I've been a bad, bad boy

[johnrhansen]

Almost 19000 miles and I just now got around to rotating my tires for the very first time. Went to discount tire. The man there said I was right at the cutoff point for treadwear on the fronts to where they would put them on the rear. I guess if the tread is too worn down back there the car could hydroplane and spin out in the rain. So they did it, and he told me to expect to change them at about 30000 miles. Ok. But I think I ought to just leave them as is until thst point. Not rotate them again, since the rears are now at the wear limit. If i put them back on the front 7500 miles from now, they will wear past that point of no return.

 

[mctom987]

I bought 3 sets of front tires on my Accord before my rear tires had to be replaced.

Assuming nothing is wrong, I don't see how rotating tires is actually beneficial. It's well-known that front tires wear down faster, but with ideal alignments, the total system wear doesn't change. Basically, going through 6 tires on my front, and 2 on the rear should have come out to the same treadlife if I rotated them properly. All rotation does is make all 4 tires wear out at the same time.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Tire rotation made more sense before FWD and AWD became more common. It probably still makes sense for AWD vehicles and even for FWD cars with mild-mannered engines and good weight distribution.

 

[Volt3939]

I bought 3 sets of front tires on my Accord before my rear tires had to be replaced.

Assuming nothing is wrong, I don't see how rotating tires is actually beneficial. It's well-known that front tires wear down faster, but with ideal alignments, the total system wear doesn't change. Basically, going through 6 tires on my front, and 2 on the rear should have come out to the same treadlife if I rotated them properly. All rotation does is make all 4 tires wear out at the same time.

Rubber ages. I prefer to have new rubber all around. By leaving the rears on through so many fronts, you might be risking an age related failure.

 

[mctom987]

Rubber ages. I prefer to have new rubber all around. By leaving the rears on through so many fronts, you might be risking an age related failure.

I'd say unlikely. I didn't drive infrequently enough for that to be an issue. Figuring an average car is driven 12,000 miles per year, and you can buy tires with 85,000 mile warranties, I'd say a decent tire should last at least 5 years,

 

[RonDawg]

I'm with Volt3939, I'd rather have to replace all 4 tires at the same time, but less frequently, than one pair but more frequently.

My biggest reason for doing so is to keep the handling as neutral as possible, given the design parameters of the car and the tires. The reason tire dealers don't like to put excessively worn tires on the back axle is because it makes the car more likely to oversteer, and if you are not experienced at counter-steering, it could very well lead to an accident.

Putting heavily worn tires on the front will make the car more prone to understeer, which an inexperienced driver can handle much easier (simply scrub off speed). But as FWD cars already have this tendency, the last thing I want is to make it worse. So I prefer that all 4 tires be as even as possible.

Plus by frequently rotating, you or a mechanic (doing the job right) can more easily check the tires for damage that could lead to sudden failure. You or the mechanic can also check the brakes for wear and other issues before they become costly repairs if not an accident waiting to happen.