View Single Post
  #29   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
Xeno Xeno is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 578
Default Clare - are smaller car tires easier to balance than SUV tires?

On 15/6/19 10:30 am, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 09:55:05 +1000, Xeno
wrote:

On 15/6/19 7:04 am, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:05:56 -0400, Tekkie®
wrote:

Arlen G. Holder posted for all of us...



I have two more tires to put on for her for her rears, which are worn more
evenly (she probably doesn't rotate?) so I told her to wait until she
needed them since they are just sitting outside (I moved them into the
garage as they were getting dirty in the rain over the winter).


The better tires should-by tire manufacturers recommendation-be mounted on
the back.
That is only true for ONE risk - the risk of the rear tires breaking
away on a corner due to hydroplaning or poor traction.

In his case if he always put the best tires on the rear he would
continually be putting half worn tires on the axle that is eating
tires and requires the most traction (the downhill steering wheels and
the uphill "scrambling" wheels.

Doesn't make a LICK of sense in either case.

The best tyres to the rear is for handling, keep the oversteer under
control. In that case, we're referring to the best *type* of tyre.
Radial versus crossply or steel belted radial versus textile radial.
Most run steel radials now so the basic premise is academic but the
basic rule is the best handling tyre when mixing tyre types.


NOT.

You NEVER mix types from axle to axle - for MANY reasons - one of
which is legal.


Yes, I am well aware of that but it used to be legal, within limits, and
some unknowing individuals still do it.

When it comes to tread depth, yes, you are dealing then with the risk of
aquaplaning. More weight on the front means better water removal even on
lower tread depths. At the rear, on a FWD, there may be very minimal
mass on the rear tyres so pushing through water may be more difficult.
In summary, the best place for the newest tyres on a FWD is the rear.


For cornering in wet weather or loose surfaces, yes. For powering
through corners or straight-line accelleration on clean dry pavement?
Mabee not.

Anywhere understeer is a possible problem , more than oversteer, you
want the best rubber on the front. On a FWD vehicle it is quite
difficult to induce oversteer to combat understeer - and FWD vehicles
tend towards understeer where you do NOT want bald front tires - - - .


I am not referring to *bald* tyres. I don't even let my tyres get to the
wear indicators as a rule. I like wet weather handling to be as optimal
as possible.

On SEVERE trailing throttle you don't want bald tires on the rear
either.


You do not want *bald* tyres anywhere on a vehicle. I am not referring
to bald tyres, just relative tread depth.

Personally, I virtually ALWAYS replace tires in sets of 4 - and WELL
before the thread is gone !!! I don't put miles on fast enough any
more to wear good tires out before they "time out"

As I said before, ditto for me. I do clock up the mileage however. I am
25-30% above average mileage now in my 3 year old car.

--

Xeno


Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)