New tyres - front or rear

RED PASSION

Apologies for starting another thread re. Tyres :D

My friend and I were going for a spin today, but first he decided he would get the front tyres changed on his Ford ST since his new tyres were delivered this morning.

Anyway, I decided to go with him rather than him coming back for me to save time.

I am not a tyre expert, but I told him on the way there, to put the good tyres on the rear and the rear with approx. 4-4.5mm to the front. I told him I read it on all the major tyre manufacturers webpages and countless people on boards have the same opinion.

He mentioned it to the tyre fella, well he would not swap them, we both got a spiel how the front tyres are for steering, braking, carry the bulk of the car's weight, 60% of the braking force is in the front, therefore the fronts must have the best rubber, I am in the business 35yrs+. I texted my mechanic to get a second opinion whilst there, expecting to be proved correct, the reply I got was good tyres to the front. my buddy gave in and let him put them on the front.

Can some please tell me who is correct; the mechanic and tyre fitter or the major tyre manufacturers.

My belief was the most worn tyres (any tyre that is still legal and above 3mm) at the rear can cause oversteer where the average driver may spin on a wet or greasy road, and this is more dangerous than the most worn tyres on the front, and a few metres longer braking in an emergency stop.

I am totally confused, as I will be changing my front tyres at the same place in a few months time. I thought good tyres on the front is now an old wives' tale. Maybe not.....

Opinions welcome.

Thanks in advance.

*Kol*

Good tyres to the back for a FWD car as you will tend to get lift off oversteer for a FWD car worse if the rear tyres are bad. That's what I have read before anyway.

Atlantic Dawn

*Kol* wrote: »

Good tyres to the front for a FWD car.

I always thought this myself but there was varying opinions here last time with interesting data posted to back up the opposite.

CiniO

Better tyres in front will give you better steering, better braking and better accelerating ability.
However worse tyres on the rear will increase a risk of rear wheel skid, which for majority of driver is not recoverable (skid = accident). This unfortunately might outrun the first argument.

IMO for average Joe it's better to have better tyres on the rear. There's no risk of rear skid. Front skid is much easier and more natural to recover even without practice. Rear isn't.

For people who do have experience and trained it properly to be able recover from rear skid, then definitely better tyres on the front.

So there isn't just one simple general solution for everyone.

porsche boy

The advice i give customers is good tyres to the rear.

Basically if you loose traction on the front of the front wheel drive car you can do things to regain control, wheels lock up on breaking - ease foot off brake, wheel spin on accelleration - ease off the power, understeer - ease off power & correct steering etc etc.

If you loose control of the rear of the car, either through loosing grip from aquaplaning or lift off oversteer there aint nothing you can do until you stop skidding/spinning/crashing.

CiniO

porsche boy wrote: »

If you loose control of the rear of the car, either through loosing grip from aquaplaning or lift off oversteer there aint nothing you can do until you stop skidding/spinning/crashing.

What you mean aint nothing you can do?
Quick contra-steer on your steering wheel and off you go like it never happened.

Boskowski

I'd put the better tyres on the powered axle. RWD on the back, FWD on the front. Makes for a more even wear. Unless you're on ice, oil, mud, way too fast or have sh1te tyres losing control over one or the other shouldnt really come into it. Your main concern would be wear. Its a perfectly fine thing to do with all 4 tyres new to switch them around after a while.

colm_mcm

We aren't talking having bald tyres on the back though.
Fronts will wear quicker.

Can't believe I'm getting drawn into this again

RED PASSION

porsche boy wrote: »

The advice i give customers is good tyres to the rear.

Basically if you loose traction on the front of the front wheel drive car you can do things to regain control, wheels lock up on breaking - ease foot off brake, wheel spin on accelleration - ease off the power, understeer - ease off power & correct steering etc etc.

If you loose control of the rear of the car, either through loosing grip from aquaplaning or lift off oversteer there aint nothing you can do until you stop skidding/spinning/crashing.

if I put good tyres on the rear will this minimise a spin/accident in the event of lift off oversteer.

my car oversteered once on a greasy road going around a bend at a low speed from lift off oversteer (on coming car dazzled me and I took my foot off the accelerator), it frightened the life out of me and something I never want to experience again. if good tyres at rear can minimise or prevent this then it is a no brainer.

coylemj

CiniO wrote: »

Better tyres in front will give you better steering, better braking and better accelerating ability.

Only in the case of FWD.

RED PASSION

colm_mcm wrote: »

We aren't talking having bald tyres on the back though.
Fronts will wear quicker.

Can't believe I'm getting drawn into this again

I am glad you were drawn in, you will be educating 2 motorists at the very least.:)

jayo26

Worked in a garage that was a main dealers as a mechanic for several years and we always changed around tyres and put the best two tyres on front to even out tyre wear, and more grip n the front tyres for stearing and breaking force goes to the front so better tyres on front, but everyone has thir own opinion,

Special Circumstances

Whole story sounds a bit off to me op but maybe it's just the way you tell em.

I guess it comes down to this - are the other older tyres ok for thread and decent quality rubber? If so there shouldn't be any real drama unless you are really pushing them and then it's up to you to understand how you car handles under pressure.

Why not just rotate them to minimise differences between axles?

CiniO

coylemj wrote: »

Only in the case of FWD.

Well I can't deny it.

greenflash

Personally I have good tyres on the front and good tyres on the back.

Big Nasty

Best tyres should be on the drive axel - end of.

mickdw

I'd always put them on the front anyway in my front drive car. Acceleration, majority of breaking, steering and heavy water clearing.

nc19

Major manufacturers recommend new to the rear in winter and new to the front in summer from what I've been taught/read.

More chance of loosing the rear in the winter for the average driver

CiniO

Big Nasty wrote: »

Best tyres should be on the drive axel - end of.

Any arguments?

Ghost Train

Have front wheel drive with disc brakes on front and drums brakes on back, so I imagine having the better tyres on front makes more sense for stopping distance with most of the weight over the front wheels and the better brakes at the front. The effects of having better tyres at the back wouldn't be as much I think

RED PASSION

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Whole story sounds a bit off to me op but maybe it's just the way you tell em.

I guess it comes down to this - are the other older tyres ok for thread and decent quality rubber? If so there shouldn't be any real drama unless you are really pushing them and then it's up to you to understand how you car handles under pressure.

Why not just rotate them to minimise differences between axles?

My buddy's car (Ford ST) now has now brand new Goodyear eagle f1 on front and 4-4.5mm Falkens on rear.

This combination on my car (Astra OPC) would make me very jumpy on a wet bend at 50mph in case the rear steps out. my own car has 5mm Falkens on rear and 3.5-4mm approx. Conti on fronts. Conti will be coming off in the near future, I would like Goodyear Eagle F1 or Conti CSC5 or more Falkens FK453 (same as rear) nxt time I purchase. I would drive very cautiously on a wet bendy country road speed limit 50mph (daily commute 30 miles each way), if the rears had 4mm and front brand new for fear of rear stepping out.

Maybe I am stressing over nothing, but the oversteer incident I had (earlier post), really shocked me and I was well under the limit. now I just want to minimise/prevent it ever happening again and if good tyres at the rear will prevent this, then I have learned something very important today. Cheers:)

Special Circumstances

What pressure are your rear tyres at? Assuming they're not hardened/perished then maybe you need to play with pressure. Average fwd car in Ireland very unlikely to step out the rear but I guess the rear arb would be strong enough for it to be a possibility on the OPC alright.

RED PASSION

Special Circumstances wrote: »

What pressure are your rear tyres at? Assuming they're not hardened/perished then maybe you need to play with pressure. Average fwd car in Ireland very unlikely to step out the rear but I guess the rear arb would be strong enough for it to be a possibility on the OPC alright.

???

rears are 35 psi today, day of the oversteer I don't know what they were.

rears were manufactured August 2013, no cracks, perishing, nothing obvious anyway. I blamed the rear tyres, but I am not 100% sure, hence why I am asking for others opinions/knowledge.

Tails142

It's a tricky one, had my rear fly out in a FWD car going around a bend with an oncoming car, he passed me by millimeters as I slid almost sideways round the bend, managed to correct the skid and carry on. I was of course driving too fast but it was a lucky escape for me, I'll never forget the shock of it anyway. I had put new tyres on the front a week or two beforehand. The question is would having the new tyres on the back prevented the skid from happening? Or with the more worn tyres on the front would I have understeered and ended up on the wrong side of the road instead of skidding sideways? Who can say for sure....

When braking all the pressure is carried by the shoulder of the tyre so does better thread help in this instance, is the only purpose of the thread to disperse water and prevent aquaplaning, can aquaplaning begin under braking or does it only occur when driving fast over standing water and the tyre essentially begins to float on top?

There's no doubt the tyres on the drive axle are the ones that wear fastest, but the whole basis of this 'put the new tyres on the rear' idea is that an oversteer skid has the potential to be more catastrophic. To me the only benefit of having the new tyres on the front is to prevent aquaplaning because of the deeper thread, I don't buy the better traction when cornering or braking argument, a smooth tyre like on a F1 car gives the most traction due to having the best contact area with the ground, and to me that goes for in the wet too, aqua planing issues aside and I don't think flying off a corner in the wet is due to aquaplaning as such but due to insufficient friction with the road surface, so thread depth doesn't come into the equation so long as water doesn't build up under the tyre to cause aquaplaning. But then does that mean new tyres on the rear make any difference at all then?

Then there is the whole 'rotate your tyres' philosophy to even out wear, does anyone even bother with that? I'm driving a RWD car now, I'm hardly advocating rotating the front and the rears every time the rear tyres wear down 1mm more than the front.

I think for most people it wont matter, it's like all things when it comes to tyres, for 99.999% of the time you'll be fine driving on crap like triangles and putting the new tyres onto the front. But there will always be that 0.001% case where an accident happens from someone doing something stupid or just pure bad luck, that could have been avoided by having a better quality tyre or better grip on the rear axle, better quality brake pads and discs, whatever, at the end of the day though most people just have other things to be worrying about in life and never think about it and get on just fine.

RED PASSION

Tails142 wrote: »

It's a tricky one, had my rear fly out in a FWD car going around a bend with an oncoming car, he passed me by millimeters as I slid almost sideways round the bend, managed to correct the skid and carry on. I was of course driving too fast but it was a lucky escape for me, I'll never forget the shock of it anyway. I had put new tyres on the front a week or two beforehand. The question is would having the new tyres on the back prevented the skid from happening? Or with the more worn tyres on the front would I have understeered and ended up on the wrong side of the road instead of skidding sideways? Who can say for sure....

When braking all the pressure is carried by the shoulder of the tyre so does better thread help in this instance, is the only purpose of the thread to disperse water and prevent aquaplaning, can aquaplaning begin under braking or does it only occur when driving fast over standing water and the tyre essentially begins to float on top?

There's no doubt the tyres on the drive axle are the ones that wear fastest, but the whole basis of this 'put the new tyres on the rear' idea is that an oversteer skid has the potential to be more catastrophic. To me the only benefit of having the new tyres on the front is to prevent aquaplaning because of the deeper thread, I don't buy the better traction when cornering or braking argument, a smooth tyre like on a F1 car gives the most traction due to having the best contact area with the ground, and to me that goes for in the wet too, aqua planing issues aside and I don't think flying off a corner in the wet is due to aquaplaning as such but due to insufficient friction with the road surface, so thread depth doesn't come into the equation so long as water doesn't build up under the tyre to cause aquaplaning. But then does that mean new tyres on the rear make any difference at all then?

Then there is the whole 'rotate your tyres' philosophy to even out wear, does anyone even bother with that? I'm driving a RWD car now, I'm hardly advocating rotating the front and the rears every time the rear tyres wear down 1mm more than the front.

I think for most people it wont matter, it's like all things when it comes to tyres, for 99.999% of the time you'll be fine driving on crap like triangles and putting the new tyres onto the front. But there will always be that 0.001% case where an accident happens from someone doing something stupid or just pure bad luck, that could have been avoided by having a better quality tyre or better grip on the rear axle, better quality brake pads and discs, whatever, at the end of the day though most people just have other things to be worrying about in life and never think about it and get on just fine.

very true.

Although most people don't have 240bhp in a FWD car. if I drove a fiesta, this topic would never ever dawn on me.

thanks for detailed reply.

wotswattage

Better tires to the front for me (FWD). The main reasons I'd want better thread on the front are: aquaplaning, having to suddenly swerve to avoid something/someone and to stop faster.

We don't all drive around on a skid pad near the edge of our grip levels -I think for real world driving the only times you'll suddenly need max grip are when changing direction (once) and stopping suddenly.

RED PASSION

wotswattage wrote: »

Better tires to the front for me (FWD). The main reasons I'd want better thread on the front are: aquaplaning, having to suddenly swerve to avoid something/someone and to stop faster.

We don't all drive around on a skid pad near the edge of our grip levels -I think for real world driving the only times you'll suddenly need max grip are when changing direction (once) and stopping suddenly.

I agree with you if braking in a straight line. Has your car oodles of bhp.

You may drive 99% of the time with no problems, but I am playing devil's advocate now, if you had to suddenly swerve on a wet motorway 60-70mph to avoid hitting something would you not lose the rear of the car and spin because you have the best traction up front and not so much at the rear.

Also why would the top 5 tyre manufacturers in the world recommend the rear (they make the damn things) and mechanics, tyre fitters say the opposite.

Cee-Jay-Cee

I've been driving 25 years now and always put new tyres on the front and part worms onto the rear. Front tyres on a FWD car wear faster and so you'll be left with bald front tyres and no front end grip and barely worn rear tyres.

For the vast vast majority of people the above applies. If you have a performance car and require maximum grip in higher speed situations then on a FWD car having the good tyres on the front is preferable. Just because the rear tyres are slightly worn doesn't mean they are going to cause rear end slip and cause an accident. The way some peoe above are talking you'd swear as soon as part worms are fitted to the rear driving the car becomes dangerous.

I would do the same on a RWD car. I want my car to steer precisely and therefore the front gets the new tyres and the part worms on the rear. If the part worms were under 50% thread is replace them so it's not like bald tyres are being put on the rear.

CiniO

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I've been driving 25 years now and always put new tyres on the front and part worms onto the rear. Front tyres on a FWD car wear faster and so you'll be left with bald front tyres and no front end grip and barely worn rear tyres.

For the vast vast majority of people the above applies. If you have a performance car and require maximum grip in higher speed situations then on a FWD car having the good tyres on the front is preferable. Just because the rear tyres are slightly worn doesn't mean they are going to cause rear end slip and cause an accident. The way some peoe above are talking you'd swear as soon as part worms are fitted to the rear driving the car becomes dangerous.

Imagine car is perfectly balanced (has no tendency to oversteer or understeer).
If you fit tyres with worse grip to the rear, then when negotiating a bend at high speed (grip limit) there will be a moment when your front tyres will keep the grip, but rears won't. That's the moment rear of your car is going to skid, and if you are not trained to deal with it, you are going to crash.
That's in short.

And to answer the question before it's asked - why would anyone want to negotiate a bend at grip limit?
Because it happens and people crash because of this - you might be very far from grip limit on dry tarred road, but then suddenly you might hit a wet patch with oil spillage on roundabout, and even though you are only doing 30km/h you will skid.
You might hit black ice, or just tricky surface where you are going to skid.

Again I'll repeat what I said in the beginning of the thread. If you are skilled enough to deal with rear skid at any time - put better tyres on the front.
If you are not - then better on the rear.

RED PASSION

CiniO wrote: »

If you are skilled enough to deal with rear skid at any time - put better tyres on the front.
If you are not - then better on the rear.

you have explained it brilliantly in a nutshell.

Rear it is for me so then. thanks a mill

Mech1

Sorry guys but no contest, always / always and i dont care if front or rear wheel drive or even 4x4, best tyres go on the front.

You need braking and steering to be top notch.

RED PASSION

Mech1 wrote: »

Sorry guys but no contest, always / always and i dont care if front or rear wheel drive or even 4x4, best tyres go on the front.

You need braking and steering to be top notch.

Michelin webpage

(every other major tyre manufacturer agrees. Goodyear, Pirelli, Bridgestone, Continental.)

Rear Tyres
FOR COMPLETE CONTROL, FIT YOUR NEW TYRES TO THE REAR AXLE
Rear wheels are not connected to your steering wheel, which makes it extremely difficult to judge their grip while driving.
We recommend that new tyres or the least worn tyres are fitted to the rear wheels to ensure:


Better control in emergency braking or tight corners when the roads are slippery.

[*]Less risk of losing control of your vehicle, especially on wet surfaces

[*]Better road holding, particularly in difficult situations, whether your car is front or rear wheel drive
[/LIST]

Special Circumstances

RED PASSION wrote: »

???

rears are 35 psi today, day of the oversteer I don't know what they were.

rears were manufactured August 2013, no cracks, perishing, nothing obvious anyway. I blamed the rear tyres, but I am not 100% sure, hence why I am asking for others opinions/knowledge.

A rear arb (???) is an anti roll bar. The handling of car X can be adjusted slightly by increasing the strength of rear arb versus front arb.
The standard astra probably has arbs that bias it for understeer all the time. OPC probably setup to be sharper on turn in with more chance of lift off oversteer.

35psi sounds too high for me for rear. I suppose it depends on what the fronts are. You cant go much lower I suppose if there are rubber bandy tyres involved. You may find that pressure recommended in the manual but that will be from a CO2 emissions point of view. Check owners forums - you may find a lower pressure is possible that will reduce tendency for oversteer without giving weird tyre wear.

jgorres

greenflash wrote: »

Personally I have good tyres on the front and good tyres on the back.

You have to have a 4WD otherwise this will not work.

Special Circumstances

jgorres wrote: »

You have to have a 4WD otherwise this will not work.

Nope.

biko

Every time this is discussed I post this video so here goes again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xzQQfT5O84

VeVeX

biko wrote: »

Every time this is discussed I post this video so here goes again

Yeah but what do Michelin know about tyres?

biko

Sure, they're just a food guide

VeVeX

ardmacha

The previous post should be Motors post of the year!

George Dalton

VeVeX wrote: »

Is that why you had to ring me back when I called looking for you earlier? There was me thinking you were busy when you were actually flat out on photoshop... :pac:

wotswattage

RED PASSION wrote: »

I agree with you if braking in a straight line. Has your car oodles of bhp.

You may drive 99% of the time with no problems, but I am playing devil's advocate now, if you had to suddenly swerve on a wet motorway 60-70mph to avoid hitting something would you not lose the rear of the car and spin because you have the best traction up front and not so much at the rear.

Also why would the top 5 tyre manufacturers in the world recommend the rear (they make the damn things) and mechanics, tyre fitters say the opposite.

^I don't think you'd lose the rear like that. The vast majority of motorway collisions caused by obstacles are front on collisions, I'd say its much less common for a car to collide sideways into the something.

What is much more common is for the skid pad effect like in the video posted where a driver drives too fast for the conditions and spins out all on their own.. The tire isn't the problem here its the driver

If I had to suddenly swerve on a wet motorway and my front tires aquaplaned I'd neither be able to change direction nor slow down. I'd simply plough straight into whatever is in my path. If you cant steer or brake you have no chance. Hence the good tires to the front on my car.

I fully understand the advice by tire manufacturers on why clueless (95% of everyday drivers) should put new tires to the rear as most people would panic in a skid, but for me its a no-brainer. Braking is #1 priority, one-off direction change is #2.

VeVeX

wotswattage wrote: »

^I don't think you'd lose the rear like that. The vast majority of motorway collisions caused by obstacles are front on collisions, I'd say its much less common for a car to collide sideways into the something.

What is much more common is for the skid pad effect like in the video posted where a driver drives too fast for the conditions and spins out all on their own.. The tire isn't the problem here its the driver

If I had to suddenly swerve on a wet motorway and my front tires aquaplaned I'd neither be able to change direction nor slow down. I'd simply plough straight into whatever is in my path. If you cant steer or brake you have no chance. Hence the good tires to the front on my car.

I fully understand the advice by tire manufacturers on why clueless (95% of everyday drivers) should put new tires to the rear as most people would panic in a skid, but for me its a no-brainer. Braking is #1 priority, one-off direction change is #2.

One of the biggest problems on the road as I see it is everybody sees themselves in the top 5% of drivers. Realistically the vast majority of drivers are actually very average.

The issue here is a drivers confidence in their abilities may not come to fruition in the very quick and highly stressful environment of an imposing accident, most of which are caused by driver error.

This is why experts in this field have made public their factual findings regarding the increase in likelihood of a an accident if you put tyres with less grip to the rear.

If you choose to disregard these proven findings and come to your own conclusion that's fine but I'd always recommend following facts than approximates.

H3llR4iser

CiniO wrote: »

Imagine car is perfectly balanced (has no tendency to oversteer or understeer).
If you fit tyres with worse grip to the rear, then when negotiating a bend at high speed (grip limit) there will be a moment when your front tyres will keep the grip, but rears won't. That's the moment rear of your car is going to skid, and if you are not trained to deal with it, you are going to crash.
That's in short.

And to answer the question before it's asked - why would anyone want to negotiate a bend at grip limit?
Because it happens and people crash because of this - you might be very far from grip limit on dry tarred road, but then suddenly you might hit a wet patch with oil spillage on roundabout, and even though you are only doing 30km/h you will skid.
You might hit black ice, or just tricky surface where you are going to skid.

Again I'll repeat what I said in the beginning of the thread. If you are skilled enough to deal with rear skid at any time - put better tyres on the front.
If you are not - then better on the rear.

This, in a nutshell. I have a feeling the reason why most, if not all, tire companies recommend better tires on the rear axle is to, essentially, avoid lawsuits.

A FWD with new tires at the front and completely shot ones on the rear can be quite a handful, especially in damp conditions - it essentially starts behaving like a Tesco trolley even at relatively low speeds. Most drivers would start randomly yanking at the wheel, having the feeling the car is "steering on its own" and the most likely destination is the wall nearby, or worse the semi coming head on.
It should not happen with modern, electronically stabilized cars, but it can also become quite "tail happy" under heavy braking.

At the same time, said driver would perceive the car "going straight" as a loss of grip.

The one point I am not 100% in agreement is that understeer is easier to control for your random just-bringing-kids-to-school motorist; From what I have seen, faced with the car going straight people tend to apply more steering, thus making the problem worse. Look around for clips of cars skidding on icy roads to see this exactly - cars goes straight, you see the front wheels steering even more, of course car keeps going straight and plunges into anything that happens to be nearby.

Personally, at least on an FWD car, I'd always take newer tires at the front - I want to know the car will go where I direct it, and that brakes actually work. The tail can be kept in check - and knowing I have less grip at the rear, I avoid doing silly things (or do them on purpose on a deserted road, but that's a different story ).

If somebody asked for advice, I'd direct them towards replacing the rear one, having no knowledge of their driving experience.

Special Circumstances

H3llR4iser wrote: »

...
If somebody asked for advice, I'd direct them towards replacing the rear one, having no knowledge of their driving experience.

If they look at you blankly when you ask them if they've ever noticed an upcoming sneaky camber change in the road and adjusted their speed or just paid extra attention in case things got squirrely ...

H3llR4iser

Special Circumstances wrote: »

If they look at you blankly when you ask them if they've ever noticed an upcoming sneaky camber change in the road and adjusted their speed or just paid extra attention in case things got squirrely ...

In my experience, people stare at you blankly when you mention "oversteer" or "understeer" - "road camber" would probably sound like some strict Klingon dialect to them

I know people who would call the steering wheel "handlebar", don't ask me why...they aren't bikers, either!

creedp

biko wrote: »

Every time this is discussed I post this video so here goes again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xzQQfT5O84

Any got footage of a similar test involving emergency braking in a straight line?

Foxhole Norman

creedp wrote: »

Any got footage of a similar test involving emergency braking in a straight line?

creedp

Thanks Foxhole. I was wondering though about the previous test scenario with new tyres on front/rear axle and what impact each set up had on braking distance in the dry/wet.

Will have a look later .. can't expect other people to do all the work!

VeVeX

creedp wrote: »

Thanks Foxhole. I was wondering though about the previous test scenario with new tyres on front/rear axle and what impact each set up had on braking distance in the dry/wet.

Will have a look later .. can't expect other people to do all the work!

Just remember when you're conducting your research that we're not talking about a new tyre on the back and a Telly Savalas on the front.



Link

On tarmac a good worn tyre (4mm) will brake similarly in the wet compared to a new tyre. It kind of debunks a lot of the fuzzy logic posted on this thread. But then again who cares about facts arrived at by proper testing when one can reach a different conclusion on their morning commute across the M50?