Two new tires, front or back?
 

I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?

I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
or something and caused the leak.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

New tires on rear is correct.

"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:pvoke4pjigefmdsp259pithjjqoe7q1gf2@4ax.com...
>I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
> I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
> gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
> Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
> flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
> or something and caused the leak.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

> New tires on rear is correct.

Then swop them 'em to the front if you want

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

I'm with you - I always put new pair on front. If I went somewhere that
wouldnt do that, I'd go elsewhere - unless the price diff more than paid
for rotating.
Just my 2c.

"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:pvoke4pjigefmdsp259pithjjqoe7q1gf2@4ax.com...
>I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
> I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
> gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
> Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
> flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
> or something and caused the leak.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Oct 6, 3:20 pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?


New on the rear and here's why...

From Tire Rack:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=52

Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and
because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear
tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will
provide more wet and wintry traction; and by the time the front tires
have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out,
too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it
can be downright dangerous.

When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new
tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the partially
worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the
rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads
since deeper treaded tires are better at resisting hydroplaning.

Members of Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon
at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to
drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires
of different tread depths -- one vehicle with new tires on the rear
and half-worn tires on the front and the other with the new tires in
the front and half-worn tires on the rear.

It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the
"proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to
sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the
rear and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising
oversteer with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.

And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going
to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common
during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front and the
worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver
spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!

Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of
Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an
Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Oct 6, 2:20 pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
> I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
> gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
> Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
> flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
> or something and caused the leak.

Put the new ones on the FRONT if no / little snow or ice - if all 4
tires are shot start on the rear

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

dgk wrote:
> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?

actually, rear is correct. the rears cut a shorter line on a corner
than the fronts, thus have more sideways forces to deal with, even on a
fwd honda.

that said however, in heavy rain, newer on the front gives better
straight line control and resistance to aquaplaning. but you MUST
modify your driving accordingly. having your rear spin out on a freeway
on-ramp can be somewhat embarassing



>
> I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
> gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
> Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
> flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
> or something and caused the leak.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

Siskuwihane wrote:
> On Oct 6, 3:20�pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
>> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
>> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
>> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
>> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
>
> New on the rear and here's why...
>
> From Tire Rack:
>
> http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=52
>
> Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and
> because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear
> tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will
> provide more wet and wintry traction; and by the time the front tires
> have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out,
> too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it
> can be downright dangerous.
>
> When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new
> tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the partially
> worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the
> rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads
> since deeper treaded tires are better at resisting hydroplaning.
>
> Members of Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon
> at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to
> drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires
> of different tread depths -- one vehicle with new tires on the rear
> and half-worn tires on the front and the other with the new tires in
> the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
>
> It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the
> "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to
> sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the
> rear and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising
> oversteer

oversteer on a honda???? obviously they're not talking about fwd vehicles.



> with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.
>
> And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going
> to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common
> during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front and the
> worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver
> spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!
>
> Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of
> Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an
> Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!
>

Re: Snows on Front Only (was:Two new tires, front or back?)
 

jim beam wrote:
> Siskuwihane wrote:
>> On Oct 6, 3:20�pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>>> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
>>> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
>>> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
>>> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
>>> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>>
>>
>> New on the rear and here's why...
>>
>> From Tire Rack:
>>
>> http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=52
>>
>> Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and
>> because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear
>> tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will
>> provide more wet and wintry traction; and by the time the front tires
>> have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out,
>> too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it
>> can be downright dangerous.
>>
>> When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new
>> tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the partially
>> worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the
>> rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads
>> since deeper treaded tires are better at resisting hydroplaning.
>>
>> Members of Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon
>> at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to
>> drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires
>> of different tread depths -- one vehicle with new tires on the rear
>> and half-worn tires on the front and the other with the new tires in
>> the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
>>
>> It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the
>> "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to
>> sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the
>> rear and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising
>> oversteer
>
> oversteer on a honda???? obviously they're not talking about fwd vehicles.
>
>
>
>> with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.
>>
>> And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going
>> to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common
>> during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front and the
>> worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver
>> spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!
>>
>> Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of
>> Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an
>> Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!
>>


On a related note, we are told to only use snow tires in sets of
four, especially on FWD cars. I've used snows in front with FWD, with
aggressive all-season tires in the rear, for 20 years now, with no
problems at all. I've also used snows in the rear only on RWD cars.
After getting a new 1986 Civic with actual summer tires on the rear, and
then putting snows on the front, I saw the problem with that, believe
me! But using all-seasons that are good in snow on the rear has worked
fine in all sorts of driving, including on unplowed and icy roads. If
the car handles well in snow, it appears that you can do what I've done
safely. If the car doesn't seem stable in snow with all-seasons on all
four wheels, though, you should probably use 4 snow tires...

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Oct 6, 10:39 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> Siskuwihane wrote:
> > On Oct 6, 3:20 pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> >> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> >> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> >> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> >> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> >> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
> > New on the rear and here's why...
>
> > From Tire Rack:
>
> >http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=52
>
> > Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and
> > because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear
> > tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will
> > provide more wet and wintry traction; and by the time the front tires
> > have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out,
> > too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it
> > can be downright dangerous.
>
> > When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new
> > tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the partially
> > worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the
> > rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads
> > since deeper treaded tires are better at resisting hydroplaning.
>
> > Members of Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon
> > at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to
> > drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires
> > of different tread depths -- one vehicle with new tires on the rear
> > and half-worn tires on the front and the other with the new tires in
> > the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
>
> > It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the
> > "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to
> > sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the
> > rear and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising
> > oversteer
>
> oversteer on a honda???? obviously they're not talking about fwd vehicles.

Obviously they are talking about old tire position and wet conditons
causing the oversteer (which is fully explained in the link that was
provided). Michelin tests were done using FWD vehicles and are
available on their website videos.

http://www.michelinman.ca/care/buy_how.html#a3

Contact them if you want to argue the results.



> > with the new tires on the front was emphatically proven.
>
> > And even though our drivers had the advantage of knowing we were going
> > to be challenged to maintain car control, spinouts became common
> > during our laps in the car with the new tires on the front and the
> > worn tires on the rear. Michelin advises us that almost every driver
> > spins out at least once when participating in this demonstration!
>
> > Experiencing this phenomenon in the safe, controlled conditions of
> > Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds rather than in traffic on an
> > Interstate ramp in a rainstorm is definitely preferred!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 05:48:02 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
<Siskuwihane1@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 6, 10:39 pm, jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>> Siskuwihane wrote:
>> > On Oct 6, 3:20 pm, dgk <d...@somewhere.com> wrote:
>> >> I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
>> >> only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
>> >> study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
>> >> prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
>> >> better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>>
>> > New on the rear and here's why...
>>
>> > From Tire Rack:
>>
>> >http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=52
>>
>> > Intuition suggests that since the front tires wore out first and
>> > because there is still about half of the tread remaining on the rear
>> > tires, the new tires should be installed on the front axle. This will
>> > provide more wet and wintry traction; and by the time the front tires
>> > have worn out for the second time, the rear tires will be worn out,
>> > too. However in this case, intuition isn't right...and following it
>> > can be downright dangerous.
>>
>> > When tires are replaced in pairs in situations like these, the new
>> > tires should always be installed on the rear axle and the partially
>> > worn tires moved to the front. The reason is because new tires on the
>> > rear axle help the driver more easily maintain control on wet roads
>> > since deeper treaded tires are better at resisting hydroplaning.
>>
>> > Members of Tire Rack team had the chance to experience this phenomenon
>> > at Michelin's Laurens Proving Grounds. Participants were allowed to
>> > drive around a large radius, wet curve in vehicles fitted with tires
>> > of different tread depths -- one vehicle with new tires on the rear
>> > and half-worn tires on the front and the other with the new tires in
>> > the front and half-worn tires on the rear.
>>
>> > It didn't take long for this hands-on experience to confirm that the
>> > "proving grounds" name for the facility was correct. The ability to
>> > sense and control predictable understeer with the new tires on the
>> > rear and the helplessness in trying to control the surprising
>> > oversteer
>>
>> oversteer on a honda???? obviously they're not talking about fwd vehicles.
>
>Obviously they are talking about old tire position and wet conditons
>causing the oversteer (which is fully explained in the link that was
>provided). Michelin tests were done using FWD vehicles and are
>available on their website videos.
>
>http://www.michelinman.ca/care/buy_how.html#a3
>
>Contact them if you want to argue the results.
>
>
>

How about if I don't use michelin tires? Nah, I suppose it's the same.

I did skid a few weeks ago on a wet road while approaching an exit too
fast, which was one reason I was thinking of new tires. The article
explained it well; the front is hydroplaning a bit and it was easy to
control. Many years ago I fishtailed going around a curve and it was
much harder to control. For those familiar with New York roads, it was
that nasty curve heading into the Bronx over the Whitestone Bridge,
past the tool booths, leading onto the Cross Bronx Expressway.

There are often spinouts on that curve.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

dgk wrote:
>
> I did skid a few weeks ago on a wet road while approaching an exit too
> fast, which was one reason I was thinking of new tires. The article
> explained it well; the front is hydroplaning a bit and it was easy to
> control. Many years ago I fishtailed going around a curve and it was
> much harder to control. For those familiar with New York roads, it was
> that nasty curve heading into the Bronx over the Whitestone Bridge,
> past the tool booths, leading onto the Cross Bronx Expressway.
>
> There are often spinouts on that curve.

Slow down and drive responsibly.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Oct 6, 3:37 pm, "Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLE...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> New tires on rear is correct.
>
> "dgk" <d...@somewhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:pvoke4pjigefmdsp259pithjjqoe7q1gf2@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> >I was going to get two new tires for my 91 Accord at Costco. They will
> > only mount new tires on the rear if you only get two. Apparently a
> > study tells them that the better tires should be on the rear to
> > prevent fishtailing. Odd, I would think that the front would be
> > better, having the steering, power, and brakes. So which is better?
>
> > I decided my tires are good enough for a while longer and left. I had
> > gotten a flat and decided that maybe I should just get new tires.
> > Oddly, the place I went to to fix the flat (Costco would only fix
> > flats on their tires!) couldn't find a hole. I must have bumped a curb
> > or something and caused the leak.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

the exception being when you are getting tires which aren't the same
as the old ones, and have less grip; like when you have purchased the
road hazard warranty from firestone and two tires get hazarded at the
same time but for some reason the factory hasn't got any potenzas
available anywhere so they give you a couple of other bridgestones to
fulfill your road hazard warranty, but i digress.

anyway, they insisted on putting the new tires on the rear, and it was
definitely squiggly feeling, especially in the rain; putting the new
tires on the front and the old potenzas on the rear improved the
stability a lot at the cost of the front losing grip and the car
having serious terminal understeer, especially in the wet.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 10:24:13 -0300, Brian Smith
<Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:

>dgk wrote:
>>
>> I did skid a few weeks ago on a wet road while approaching an exit too
>> fast, which was one reason I was thinking of new tires. The article
>> explained it well; the front is hydroplaning a bit and it was easy to
>> control. Many years ago I fishtailed going around a curve and it was
>> much harder to control. For those familiar with New York roads, it was
>> that nasty curve heading into the Bronx over the Whitestone Bridge,
>> past the tool booths, leading onto the Cross Bronx Expressway.
>>
>> There are often spinouts on that curve.
>
> Slow down and drive responsibly.

Yup, I've been driving for 40 years so I'm pretty calm these days.
Still, it's best to have good tires.

Re: Two new tires, front or back?
 

dgk wrote:
>
> Yup, I've been driving for 40 years so I'm pretty calm these days.
> Still, it's best to have good tires.

Agreed. But even with good tires, there is no substitute for driving
within the capability of yourself, the vehicle and the weather and road
conditions.