VW GOlf 1.6, don't hammer it and currently on 25k miles for the front two with about 1.5mm left before they need changing. Rears are on about 20k with about 4mm left. Bridgestone ER300 I think - will be buying them again!
Chat Forum
Car Tyre - Wear Experience
-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
I would have thought them more likely to wear more when warmer (& hence softer?), likewise driving on nice slippy snow reduce the friction & corresponding wear ?
In a normal winter? Maybe, but in extremis the opposite is true. Below a certain temperature the rubber in the tyres doesn't activate and simply ablates on the cold road surface. Most tyres are rated for temperatures over 5 degrees, that's another reason winter tyres are more successful in the cold.
You're right that the tyre wear would be lower on ice, but the majority of the roads you drove on in winter weren't ice covered, they were simply cold and wet.
Look at winter tyres, they degrade in the opposite way once the temperature increases above 10 degrees.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Fit new to the back.
I know this is the accepted wisdom, but I couldn't disagree more with this statement. I want my grip where the braking and turning is done, if the rear lets loose I can handle that and use the front to control it, if the front lets loose I've no directional or braking control. (Much as many people prefer a RWD car over a FWD in sketchy situations)
Also agree that uniroyals (rainsport) are a cracking tyre - a bit weary but amazing grip and predictable
but...if you are concerned the tyres you are moving to the front from the back are no good then you shouldnt be using them at all.
And the tyres you previously had on the front must have been dangerous for a while by that logic.
It just doesnt work when you think about it.
New tyres on back. Older on front.
Rear tyres on a FWD car will wear at a very low rate so if you have new 7-8mm all round then when the front at <3mm your rears should still be well over 5mm.
If you wait for rears to wear down to <3mm then they will probably be horribly aged and cracked and unsafe and you will be driving round on <3mm rear tyres for a lot longer waiting for them to wear out.
As for grip of new V old it goes back to the original argument - if a tyre is no good enough to be on the front it should not be on the back. Rear stepping out is FAR more dangerous than understeer so new should go on the back. Your engine sits over the front wheels so they have more potential for grip. If you keep the old ones on the back you will also have a massive difference between old 3mm rears and new 7-8mm fronts making the chance of losing the lighter back end even more likely.
I do know where you are coming from though, seems initially silly to put older tyres on the front but the tyres you move from the back will still have 80% of their life left in most situations as they are only on the back while waiting for the used ones on the front to wear down.
Posted 11 months ago # -
How long your tyres last has lots of variables.
The compound of the tyre, whether you check the tyre pressures, whether you drive locally or motorways, whether your have a heavy engine, whether your car has a good chassis, whether you turn the steering on the spot or only when its moving, how you drive etc etc.
Currently I'm getting about 25k miles out of Pirreli P7's on the fronts and 40k miles on the rears, but thats driving 100 miles a day up and down a motorway.
If I wasnt doing a silly commute on motorways I would reckon on getting between 10-15k miles around town and country.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I know this is the accepted wisdom, but I couldn't disagree more with this statement. I want my grip where the braking and turning is done, if the rear lets loose I can handle that and use the front to control it, if the front lets loose I've no directional or braking control. (Much as many people prefer a RWD car over a FWD in sketchy situations)
Can't make my mind up about this.
I think day to day, I'm more likely to need to do an emergency stop than deal with oversteer, but I guess that uncorrected (or tankslapper-style overcorrected) oversteer would be more likely to result a big crash.
Also agree that uniroyals (rainsport) are a cracking tyre - a bit weary but amazing grip and predictable slip wet and dry.
How about ice/snow?
Posted 11 months ago # -
Ice and snow? tbh most summer tyres are just poop. Some people say rainsports are good, others say crap. Of the summer tyres I have used I would go with Michelin in the snow if I had to. I think it is just a case of suck it and see and be careful.
But I use Nokian WRG2 in winter (as does Molgrips) which are amazing for UK conditions. Admittedly not everyone can have sets of wheels and tyres. Although in the long run it doesnt really cost any extra as you are not wearing your summer tyres. You just have the expense of spare wheels which I already had.
Posted 11 months ago # -
actually, the vredestein all season tyres may give you some improvement in winter performance but obviously they will have a corresponding dip in summer performance. Just got to be careful in winter and not use the car if it gets to that point like we see for a few weeks a year when the country panics.
Personally I would rather see more UK spending on winter tyres and less salt on the roads. Salt is throwing money away and causes corrosion to cars and our bikes. Winter tyres are much safer than any summer tyre on a salted road and are re-usable. We really should follow the Europeans on this one.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Rotate your tyres.
Posted 11 months ago # -
andyl - Member
But I use Nokian WRG2 in winter (as does Molgrips) which are amazing for UK conditions. Admittedly not everyone can have sets of wheels and tyres. Although in the long run it doesnt really cost any extra as you are not wearing your summer tyres. You just have the expense of spare wheels which I already had.Yeah, I'd like to do that but I live in a flat, wifey would kill me if I took up some bag/shoe storage space with wheels!
Need to find a proper set of all weathers. Conti Sport 3 were good at cornering on ice & snow, but poor stopping and accelerating, not enough tread/siping to dig in I think.
Posted 11 months ago # -
get some wall mounts and hang your bikes and tyres on the walls like they are works of art
You can get tyre bags though and store them under a bed, on top of a wardrobe in the spare room etc. Just need to be careful to stop them degrading or deforming.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I use Nokian WRG2 in winter (as does Molgrips)
Yep - that's the reason I have Nokian summer tyres. The WR G2s were so fantastic even on dry roads - quiet, at least 5% more economical than previous dunlop sports (2-3mpg), grippy and with the free bonus of being able to drive in snow - that I rewarded Nokian with repeat business. I wanted summer tyres that were as quiet and economical as the winter ones, and I got tyres that were quieter still
Re storing winter tyres - I believe Kwik Fit will swap your tyres for you and store your non-used set. If the above is true about faster wear in cold conditions, this could easily pay for itself. It's not expensive, £20 or something silly for a season.
Just need to be careful to stop them degrading or deforming
What if you store them stacked up, not on wheels?
EDIT: seems that it's okay to do this up to 4 high.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Where is good for Nokians cheapish now?
I have been tracking prices and whist the price was sub £100 last year for my size (215/45/17) it went up to something silly like £168 a corner in the height of the snow in December and is still something daft like £130 odd.
Mind you, all rubber seems to be getting more expensive faster than inflation - look at most bike tyres.
Posted 11 months ago # -
If you think your wear rates are high, you should try a set of Yoko Paradas, getting a new set fitted at the weekend, not expecting more than 5-6k from them! Fun while they last though
Posted 11 months ago # -
Convert - I dunno, got mine from mytyres.co.uk. Google shopping search usually includes lots of those online places.
You could also investigate different sizes - 205/55s were a lot cheaper than 215/55s at one point.
Posted 11 months ago # -
but...if you are concerned the tyres you are moving to the front from the back are no good then you shouldnt be using them at all.
I'm not concerned about them, but even at 3-4mm the grip is noticably less than a new tyre, better it be at the location that's under lower stress and still capable of doing the job nicely. By the time I go through 2 sets of fronts the rears are just about coming up ready to change, both age and reaching ~2-2.5mm tread left. Nothing resembling logic would leave dangerous tyres on and it makes no sense at all to switch the less capable (even if it's only a bit less) to the highest load location - stupid idea. In the vast majority of cars, slamming on in a bend will result in nothing but understeer, even with dodgy tyres on the rear. The better the front tyres, the less likely this is to occur (or to a lesser extent). In most normal driving situations you won't see oversteer (even lift-off oversteer), you'd have to be driving like a nut, and since I don't drive like a nut I don't need the extra protection against LOOS, what I do need is better grip up front in case of emergency and less likelyhood of aquaplaning if caught out by standing water.
As for rainsports in the snow/ice - ice you're stuffed anyway (but I've not noticed a problem over any other tyre) but snow - no problems, I've some photos of the 306 up to is sills in a country lane in mid scotland with no problems getting about or stopping, didn't get stuck once.
If you think your wear rates are high, you should try a set of Yoko Paradas, getting a new set fitted at the weekend, not expecting more than 5-6k from them! Fun while they last though
Or 888sPosted 11 months ago # -
Thought the current logic was to not rotate tyres as so many are directional etc.
Also seems there's some logic missing on length of wear, if you've used 3mm in 8k unless you change your driving style or pattern you'll only get 17K before down to legal minumum.
And 1/4 worn 2nd hand tyres are really 1/3 used.
The reccomendation is to change tyres at 3mm rather than getting down to the 1.6 minimum.
Anyway just over 12k off my last fronts and rears still looking good at about 40k, was recommended Kumho something or other sport not a fan, I'll go back to the Toyo's that lasted about 10k but were mighty grippy in all conditions (bar snow)
Posted 11 months ago # -
This is one of those rare occasions when a Land Rover makes economic sense. Just had a service and my tyres were measured at 7mm out of 10mm remaining. They've done 34,000 miles.
Posted 11 months ago # -
The reccomendation is to change tyres at 3mm rather than getting down to the 1.6 minimum.
Yup but no-one ever does, with tyre prices what they are. Thats why the legal min exists I guess! Definitely a big difference from 3 to 1.6 though.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Why is dry grip affected by tread depth?
Posted 11 months ago # -
molgrips - Member
Why is dry grip affected by tread depth?I see what you mean but we don't drive around on pristine race tracks with tyres warmed until they are nice and sticky. We have uneven surfaces, stones, rain, leaves etc. 1.6mm tread is not really deep enough to cope with a decent bit of rain. Tread depth limits have to apply to a range of weather and surfaces.
Apart from water you also get less tread movement which give heat to hard road tyres and the movement in the blocks adds grip around rough roads surfces.
As evidence of this try your WRG2 in the current weather - the tread blocks will squirm around, helped even more by the sipes. The compound is already very soft to begin with but will warm up and become even softer with some enthusiastic lanes and you will not only get horrible squishy handling but have less grip as the tread gets too warm and its a repeating cycle as slip causes more heating (think wheel spin) which causes more heat....
Posted 11 months ago # -
Why is dry grip affected by tread depth?
It's not necessarily, but bear in mind that compounds change as the tyre wears down and reduced tyre compliance means the tyre characteristics will change as it wears down.
Posted 11 months ago # -
(new to the back)
I know this is the accepted wisdom, but I couldn't disagree more with this statement. I want my grip where the braking and turning is done, if the rear lets loose I can handle that and use the front to control it, if the front lets loose I've no directional or braking control. (Much as many people prefer a RWD car over a FWD in sketchy situations)
Even if you're a driving GOD I'd take progressive understeer over snap oversteer any day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5YsQ_a_ijA
Are you an ABS refusenik too because you think you can come on and off the brakes better than the electronics can?
Posted 11 months ago # -
Even if you're a driving GOD I'd take progressive understeer over snap oversteer any day.
Not really bothered what you'd do to be honest, the lower likelyhood of LOOS and the relatively easy control of it (if you're not scared of your car) makes me want it on the rear. Not to mention I'd rather go backwards through a hedge/other people than forwards. And it's not progressive understeer in any time I've had it, it's snap understeer leading to absolutely zero direction control and zero braking. In that vid she doesn't even try to counter the oversteer, to prove a point.
No, I quite like ABS in the right situation, but it comes off in snow. Im an engineer who likes to spend most of his time tinkering with both road and track cars when he can :), but not a driver-extraordinaire :).
Posted 11 months ago # -
I hate understeer and when driving hard I would rather take LOOS than understeer as when I am fully switched on I am either ready for it or inducing it - Mk3 fiesta was great for getting oversteer to make up for the lack of front end grip and holding it round a bend.
But I find understeer more predictable and I drive within those limits when driving hard and well within them 95% of the time. You can easily feel if the conditions don't suit your tyres n the front but not on the back.
The lift off oversteer is a problem in emergency/sudden change situations - both when driving hard and in every day use. Something unexpected happens or you are just not fully on the ball in bad conditions and lack of rear end grip can **** you up very quickly. Yes understeer in those situations can be worse in the way it is frustrating "aghhh I can't steer around this.........an eternity later......BANG" but I still stand by the "put new tyres on the back" rule as they should still have 5-6mm left when you fit them to the front (starting at 7mm).
Posted 11 months ago # -
In 14 years of driving not particularly slowly (certainly in the early years!) the only time I've come across oversteer is when my rear trailing arm bearings failed allowing massive camber control issues on a very short wheel base car, and even then it was pretty fun and controllable even in the wet, not that I'd recommend it now!
Never had a problem with a tyre down to about 2.5mm on the rear gripping in any situation, just doesn't get loaded enough, even full on lockup 'n' swing with nearly new tyres up front in the wet (that ended in a head-on at 40mph combined because the front just refused to turn properly despite being nice new tyres. Had it not slipped I could have avoided the impact, 100% guaranteed, even if I'd then spun out and backed into a hedge (what would have happened had the rear let go), it wouldn't have ended in serious whiplash and a written off car, though of course if there had been heavier traffic I'd just have hit someone else, but at least in reverse with more metal between me and them.
In normal driving I'll never be pushing the normal car to the point of the rear breaking away, in emergency I'd rather be able to direct the front, at least initially.
Each to his own, but I continue to put the good ones on the front.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I've got a 205 gti, so I know all about LOOS!
I've modified mine with solid alloy mounts for the rear beam. It takes out the saggy passive rear steer that it usually has (and has accounted for so many damaged hedges) and means you really have to provoke LOOS now. And I mean really provoke it, even in the wet. And even then its recoverable.
So I tend to put best tyres up front.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Rear stepping out is FAR more dangerous than understeer so new should go on the back. Your engine sits over the front wheels so they have more potential for grip. If you keep the old ones on the back you will also have a massive difference between old 3mm rears and new 7-8mm fronts making the chance of losing the lighter back end even more likely
That explains something I didn't understand. Ta.
Posted 11 months ago # -
What tyre for 20+K!!
I've just changed the front 2 on my Passat & was well pi$$ed off cos I only got 20k out of them (Federal Something or Anothers). Got more than that out of the last Hancook cheapo's.
On my own admission I do drive like Mrs Brady, which is why I'm currently on 48mpg o/a but bizzarely got a speeding ticket 2 weeks ago. (1st one in 37 years of driving!)
Posted 11 months ago # -
I'm tellin ya, get eco tyres for long life, specifically Nokian V or H.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Audi rs4
4000kms the last set lasted , conti sport contacts. 4 track days dealt with them swiftly
Posted 11 months ago # -
Interesting thread. I guess to a large extent it's what you're used to.
I've driven FWD cars ("briskly") all my life, oversteer for me is such a nonissue. Understeer OTOH is a problem. Personally, I know where I'd rather have the new rubber.
Posted 11 months ago # -
R Your engine sits over the front wheels so they have more potential for grip. If you keep the old ones on the back you will also have a massive difference between old 3mm rears and new 7-8mm fronts making the chance of losing the lighter back end even more likely
Doesn't work like that - the lower the vertical load on the tyre (to a point, one below that possible with normal cars) the higher the lateral force it is capable of creating (in proportion to the load). i.e. if you load the tyre with 1000N vertical load and it can produce 1000N of lateral load, doubling the vertical load (axle weight, due to say an engine) to 2000N does not produce 2000N of lateral force, more like 1800 (nonsensical figures for explanation). Now doubling that load DOES require twice the force to accelerate the same amount, so you now have a deficit of grip over required force. This is why race cars are made as light as physically possible.
Add to that the fact that the rear is lighter and so easier to move, it takes less force to throw around anyway, the rear is the best place to have the poorer tyre.
Higher weight = harder to accelerate (in any direction, proportional to weight) and so the front tyre has a harder time doing it, if it's got less grip it's also less capable of doing it - bad place to put old rubber. Especially when generally you also add in having to brake and accelerate at the same time.
Some mega generalisations of vehicle dynamics and tyre dynamics there but the crux of it is the front tyres have a much harder life in a FWD front engined car, so the only reason to put the worst there is if you don't mind rail-roading through your mistakes unable to steer or brake. Not my idea of fun.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Same car and tyres as the OP and I have just put the 3rd set on the front. The car has done 30K. Still on orginals at the back
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
