Worth Paying for one more rotation?
Paladin
215/50-17) show even tread wear but three of them are between 5/32 and
6/32 tread depth while the RF has 7/32. They've got about about 33,000
miles on them.
I'm due for an A-1 service (oil change, tire rotation) and wondering if
it's worth paying for the rotation seeing as how they'll probably need
to replaced sooner rather than later.
Tegger
@news.albasani.net:
How much are they charging for the rotation itself?
--
Tegger
Paladin
$20
Tegger
For a measly $20, I'd get it done.
Surely you'll get that back in slightly longer tire life, maybe even $20
more life.
--
Tegger
jim beam
i'll take the longer survival life of the driver thanks. rotation ruins
traction and braking control because it reduces the amount of actual
rubber contacting the pavement.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Tegger
news:jqCdnRWHf4xtQGLQ...@speakeasy.net:
You have some pretty odd ideas, sir.
--
Tegger
jim beam
one of the things you learn early on in materials science is that the
micro determines the macro. [this is an observation principle many
never learn, and even some who have been taught, never fully
appreciate.] thus, if you methodically observe the "micro" of the
tire's behavior, you will understand the "macro" of its performance.
i've repeated the description of this easy-to-do-for-yourself experiment
on this forum many times - chalk up some hdfb, lay it on some flat road
and with your "has been in this position for a few thousand miles now"
tires still in those positions, drive across it. take a pic of the
rubber blocks on the tire, and what percentage of each is chalked. then
rotate the tires, and repeat [taking the trouble to drive around the
block to de-chalk from last time of course]. you will see a dramatic
reduction in the contact area on each single block, particularly the
ones at the edges of the tire.
this is the reason why the "sport" car manufacturer segment recommends
/against/ tire rotation - this reduced contact area. and they're making
sense because some clown jumping into their m5 [bmw is one such
manufacturer that recommends against rotation] and trying to take an
on-ramp at the same speed they always do will quickly come to grief
because of it.
"good riddance to that guy" you may say, but the same applies to your
wife driving the kiddies to school - her emergency braking distance will
be increased in proportion to the reduced rubber contact area after a
rotation. i'm sure you don't want that, and now you can do your chalk
experiment, you can prove what i've said for yourself.
reality is, perpetuation of the tire rotation mantra is both ill
informed and anachronistic for today's radial tires. some people say it
because either their cars are crap and can't track a tire straight under
any circumstances, they don't know how the tire actually behaves, or
because they think it's some kind of legal cya. all are ridiculous imo.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Tegger
1E907E.210...@news.eternal-september.org:
> In article <Xns9F0ACF45...@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>> > i'll take the longer survival life of the driver thanks. rotation
>> > ruins traction and braking control because it reduces the amount of
>> > actual rubber contacting the pavement.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> You have some pretty odd ideas, sir.
>
> ...ideas which BMW put into writing and practice some time ago, for the
> same reasons jim outlines.
>
> There is no tire rotation for BMW vehicles.
jim says that the reason you shouldn't rotate tires is because of
temporarily-reduced contact patch when the tires change positions. And this
is perfectly true.
It's also true that if you never rotate your tires, you will maintain
maximal contact patch through out the tires' life. For race cars, or road-
going performance-cars such as BMWs, this is important when approaching the
limits of the cars' capabilities.
Unfortunately, maintaining maximal contact-patch has a tradeoff: shorter
usable tire life. Without rotation, the portions of the tread that wear
most will reach their wear-limit more quickly than if the tires had been
subject to different wear-patterns regularly.
Does the temporarily-reduced contact-patch make any real difference to the
handling and safety of daily-driver Hondas that are driven the way most
people drive them? I don't think so. I think most people appreciate getting
the longest life they can out of their Honda's tires, and are unlikely to
drive their Hondas the way race cars are driven.
--
Tegger
Paladin
Man....ask a simple question! Hey, thanks for the advice.
I'd post a longer reply but I'm out here on the interstate commuting to
work. I don't want to take the risk of raising the sun-tinted Polaroid
visor on my racing helmet so I can see the cell phone screen more
clearly-- nor taking off my fireproof nomex racing gloves to get my
fingers on the tiny little keyboard better.
Shoot, there's the dreaded yellow flag-- backing it down past 150 mph
now. Good damn thing my tires are so grippy...only the inside two are
contacting the pavement as I make this tight turn...
jim beam
wow, i wish i lived where you live. great wide straight flat roads,
perfect weather all the time, no other doofuses on the road to change
lanes without using their mirrors. and no kids chasing out into the
street either. at least, i hope not...
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
jim beam
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty"<el...@nastydesigns.com> wrote in news:elmop-
> 1E907E.210...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> In article<Xns9F0ACF45...@208.90.168.18>,
>> Tegger<inv...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> i'll take the longer survival life of the driver thanks. rotation
>>>> ruins traction and braking control because it reduces the amount of
>>>> actual rubber contacting the pavement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You have some pretty odd ideas, sir.
>>
>> ...ideas which BMW put into writing and practice some time ago, for the
>> same reasons jim outlines.
>>
>> There is no tire rotation for BMW vehicles.
>
>
>
> jim says that the reason you shouldn't rotate tires is because of
> temporarily-reduced contact patch when the tires change positions. And this
> is perfectly true.
>
> It's also true that if you never rotate your tires, you will maintain
> maximal contact patch through out the tires' life. For race cars, or road-
> going performance-cars such as BMWs, this is important when approaching the
> limits of the cars' capabilities.
>
> Unfortunately, maintaining maximal contact-patch has a tradeoff: shorter
> usable tire life.
only if you toss the whole set when one axle's tires are done.
"rotation" simply averages the wear rate over all the tires at the same
time. if tires remain in one station, their wear rate for each station
is still exactly the same [higher in fact since individual blocks get
stressed more after a change], they're just not averaged over the set.
> Without rotation, the portions of the tread that wear
> most will reach their wear-limit more quickly than if the tires had been
> subject to different wear-patterns regularly.
>
> Does the temporarily-reduced contact-patch make any real difference to the
> handling and safety of daily-driver Hondas that are driven the way most
> people drive them? I don't think so. I think most people appreciate getting
> the longest life they can out of their Honda's tires, and are unlikely to
> drive their Hondas the way race cars are driven.
>
>
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
jim beam
forgot: this "longer life" mantra is a fundamental misconception. wear
rate is the same, it's merely averaged over more tires. that is /not/
"longer life".
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Tegger
news:itq6c4$mgr$1...@news.albasani.net:
>
> Shoot, there's the dreaded yellow flag-- backing it down past 150 mph
> now. Good damn thing my tires are so grippy...only the inside two are
> contacting the pavement as I make this tight turn...
And if you haven't rotated your tires, you're enjoying maximum contact
patch on those two! Good for a few more MPH, for sure.
--
Tegger
News
> In article<Xns9F0ACF45...@208.90.168.18>,
> Tegger<inv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>> ruins traction and braking control because it reduces the amount of
>>> actual rubber contacting the pavement.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> You have some pretty odd ideas, sir.
>
> same reasons jim outlines.
>
> There is no tire rotation for BMW vehicles.
Some of which use different tire sizes and profiles front and rear.
jim beam
why do people trivialize this? traction is a safety thing much more
than a "racing" thing. doesn't anyone want to /not/ rear-end the car
that can stop faster than you?
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Tegger
I think you're overreacting just a little bit.
--
Tegger
Tegger
g6uwL53TnZ2d...@speakeasy.net:
I'm guessing BMW is expecting its owners to take their cars to 10/10ths
regularly. Few daily-driver Honda owners would do that unless they're young
and/or ricers. And when you're that close to the limit, inexperience and
incompetence is more likely to result in crashes than some small and
temporary reduction in contact-patch.
--
Tegger
Bluto
"Tegger" wrote in message news:Xns9F0B7DE7...@208.90.168.18...
jim beam
> News<Ne...@Group.Name> wrote in news:y72dnT1-
> g6uwL53TnZ2d...@speakeasy.net:
>
>> On 6/20/2011 9:06 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article<Xns9F0ACF45...@208.90.168.18>,
>>> Tegger<inv...@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> i'll take the longer survival life of the driver thanks. rotation
>>>>> ruins traction and braking control because it reduces the amount of
>>>>> actual rubber contacting the pavement.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You have some pretty odd ideas, sir.
>>>
>>> ...ideas which BMW put into writing and practice some time ago, for the
>>> same reasons jim outlines.
>>>
>>> There is no tire rotation for BMW vehicles.
>>
>>
>> Some of which use different tire sizes and profiles front and rear.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> I'm guessing BMW is expecting its owners to take their cars to 10/10ths
> regularly.
b.s. bmw's break if you actually /do/ drive them hard. ask my buddy
with the m3 and three new subframes.
> Few daily-driver Honda owners would do that unless they're young
> and/or ricers. And when you're that close to the limit, inexperience and
> incompetence is more likely to result in crashes than some small and
> temporary reduction in contact-patch.
the factor common to all drivers, irrespective of "inexperience" or
"incompetence" is emergency braking. and with abs control, driver
competence is simply not a factor.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
News
jim beam
> In article<eIOdnZY69qbuL53T...@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> traction is a safety thing much more
>> than a "racing" thing. doesn't anyone want to /not/ rear-end the car
>> that can stop faster than you?
>
> question becomes, are Honda owners screwing themselves on THAT basis if
> they make the car turn BETTER?
>
> 'Cuz, Honda designs serious understeer into their cars, on the basis
> that it's better than having the car oversteer. I'm not saying that any
> Honda will oversteer necessarily, but people are used to Hondas
> scrubbing their front tires toward the guardrail as they take that
> cloverleaf too fast. Better grip does change that behavior to some
> extent...
it does indeed. i have a set of michelin pilots on one civic and
standard tires on another. the pilots definitely push that thing around
the bends better.
but i don't think "screwing" is the right way to look at it. all you
get si slightly less understeer, you don't eliminate it by any means.
>
> (I presume the S2000 is the exception to this rule--I presume one can
> kick the tail out pretty easily?)
that's something i'll never be able to try unfortunately - too tall and
simply cannot fit behind the wheel. :(
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
jim beam
i don't think you're reacting enough. rotation is an anachronistic
dogma left over from the days of bias ply - just like 3k mile oil changes.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Bluto
ABS is great but you still need driver skill and competence to control the
car in an emergency braking situation. During the winter, there is at least
one news story about drivers in emergency situations, loosing control and
finding ditches alongside the road.
"jim beam" wrote in message
news:vJadnay6fNKhVJ3T...@speakeasy.net...
jim beam
ass posting is a real pain in the top - please don't.
as elmo says, abs can't help you outperform available traction. but it
can help my grandmother effectively /stop/ standing on the brake long
after she's starting to slide and thus retain some chance of control.
why the government sees fit to save the incapable from themselves with
things like abs is something you need to take up with your
representatives [but if you actually want to be heard, be prepared to
hand over the same or more then the oilco lobbyists who encourage
anything that adds to a vehicles weight and/or fuel consumption].
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Bluto
Mr. Beam, my posts are on the top when I reply, don't know what the
newsgroup does after. Guess I don't post enough to be an expert like you
are. Oh well, we all can't be experts.
Tegger
_TnZ2dnUV...@earthlink.com:
>
> Mr. Beam, my posts are on the top when I reply, don't know what the
> newsgroup does after.
The "group" does nothing to your post. Top- or bottom-posting is
established by the poster.
> Guess I don't post enough to be an expert like you
> are. Oh well, we all can't be experts.
>
>
> ass posting is a real pain in the top - please don't.
If you want to scold people on how to post, you should at least learn how
to separate quoted text from your reply. Without some sort of separation,
it's difficult to know where your reply ends and the quoted text begins.
And, as a Usenetter since about 1999, I can tell you that Usenet is
traditionally a bottom-posting milieu.
--
Tegger
Al
> Paladin<gunsl...@1875.net> wrote in news:ito8o9$kn6$2...@news.albasani.net:
>
>> On 6/20/11 3:14 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>> Paladin<gunsl...@sf1875.net> wrote in news:itm1dc$b7a$1
>>> @news.albasani.net:
>>>
>>>> The OEM tires on my '07 Accord EX-L V6 Sedan (Michelin Pilot MXM4,
>>>> 215/50-17) show even tread wear but three of them are between 5/32 and
>>>> 6/32 tread depth while the RF has 7/32. They've got about about 33,000
>>>> miles on them.
>>>>
>>>> I'm due for an A-1 service (oil change, tire rotation) and wondering if
>>>> it's worth paying for the rotation seeing as how they'll probably need
>>>> to replaced sooner rather than later.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How much are they charging for the rotation itself?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> $20
>>
>
>
>
>
> Surely you'll get that back in slightly longer tire life, maybe even $20
> more life.
>
>
This thread raises some questions in my mind:
1. About how many miles might it take a 'rotated' tire wear off its
high spots and regain full contact? I imagine it would be about the
same as the miles it takes a brand new tire to achieve full contact?
2. If you paid $20. to have the tires rotated every 10,000 miles, you
would have invested $100. by 50,000 miles (about the price of a new
tire). Is is reasonable to expect rotations to extend the life of a set
of tires by 25%? I agree with beam's point about averaging the wear,
and even increasing it by having to wear off the high spots each time.
Of course many posters on this group do it themselves so only their time
is involved, but many others probably pay $40. or more for a rotation,
and many do 5,000 or 7,500 miles intervals.
3. How does front to back rotation vs cross rotation affect the
"contact" discussion?
4. I usually find that I don't like the feel of a car after rotation,
but I like to buy my tires 4 at a time rather than 2 at a time, which is
often what happens if you never rotate. What works for me is rotate
only once when the most worn tire appears to be at 50% and I do it front
to back (no cross).
jim beam
> On 6/20/2011 7:48 PM, Tegger wrote:
>> Paladin<gunsl...@1875.net> wrote in
>> news:ito8o9$kn6$2...@news.albasani.net:
>>
>>> On 6/20/11 3:14 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>>> Paladin<gunsl...@sf1875.net> wrote in news:itm1dc$b7a$1
>>>> @news.albasani.net:
>>>>
>>>>> The OEM tires on my '07 Accord EX-L V6 Sedan (Michelin Pilot MXM4,
>>>>> 215/50-17) show even tread wear but three of them are between 5/32 and
>>>>> 6/32 tread depth while the RF has 7/32. They've got about about 33,000
>>>>> miles on them.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm due for an A-1 service (oil change, tire rotation) and
>>>>> wondering if
>>>>> it's worth paying for the rotation seeing as how they'll probably need
>>>>> to replaced sooner rather than later.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How much are they charging for the rotation itself?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> $20
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For a measly $20, I'd get it done.
>>
>> Surely you'll get that back in slightly longer tire life, maybe even $20
>> more life.
>>
>>
>
>
> This thread raises some questions in my mind:
>
> 1. About how many miles might it take a 'rotated' tire wear off its high
> spots and regain full contact? I imagine it would be about the same as
> the miles it takes a brand new tire to achieve full contact?
it's more because it has to wear back to flat, then go past that to the
new profile.
>
> 2. If you paid $20. to have the tires rotated every 10,000 miles, you
> would have invested $100. by 50,000 miles (about the price of a new
> tire). Is is reasonable to expect rotations to extend the life of a set
> of tires by 25%? I agree with beam's point about averaging the wear, and
> even increasing it by having to wear off the high spots each time. Of
> course many posters on this group do it themselves so only their time is
> involved, but many others probably pay $40. or more for a rotation, and
> many do 5,000 or 7,500 miles intervals.
if you really want to rotate, the "least negative" impact you can have
is to keep each rubber block comparatively flat, like a new tire. but
to keep that, you'll have to rotate every few hundred miles.
>
> 3. How does front to back rotation vs cross rotation affect the
> "contact" discussion?
depends on the car. some vehicles are fundamentally awful, and no
amount of alignment or realignment seems to help them. in that case, i
doubt rotation has any serious negative effects. but for a good vehicle
with 4-wheel independent suspension, particularly those with multi-link
rears, the front/rear wear patterns are completely different, thus the
contact patches are completely different and rotation can have a
substantial negative effect.
>
> 4. I usually find that I don't like the feel of a car after rotation,
we've been discussing the reason for that! it's worst when crossing
side to side.
> but I like to buy my tires 4 at a time rather than 2 at a time, which is
> often what happens if you never rotate. What works for me is rotate only
> once when the most worn tire appears to be at 50% and I do it front to
> back (no cross).
i'm a fwd guy with same size front/rear, so i replace by axle - my
fronts always go first. when i replace them, the new ones always go on
the rear. then i'll brutalize the tires for a bit to make sure the
"new" fronts wear in as quickly as possible to restore maximum braking
again.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Gordon McGrew
Who do you think that incompetent driver is going to hit? I would
actually favor some efforts to weed out or restrict incompetent
drivers, but that would require evil government regulation. Can you
imagine the uproar if the government required a special light truck
license to drive your suv, minivan or pickup. Two moving violations
in a year (in any vehicle) and you lose your special light truck
license for two years.