Best two tyres. Fit to front or Rear of FWD car.

[G_T]

This came up on another thread and I really am rather confused.

Hypothetically you have a FWD car and have two brand new tyres and two perfectly legal but not as good tyres.

Now I would, and have in the past, always fitted the best two tyres to the front of a FWD car. The reason being that these are the wheels that have use more of the grip to turn, brake and accelerate.

But another thread on here states that many tyre fitters recommend fitting them to the rear to reduce the risk of oversteer?

Surely it's not a case of understeer vs. oversteer though. By fitting the best tyres to the front surely it's more a case of neutral handling (if best tyres at front) vs. understeer (best tyres at rear).

I'm not arguing against the grain but I really don't understand the logic to fitting your best tyres to the rear of a FWD front engined car!

[G_T]

So basically it has very little to do with under/over steer, the concern is aqua-planing?

[G_T]

FreeLitres said:

I was initially thinking that the best tyres should go on the front, for better braking, steering, etc. That video from VBH (posted above) is an eye-opener though as it clearly showed that the rear should have the best tread in high speed aquaplaning situations. Looking at the poll, it suggests the opinion is bang on 50:50 on PH as to whether they should go in the front or rear.

Do you think that the decision should be based on the TYPE of driving you normally do?

i.e.
Best tyres on front - if you do mainly town driving - gives you better emergency braking and avoidance ability at slower speeds

Best tyres on rear - if you do mainly motorway driving - high speed driving over standing water

What do you think of this theory?

After Kambites very helpful comments this is exactly what I'm thinking.

Think I'll keep the best on the rear of the GFs car in case she hits standing water but also because the timid way she drives means shes unlikely to break traction. Then will rotate them of course.

For my own I'll probably stick the best on the front for any hooning as I'm unlikely to hit standing water at the moment. Then rotate.

In summer though best tyres at the front sounds good to me.

Edited by G_T on Sunday 3rd October 10:40

[G_T]

Silent1 said:

rottie102 said:

1) It's been discussed over and over again, please search

Bloody hell when did we turn into a "use the search, idiot" Nazi forum? Rather than tell him to search, how about providing a link?

Find it unlikely he can. Since the search function is down.

[G_T]

Acehood said:

Find it unlikely he can. Since the search function is down.

The google search isn't. It works way better than the PH search function too.

heebeegeetee said:

As discussed recently at length in this thread: http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Cheers for the link. Yes, recently in December 2009...


Thanks for the heads up lads. I wasn't aware I couldn't ask a question to the forum unless it was entirely unique.

Tossers.

[G_T]

Welshbeef said:

Costco will always fit the new tyres to the rear and put theworn to the front.

I tend to change my tyres at 3mm which following many of the published tests indicate is the much safer limit. Before that I'd run down to 2mm. Not any more - trying to squeeze a few thousand extra miles out of a set of tyres is frankly risking your and other road users lives.

Personally I think the law should be changed and min tread depth increased at least to 2.5 mm with a formal noting on your mot cert if your within .5mm

The tyre is the most important safety item on a car piss about and you can kill.
Next brakes again crucial to be fully functioning. I don't think the % efficiency is adequate I mean 16% efficiency is the pass level..... 16%!!!
Following that suspension.
Those three items in that order save lives. They are not cheap but a set of tyres lasts a good few years unless your a hooner but you may be more than happy to change your shoes every year...

Agreed, I don't think making regulations more heavy is necessarily the solution though. I'd like to see the stats for accidents caused as a direct proven result of tyres before I inconvenienced millions though.

I was sure the GFs car just passed with 11% rear brake efficiency?

Woeful all the same. Fortunately I've had her insured.

[G_T]

heebeegeetee said:

G_T said:

Cheers for the link. Yes, recently in December 2009...


Thanks for the heads up lads. I wasn't aware I couldn't ask a question to the forum unless it was entirely unique.

Tossers.

Er, my post above was posted on 1st September this year.

Well less so you then.

And thank you for posting your links. They were useful.