[DanBoy24]

I can't find it at the moment but there's a thread somewhere where a discussion takes place about which tyres on your car should be replaced when buying new ones. The thread contains links to various web sites (RAC and Fifth Gear from memory) where it is concluded that new tyres should always go on the rear of the car. The thinking is that when loosing grip in a corner it is better to have the traction at the rear as this will cause the car to understeer, which is easier to control than if the back suddenly slides out causing massive oversteer.

I understand the reason, but I'm not sure I agree. The recommendation is based purely on loosing control whilst driving round a corner which seems a bit limited. My Alfa, like most is front wheel drive. In all the snow we've had recently I sometimes struggled to get traction whilst pulling away. In this case I would have thought it was better to have the new tyres on the front of the car as there's little point having all the grip at the back if the front tyres are spinning wildy. This is especially so when trying to climb a gradient.

Secondly what about stopping in a straight line? When this occurs a large proportion of the weight of the vehicle is thrown forwards causing the front wheels to do considerably more breaking than the rear. This is why the front disks are always much beefier than the rear [obv]. Once again why have the new grippy tyres on the rear and the worn out ones at the front? Surely you want the maximum surface grip at the end of the car which is doing the most breaking?

I've just bought some Uniroyal RainSport 2 tyres based on various recommendations on this site, and I had them put on the front. I'll let you know whether I end up half way up a tree in due course, but for now what do you all think?

 

[David C]

Part of the reason is also that the wear rate of rear tyres on a FWD car is so low that if you just keep putting new tyres on the front you will end up with VERY old rear tyres. A thread in the GTV/Spider section has an example with 10-year old rear tyres that still had plenty of tread left but were obviously will past their best through age alone.

 

[iainfm]

I had rubbish tyres on the front of a fwd once. Reckoned that I'd be better swapping them onto the back, which had michelins on... Which was fine until I went around a bend in the wet and nearly spun it.

I put them back on the front

 

[Stori]

Part of the reason is also that the wear rate of rear tyres on a FWD car is so low that if you just keep putting new tyres on the front you will end up with VERY old rear tyres. A thread in the GTV/Spider section has an example with 10-year old rear tyres that still had plenty of tread left but were obviously will past their best through age alone.

The 147 seems to chew up rears nearly as fast as the fronts...

 

[K9d]

You have more control over the front tyres, if they let go there are the throttle, steering and even brakes to use but if the back goes it's a lot more difficult to correct.
I'm quite happy for the front of my car to understeer a bit but not too happy when the back tries to overtake me

 

[alfatastic]

In all this snow find somewhere safe and try and stop in a straight line using only the handbrake. (this is like having worn tyres on the back and therefore more likely to lock than the front). then as the backend over takes you, see if you can control it I had all this stuff demonstrated to me by the mintex company using a test mule that could operate front and back brakes seperately. Locking the front up is no biggy compared to locking the back you can always let the brakes off to regain the front grip but not the back. I agree though, you do suffer with traction issues in the snow with lesser tyres on the front of a front wheel drive.