Last sunday when I was at Costco waiting for tire balance and wheel rotation, I saw an ad (maybe from Michelin, forgot)saying something like "after extensive study/experiment, we found the rear two tires have the most grip on a front wheel drive car... therefore we'd put two new tires on rear..." It is just a single page brochre.
If that's the case then I never need to rotate wheels, because the front tires always wear faster so the rears are always relatively newer...
I hope I read that ad wrong. If I get another chance I'd go, get it and read it more carefully.

 

maybe they ment the rear tires have more traction on a FWD because they are not spinning out like the fronts do. I would put the new tires on the front though.

My auto teacher told me that he would but the best condition tires on the rears on a FWD car becasue he said that the rear tires are more important becasue if one of the rears were blown out at high speeds, it would cause the car to fish-tail. If a front tire blew out, it would just coast and will be more controlable.

 

i think what your auto teacher meant was if a front tire blew out, you wouldnt be able to control it as much cause your steering is in the front, also the front are your drive tires. Anyways, i work at Firestone and this is what we always recommend to our customers..

 

I understand what your saying and I also think that too but what he told us is that if the front tire blew out, it would be difficult to steer but it will still be controllable.

If the rear blew out, the car may fish-tail due to the uneven(lack of) traction of the rear and possibly the chance of over correcting it will cause it to spin even more severe.
I guess it depends on what speed it blows out.

 

The idea is this...

If you can only afford to replace 2 tires on your car at a time, replace the rears first. If you are drving in the rain, your new tires have way more traction than the old worn ones.

If you have the new ones one the front, and it rains, the front has more traction. This is all fine until you need to turn. When the front has more traction, the car will have tendency to snap oversteer. This is very bad in the rain, in a FWD car.

If you have the new ones on the rear, in the rain, the rear has more traction. If you have to turn suddenly, the car will tend to understeer. This is easier for most people to handle.

This is why you put your new tires on the back...

 

I guess Firestone has a lot of experience with blow outs and tread seperation at highway speed causing problems, so I guess they'd know.

Stereodude

 

Poor Firestone

 

But at least Bridgestone is good isn't it? Are they now one family? My 96 GXE's originals are Bridgestone H-rated and I found them OK. A year ago I replaced them with Michelin, forgot if they are MXV something, and found them a bit quieter, but relatively easy to slip. If I'd do it again I'd put back the original Bridgestone ones.

 

in your sig it looks like you drive a Max...so your tires wont blow out. Put a Michellin or Goodyear on the Explorer and put it through the same conditions and see what happens. People tend to always blame the tire for whatever prob they have, I get customers that come in and drove it flat till it blew up, on their passenger car, then they come in and try and blame the tire saying its a recall. is that a tire defect or driver defect?

I honestly dont like much of the Firestone tires but i love Bridgestone tires. Yes Bridgestone and Firestone are the same company.

S0-2,S0-3, RE730, RE950, Dueler AT, Dueler HL, Blizzak, they make some of the best tires avalible.

 

The Firestone SZ50 EP also seems like a really really good tire. Good reviews on Tirerack and from a 3rd Gen owner.

Also I think Ford was underinflating those things (what was it? 24psi or something??) and causing them to overheat under load.

Personally I'd still put the new tires in the front since they hit the water first, they wear faster than the rears, and if the worn tires are so bad that you'd worry about fishtailing in standing water then you'd just better replace those too!

My 3 cents.

 

yes Ford was recommending 26psi on those tires, Tests showed that at 30 or 32psi the SUV would have the tendancy to flip, so instead of redesigning the rear suspension, they can lower the tire pressure. They have since then redesigned the rear suspesion on the new Explorers and recommend higher tire pressure.

the SZ50's are pretty good tires, im sure you would hear some good input from some domestic owners.

 

sounds about right as far as replacing them goes.

SuDZ

 

Sounds about right to me. Stuff like that all depends on placement of engine and whether it is front or rear wheel drive. But from what i read that sounds about right for your car.

 

Not taking a popping tire into account, it is generally safer to have worn tires in the front and newer ones in the back in slippery conditions, such as a wet road. The theory is that worn front tires cause the car to understeer, whereas worn rears will cause the car to fishtail. Most drivers know how to deal with understeer, but most cannot handle a spin.

This is gone over in detail (and video) on the british car website (4car.co.uk). Check out the "video" section and find the one about tires. You will understand what I mean when you see that video clip.

 

what ive learned in my Toyota T-TEN auto program and my Firestone training is that newer tires is recommeneded to go on the front in FWD cars. So what i would state is generally it is safer to have newer tires in the front. I dont think there is actual hard evidence that proves newer tires in front or rear is better. whats recommeneded for the "general public" may not be whats recommeneded for the "enthusists"
If someone shows me evidence elsewise then i stand corrected, but i havent see it yet.
simple solution is replace all 4 tires! heeh.

 

And what I learned in my Toyota T-10 training is that the best tires go on the back on FWD cars.

hehe yep I agree- Replace all 4

 

dont trust costco!!!!