Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
bad idea?

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

<allenvillegas@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2152856a-e51c-49ae-a92b-e021c3a81069@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> bad idea?


Depends on how worn down they are. Do the tires still have enough tread to
pass a safety inspection? Then sure. If not, they're not safe front or
back.

Me, I don't rotate my tires either. When I get a new pair they go on the
front, what's on the front goes to the rear and what on the rear isn't worth
saving and get disposed of.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"allenvillegas@gmail.com" <allenvillegas@gmail.com> wrote in news:2152856a-
e51c-49ae-a92b-e021c3a81069@m19g2000...oglegroups.com:

> Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> bad idea?



It's a BAD idea according to any magazine article, Click & Clack episode,
race car driver, or competent mechanic I've ever spoken to.

People think the good tires should naturally go on the front, since the
front does most of the work, but people are wrong.

Those rear tires are supposed to hold the rear of the car from swinging
around forwards during turns or in slippery weather. It swings, you spin
out of control. And most likely crash.

If the FRONT slides, all you do is keep going the way you were going, just
unable to stop in as short a distance as you think you should. You'll be
very quick to discover how little traction your fronts have and adjust your
driving accordingly.

This is why if you purchase only two new tires, they go on the REAR.



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

In article <Xns9C1F4DDF49B82tegger@208.90.168.18>,
Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:

> Those rear tires are supposed to hold the rear of the car from swinging
> around forwards during turns or in slippery weather. It swings, you spin
> out of control. And most likely crash.

"Understeer is when the back end of the car arrives at the scene of the
accident first."

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in
news:elmop-F9C0F9.07501703062009@mara100-84.onlink.net:

> In article <Xns9C1F4DDF49B82tegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>> Those rear tires are supposed to hold the rear of the car from
>> swinging around forwards during turns or in slippery weather. It
>> swings, you spin out of control. And most likely crash.
>
> "Understeer is when the back end of the car arrives at the scene of
> the accident first."
>




That's OVERsteer.

To put your quote another way, the rear of the car is OVERsteering
(going past) the front.

OVERsteer is very bad for a road-going car, which is why road cars are
invariably set up to UNDERsteer (plow straight ahead under heavy braking).


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

Good (new) tires are about cheapest way to make a car safe.
Especially if you live in an area where it rains or snows.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:

> That's OVERsteer.

Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed than
my hands.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
9BF8F7.10493603062009@mara100-84.onlink.net:

> In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>> That's OVERsteer.
>
> Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed than
> my hands.




Then you were OVERtyping; your hands went past your brain.

Now if you were UNDERtyping, you'd never get anything done, since you'd
forget what you wanted to type by the time your hands got around to typing
it.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 3, 3:39 am, "Seth" <seth_lermanNOS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <allenville...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2152856a-e51c-49ae-a92b-e021c3a81069@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> > about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> > are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> > rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> > bad idea?
>
> Depends on how worn down they are. Do the tires still have enough tread to
> pass a safety inspection? Then sure. If not, they're not safe front or
> back.
>
> Me, I don't rotate my tires either. When I get a new pair they go on the
> front, what's on the front goes to the rear and what on the rear isn't worth
> saving and get disposed of.

The tires in the front aren't super worn down but the tread is
noticeably less than the rear.

I'm still iffy on what to do especially with Elmo's info...I'm leaning
more towards just getting two new front tires, for safety reasons

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 3, 1:38 pm, "allenville...@gmail.com" <allenville...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 3, 3:39 am, "Seth" <seth_lermanNOS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > <allenville...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:2152856a-e51c-49ae-a92b-e021c3a81069@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com....
>
> > > Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> > > about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> > > are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> > > rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> > > bad idea?
>
> > Depends on how worn down they are. Do the tires still have enough tread to
> > pass a safety inspection? Then sure. If not, they're not safe front or
> > back.
>
> > Me, I don't rotate my tires either. When I get a new pair they go onthe
> > front, what's on the front goes to the rear and what on the rear isn't worth
> > saving and get disposed of.
>
> The tires in the front aren't super worn down but the tread is
> noticeably less than the rear.
>
> I'm still iffy on what to do especially with Elmo's info...I'm leaning
> more towards just getting two new front tires, for safety reasons

I meant Tegger, sorry.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 3, 1:38 pm, "allenville...@gmail.com" <allenville...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 3, 3:39 am, "Seth" <seth_lermanNOS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > <allenville...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:2152856a-e51c-49ae-a92b-e021c3a81069@m19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com....
>
> > > Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> > > about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> > > are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> > > rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> > > bad idea?
>
> > Depends on how worn down they are. Do the tires still have enough tread to
> > pass a safety inspection? Then sure. If not, they're not safe front or
> > back.
>
> > Me, I don't rotate my tires either. When I get a new pair they go onthe
> > front, what's on the front goes to the rear and what on the rear isn't worth
> > saving and get disposed of.
>
> The tires in the front aren't super worn down but the tread is
> noticeably less than the rear.
>
> I'm still iffy on what to do especially with Elmo's info...I'm leaning
> more towards just getting two new front tires, for safety reasons

I meant Tegger's info. Looks like I will just wait until the front
tires get very worn down and replace those only. The rear ones have
alot to go.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"allenvillegas@gmail.com" <allenvillegas@gmail.com> wrote in
news:3dda50fc-6450-4e1f-9d3d-ad78b463d46b@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com:


>
> The tires in the front aren't super worn down but the tread is
> noticeably less than the rear.



How much tread is there on the fronts anyway? You may be worried about
nothing.

Place a penny in the tread with the top of Lincoln's head pointing into the
tread. Check at various places, and see how much of Lincoln's head shows.
Does the tread come up to the top of his hair? The top of his forehead? His
eyebrows? The end of his nose?



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

In article <Xns9C1F99654229Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:

> > Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed than
> > my hands.
>
>
>
>
> Then you were OVERtyping; your hands went past your brain.

Ya know, you went RIGHT where I was going--until I OVERanalyzed it, and
wondered if perhaps I was UNDERtyping.


> Now if you were UNDERtyping, you'd never get anything done, since you'd
> forget what you wanted to type by the time your hands got around to typing
> it.

Ah!

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

Tegger wrote:
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
> 9BF8F7.10493603062009@mara100-84.onlink.net:
>
>
>>In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
>> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>That's OVERsteer.
>>
>>Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed than
>>my hands.
>
>
>
>
>
> Then you were OVERtyping; your hands went past your brain.
>
> Now if you were UNDERtyping, you'd never get anything done, since you'd
> forget what you wanted to type by the time your hands got around to typing
> it.
>


....and then there is the circumstance of mistyping...

JT

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 3, 3:11 am, "allenville...@gmail.com" <allenville...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> bad idea?

You wouldn't ask this question if you thought this was a good idea.
You're just looking for someone to justify your being cheap. No, it's
not OK. Your tires are shot. Replace them. Put the new ones onto the
rear.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 4, 8:19 pm, ACAR <gmw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 3:11 am, "allenville...@gmail.com" <allenville...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were purchased
> > about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but the rear tires
> > are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the front and front to
> > rear since being FWD the front takes the most wear? or would that be a
> > bad idea?
>
> You wouldn't ask this question if you thought this was a good idea.
> You're just looking for someone to justify your being cheap. No, it's
> not OK. Your tires are shot. Replace them. Put the new ones onto the
> rear.

Uh no. I'm asking for help, not being cheap. Why not get the most out
of my tires if I can? This is what this place is for, to get advice.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

ACAR wrote:
>
> You wouldn't ask this question if you thought this was a good idea.
> You're just looking for someone to justify your being cheap. No, it's
> not OK. Your tires are shot. Replace them. Put the new ones onto the
> rear.

You have no way of knowing what condition his tires are in without
seeing them. You don't know how many miles a year he puts on the
vehicle, You don't know where he is located, you dont know if he
maintains the air pressure correctly or not. In short, you don't know
anything about his situation other than the little bit he mentioned in
the OP. Ask some questions or stifle yourself. :^)

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On 6/5/2009 4:29 AM Brian Smith spake these words of knowledge:

> ACAR wrote:
>>
>> You wouldn't ask this question if you thought this was a good idea.
>> You're just looking for someone to justify your being cheap. No, it's
>> not OK. Your tires are shot. Replace them. Put the new ones onto the
>> rear.
>
> You have no way of knowing what condition his tires are in without
> seeing them. You don't know how many miles a year he puts on the
> vehicle, You don't know where he is located, you dont know if he
> maintains the air pressure correctly or not. In short, you don't know
> anything about his situation other than the little bit he mentioned in
> the OP. Ask some questions or stifle yourself. :^)

Further, there's nothing wrong with being cheap. It is not the same as
being foolish, although cheaping out in the wrong places is one of the
ways of being foolish.

To the OP: what would you do with those tires if your daughter were
driving the car? That's how I would make the decision.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
"Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art.... It has no
survival value; rather it is one of those things that give value to
survival." -- C.S. Lewis

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"allenvillegas@gmail.com" <allenvillegas@gmail.com> wrote in
news:7d0e6812-b499-4a5f-b311-5178243c7af5@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com:

> On Jun 4, 8:19 pm, ACAR <gmw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 3, 3:11 am, "allenville...@gmail.com"
>> <allenville...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Tire rotation has been neglected on the car since they were
>> > purchased about 2-3 years ago. The front tires are worn down but
>> > the rear tires are fine. Would it be ok to rotate the rear to the
>> > front and front to rear since being FWD the front takes the most
>> > wear? or would that be a bad idea?
>>
>> You wouldn't ask this question if you thought this was a good idea.
>> You're just looking for someone to justify your being cheap. No, it's
>> not OK. Your tires are shot. Replace them. Put the new ones onto the
>> rear.
>
> Uh no. I'm asking for help, not being cheap. Why not get the most out
> of my tires if I can? This is what this place is for, to get advice.




I offered advice. You never answered. To repeat my post of a few days
ago:

"How much tread is there on the fronts anyway? You may be worried about
nothing.

"Place a penny in the tread with the top of Lincoln's head pointing into
the tread. Check at various places, and see how much of Lincoln's head
shows. Does the tread come up to the top of his hair? The top of his
forehead? His eyebrows? The end of his nose?"


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

Dave Kelsen wrote:
>
> Further, there's nothing wrong with being cheap. It is not the same as
> being foolish, although cheaping out in the wrong places is one of the
> ways of being foolish.

Exactly, being frugal in these times is a good thing. Tires however are
one of the most important components of vehicle operation and should not
be let go to the tread wear markers.

> To the OP: what would you do with those tires if your daughter were
> driving the car? That's how I would make the decision.

Excellent example Dave.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-9BF8F7.10493603062009@mara100-84.onlink.net...
> In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>> That's OVERsteer.
>
> Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed
> than
> my hands.

Or the back of you was moving faster then the front.

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

On Jun 3, 3:31 pm, Tegger <inva...@invalid.inv> wrote:
> "allenville...@gmail.com" <allenville...@gmail.com> wrote innews:3dda50fc-6450-4e1f-9d3d-ad78b463d46b@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > The tires in the front aren't super worn down but the tread is
> > noticeably less than the rear.
>
> How much tread is there on the fronts anyway? You may be worried about
> nothing.
>
> Place a penny in the tread with the top of Lincoln's head pointing into the
> tread. Check at various places, and see how much of Lincoln's head shows.
> Does the tread come up to the top of his hair? The top of his forehead? His
> eyebrows? The end of his nose?
>
> --
> Tegger
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQwww.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Sorry for the delay. Gave both rear and front the penny test. Front
are pretty bad shape and need to be replaced, the tread reaches the
top of Abe's head. The rear tires tread goes to about his brow. Going
to get two new tires either today or tomorrow. So from what I read
these should go on the rear when I buy them?

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"allenvillegas@gmail.com" <allenvillegas@gmail.com> wrote in
news:052480e8-1343-4724-956e-d897bf27fbdf@w35g2000prg.googlegroups.com:


>
> Sorry for the delay. Gave both rear and front the penny test. Front
> are pretty bad shape and need to be replaced, the tread reaches the
> top of Abe's head. The rear tires tread goes to about his brow. Going
> to get two new tires either today or tomorrow. So from what I read
> these should go on the rear when I buy them?
>


Correct. The ones currently on the rear will be moved to the front.

Your current rears are in pretty good shape, actually. You have
approximately 1/4" (or about 8/32") of tread.

If I were you, I'd rotate your tires front-for-rear until the old ones are
down to maybe 4/32". This will give the new tires a proper start.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

Thus spake "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> :

>
>"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>news:elmop-9BF8F7.10493603062009@mara100-84.onlink.net...
>> In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
>> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>
>>> That's OVERsteer.
>>
>> Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different speed
>> than
>> my hands.
>
>Or the back of you was moving faster then the front.
>

Eventually he'll come around.
--

- dillon I am not invalid

"Gee, Jimmy,I'm sorry to hear that your girlfriend
turned out to be a Cylon."
-Special Agent Tim McGee, "NCIS"

Re: Tire rotation neglected on 2000 Accord LX
 

"Dillon Pyron" <invaliddmpyron@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:m093359n533o7erv6f180kb500eie9fkca@4ax.com...
> Thus spake "L Alpert" <alpertl@xxgmail.com> :
>
>>
>>"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>news:elmop-9BF8F7.10493603062009@mara100-84.onlink.net...
>>> In article <Xns9C1F578638A1Ctegger@208.90.168.18>,
>>> Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's OVERsteer.
>>>
>>> Oops--sorry, you're right. My mind was moving at a different
>>> speed
>>> than
>>> my hands.
>>
>>Or the back of you was moving faster then the front.
>>
>
> Eventually he'll come around.

The laws of physics demands it.....

> --
>
> - dillon I am not invalid
>
> "Gee, Jimmy,I'm sorry to hear that your girlfriend
> turned out to be a Cylon."
> -Special Agent Tim McGee, "NCIS"