From: Nate Nagel on
Where was this? That doesn't even make sense.

nate

Ashton Crusher wrote:
> I had the same BS from them except I'm sure they told me they had to
> put the new tires on the front. It's not a law, it's just some policy
> written by their lawyers.
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:21 -0700, "CWLee"
> <cdubyalee(a)post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
>> 6 months ago got a set of 4 new tires at Costco. 5000 miles
>> later one tire, right front, failed. Costco replaced it,
>> charging me about $30 for my tread wear. So far so good.
>>
>> Then Costco said it was required (implication was by law) to
>> put the new tire on the rear, and move the slightly used
>> rear one to the forward. I had no problem with that, but I
>> wonder if:
>>
>> 1. That is a genuine legal requirement or not? (This is in
>> California, so it could be a state law, not a federal law.)
>>
>> 2. If not required by law, is this an industry standard?
>>
>> 3. If the answer to either of the above is YES, what is the
>> rationale behind it. I always believed it was safer to have
>> the best tires on the front, to decrease the danger of
>> loosing steering control during a blowout at speed, thinking
>> that one won't be likely to lose steering control if a rear
>> tire blows.
>>
>> Comments?


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
From: Hachiroku on
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:21 -0700, CWLee wrote:

> 3. If the answer to either of the above is YES, what is the
> rationale behind it. I always believed it was safer to have
> the best tires on the front, to decrease the danger of
> loosing steering control during a blowout at speed, thinking
> that one won't be likely to lose steering control if a rear
> tire blows.


It was put to me you put the best tires on the rear, because you can't
steer the rear wheels.

This question is similar to asking, where should I part my hair?
You'll get a different answer from everyone.

Never heard of any law as to where to put tires, however.


From: Don Stauffer on
CWLee wrote:
>
> 6 months ago got a set of 4 new tires at Costco. 5000 miles later one
> tire, right front, failed. Costco replaced it, charging me about $30
> for my tread wear. So far so good.
>
> Then Costco said it was required (implication was by law) to put the new
> tire on the rear, and move the slightly used rear one to the forward. I
> had no problem with that, but I wonder if:
>
> 1. That is a genuine legal requirement or not? (This is in California,
> so it could be a state law, not a federal law.)
>
> 2. If not required by law, is this an industry standard?
>
> 3. If the answer to either of the above is YES, what is the rationale
> behind it. I always believed it was safer to have the best tires on the
> front, to decrease the danger of loosing steering control during a
> blowout at speed, thinking that one won't be likely to lose steering
> control if a rear tire blows.
>
> Comments?
>


The idea is that the average driver can handle an understeering car more
easily than an oversteering one. If you've driven the original VW
Beetle for very long, it would be no problem.
From: Scott Dorsey on
CWLee <cdubyalee(a)post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>6 months ago got a set of 4 new tires at Costco. 5000 miles
>later one tire, right front, failed. Costco replaced it,
>charging me about $30 for my tread wear. So far so good.
>
>Then Costco said it was required (implication was by law) to
>put the new tire on the rear, and move the slightly used
>rear one to the forward. I had no problem with that, but I
>wonder if:

If this is a front-wheel drive car, you want to do this so that the two
driven wheels are the same diameter.

If you had a rear-wheel drive car, you probably want to put the new tire
on the front.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
From: C. E. White on

"Hachiroku" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.09.23.17.20.16.953000(a)e86.GTS...
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:21 -0700, CWLee wrote:
>
>> 3. If the answer to either of the above is YES, what is the
>> rationale behind it. I always believed it was safer to have
>> the best tires on the front, to decrease the danger of
>> loosing steering control during a blowout at speed, thinking
>> that one won't be likely to lose steering control if a rear
>> tire blows.
>
>
> It was put to me you put the best tires on the rear, because you
> can't
> steer the rear wheels.
>
> This question is similar to asking, where should I part my hair?
> You'll get a different answer from everyone.
>
> Never heard of any law as to where to put tires, however.

I don't think there is a "law." I think this is a cover your rear end
practice and is a rule at the big box retailers like Costco. The
theory is simple - if one end of your car is going to loose traction
first, it is better if it is the front end. It the front end breaks
loose first, the the car usually continues in a straight line. This
may end up with you in a ditch, or in the raer of the car in front,
but in many cases that is the lesser of two evils. If the rear end
breaks loose first, the car will spin, and unless the driver is very
competent, it is possibe that the car will end up going sideways and
rolling, or spin into the opposing lane of traffic or something else
nasty. These are worse options - usually. Car manufacturers have been
designing passenger cars so that the front end breaks loose first for
many years (understeer). Putting the better tires on the front can
counteract this design "feature" by improving the front end traction
relative to the rear end traction.

In the case quoted, this seems to be a trivial worry. The guy was
getting exactly the same tire, with just a little less tread than the
tires already on the car. I assume he is roatating them. I would just
switch the rear tires to the front in a normal rotation pattern. The
front and rear tires wear differentially (as do the side to side
tires).

Ed