K mi with no problems, while Bridgestones are normally not that durable. I am, however, not too impressed with the thread design on Michelins (both LTX's and Cross Terrain). They remind me of the design Michelin is using on their Bus tires - straight deep threads that go around the tire. I was also getting mixed reviews on LTX's and Cross Terrain snow performance. Michelin rated CT much better than LTX's in virtually every category, but all the salespeople I've been talking to say the opposite.
Another concernt that I have about Bridgestones is that they are A/T tires and might be hard to ballance and might provide rather bumpy ride because of that. All the reviews, however, say opposite and claim that they provide even softer ride than most of the all-season highway tires.
Please help!!! It's getting really close to winter and those Duelers that I have now will not give me a good grip. It'll also take about a week to get Revo's in stock if I do go with them. Firestone do have them at their warehouse but I'd rather go with Discount Tire as their customer satisfaction and performance are far superior over anybody else. But since they are not Bridgestone direct store (and I guess that's why they normally don't recommend Bridgestone tires) it'll take them a while to get those tires in stock.
First, look at the tires you're comparing and decide which performance characteristics are most important to you.
The Bridgestone is a new tire from them incorporating their latest technology from car performance tires into a LT tire. The Dueler A/T Revo is an All-Terrain tire which means it will work well on and off road. If you plan to use your truck off road on a regular basis, and you want very good traction, then an A/T is an excellent choice. The downside is a usually rougher, noisier ride. So, you've got to decide what is more important - ride quality or off road traction. Mileage isn't a big issue with this tire as Bridgestone warrants it for 50,000 miles.
The Michelin LTX M/S is an excellent all around tire. It's been in their lineup for many years so most Michelin dealers are very familiar with it and have confidence in it. I consider it an "80/20" tire; good for 80% on-road and 20% off-road use. For occassional light duty off road use, the LTX M/S is fine.
The Michelin Cross Terrain (C/T) is designed to offer a car-like ride for trucks and SUVs. It will give you long life, a smooth ride, and good 4 season traction. It's perfect for those luxo-SUVs that almost never see off road use. I have a friend that has C/T's on his Chevy Tahoe and the truck rides like a Cadillac with them. The C/T is a very high quality tire using Michelin's most advanced production technology so it may be the best made LT tire you can buy. It's a fairly new tire in the Michelin line so some dealers may not have a lot of experience with it just yet.
So, what tires do I think you should buy? Based on your post, I think the Michelin LTX M/S is your best choice. It will do exactly what you want it to and should be a good match to your Rodeo.
I hope this was helpful. Let us know if you have more questions.
Funny, I asked the sales guy the same question. They said there wasn't any puncture so I asked if it wasn't a punture, what else could cause a flat other than a faulty installation (especially within 24 hours of installation)? The salesguy said "tons of things" but wouldn't elaborate and avoided further inquiry by me.
The good news is that Big O did the right thing and replaced the tire on a non-warranty claim.
I was a little surprised. The salesperson said at the beginning that it is impossible to replace a tire since cosmetic issues aren't covered under either the tire warranty or road hazard warranty. I brought up that Big O has a 90 day installation warranty and it should be covered under that. He said I would have to talk with the manager who was not there at the time. I left the tire/rim there and went to work on the spare. I called several times to speak with the manager but he was never there. Towards the end of the day I called and spoke with the salesman again and asked if I should just leave the tire there overnight. He said he went ahead and replaced the tire. I had to ask him to repeat that because I was gearing up for a long fight. My guess is that once the manager was told of the situation, he realized I had a right to be very upset and replaced the tire in good faith.
Bottom line is that Big O lived up to their advertised customer service policy and did the right thing. I bet that if the manager was there when I brough the tire in he would have replaced it with a lot less conflict than what I had with the salesman.
I wrote the Cincinnati franchise headquarters and wrote to the friend of the franchise owner who does an auto talk show on radio. Got attention!!!
But no real closure on the problem. You were lucky. Needless to say I talk down the stores to everyone in our cirle of acquaintances...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If Big O didn't do the right thing, I would have spoken of them very poorly to everyone I know and try to spread the word that they don't live up to their advertised customer service.
I will consider Big O in the future because I was lucky and in the end they did treat me right.
Steve, Host
I just found this web site and would greatly appreciate help in selecting the next set of tires for my 99 Chrysler 300M. Right now I have Pilot Sports in 225/55 on 17 inch wheels (I think this is the size that the original tires were). My priorities are that I want a tire that isn't a waste in snow, that is quiet (very important), and that also handles well with pretty good mileage. So I have 2 questions: 1) I managed to lose the owners manual; I'm wondering what sizes I can switch to that are safe and not affect the speedo more than 2.5 mph. The Avid T4 tires are made in my size, which I could get. 2) Any suggestions on what I could consider besides the Avids? On Tire Rack the Pirelli Pzero Neros and ContiExtreme Contacts were both appealing to me and rated well, but neither is made in my exact size. So I guess a third question would be if there is a size in the PZero Neros or the Conti Extreme Contacts that would work for my standard wheel. I am not about to change wheels. Thank you very much for any help with this.
I did a search on Tire Rack (Tire Decision Guide on their website) using your preferences and they suggested 12 tires, first choice being the Michelin Hydroedge. Based on your comments I think this tire would be a good choice. It'll do what you want it to perhaps with the exception of sharp handling.
The yokohama Avid isn't a bad tire but they never seem to do well in snow so I'd take a pass on it.
I'd also pass on the Pirelli. It's a max performance summer-only tire; not what you need based on your post.
The Continental would be a good choice but, as you know, they don't offer it in your size. You could go to a 235/45-17 but since there are plenty of tires in your OE size, I see no reason to change unless you've just got to have a set of Continentals on your car.
That's my 2 cents based on your post. Hope this helps.
Can you give any supporting facts why that is true?
I misspoke about the 235/45 size. It should be more like 235/50. There are several online tire calculators that you can play with to see what sizes are acceptable. A quick internet search will reveal them.