 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / May 2005Is it just BMW that does not recommend tire rotation?
Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? >From the BMW shop manual: Tire rotation The tread wear patterns at the front end differ from those at the rear - the actual patterns will vary according to individual driving conditions. In the interests of safety and maintaining optimal handling characteristics, BMW does not recommend tire rotation. If a proposed interaxle rotation of tires is based on economic considerations, one should consider whether the costs for the rotation are likely to be recaptured by any increase in the service life of the tires that might be realized. In principle, interaxle rotation must be performed in short intervals, with a maximum of 3,000 miles (5,000 km). Consult your BMW center for more information. Should you decide to rotate the tires, it is essential to comply with the following: Rotate tires on the same side only, since braking characteristics and road grip could otherwise be adversely affected. Following rotation, the tire inflation pressure should always be corrected. If different tire sizes are mounted on the front and rear axles (refer to page 130), the wheels may not be rotated from one axle to the other. http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55120 http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36893 http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69037 > Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? The info you provided sounds like they might be referring to purpose-built front and rear tires of the same size. Some high-end BMWs have larger tires on the rear axle. Pirelli's PZero system includes a directional tire for the front, and an asymmetric tire for the rear. I believe they're optimized for RWD cars. <http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Pirelli&tireModel=PZero+System+ Direzionale> "y_p_w" <y_p_w@hotmail.com> wrote >> Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? > > The info you provided sounds like they might be referring to > purpose-built front and rear tires of the same size. Some > high-end BMWs have larger tires on the rear axle. The info is the same in virtually all BMW owner manuals, for all tire combinations including same-size front/rear. For instance, my '01 330xi (same size all round - has to be!) recommends against it. So does the manual for my '91 E34 525i. The front tires tend to wear asymmetrically; more wear on the outside/outboard edges than in the center and inside edge. This happens *even if* the car is perfectly aligned. Floyd > Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? Some tyre can only rotate in one direction, so these can't be turned around on the rim and could only be swapped between the front and back on the same side and then only if the tyres are the same size (otherwise you will go round in circles!). So you may not be able to swap any tyres on some models / wheels. Generally speaking rear tyres tend to wear in the middle, especially if you do a lot of motorway work whereas the fronts tend to wear at the edge (especially outside - so some tyres can be turned or rim swapped to even this wear up). As it happens all my 7 series have had standard tyres which are all the same size, so when the fronts wear down, I move the rears to the front and put new tyres on the rear. > Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? Well, I can think of several cars right off the top of my head (Dodge Viper, for one) where there is a different configuration tire for each corner of the car, and so rotation isn't even possible. ANY car that uses unidirectional tires AND different size tires front and rear falls into that category. >> Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > uses unidirectional tires AND different size tires front and rear falls > into that category. Vettes - 97 & up - different size wheels on the front and back. tires are directional, so rotating isn't possible without dismounting the tires. Don't own one, so can't tell you what the manual says, but if I owned one I wouldn't rotate the tires. Some 80's Camaros had wheels with different offset for front and rear with directional tires, so same problem. For my 01 Trans Am it recommends rotating front-rear on the same side. I think the Acura NSX had a unique tire at each corner as well. SNIP > I think the Acura NSX had a unique tire at each corner as well. Forgive my ignorance but, in using the word 'unique' are saying that each tire is actually manufactured differently? And if so, how does one replace a single tire? Do you request a left rear, front right, etc...? RichieP > "ray" <nospam@example.com> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > replace > a single tire? Do you request a left rear, front right, etc...? That is exactly the case. The NSX (and many other high performance cars, including BMW's with different-sized front/rear sport packages) have uni-directional tires. That means that the tires can be on only one side (left/right) of the car. When, in addition, the tires at the front and rear are different sizes, that means that no tire can be used *EXCEPT* at the corner it is designed for. The NSX ('91-'94) has 205/50ZR15's front, 225/50ZR16 rear (IIRC), and the OEM tires (Yoko & Bridgestones) are uni-directional. If you trash a tire, you should replace both on that axle if they have been worn much - say about 75% left. You do have to order the right one for that corner. FloydR - used to have an NSX > > "ray" <nospam@example.com> wrote > > > >> I think the Acura NSX had a unique tire at each corner as well. > > > > Forgive my ignorance but, in using the word 'unique' are saying that each > > tire is actually manufactured differently? And if so, how does one > > replace > > a single tire? Do you request a left rear, front right, etc...? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > has 205/50ZR15's front, 225/50ZR16 rear (IIRC), and the OEM > tires (Yoko & Bridgestones) are uni-directional. There are all sorts of wacky configurations. My current Pirelli PZero Nero M+S tires are non-directional asymmetric. Some tires are directional asymmetric. The wackiest of all are directional asymmetric left/right specific. <http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=BFGoodrich&tireModel=g-Force+T% 2FA+KD> >There are all sorts of wacky configurations. My current Pirelli >PZero Nero M+S tires are non-directional asymmetric. Some tires >are directional asymmetric. The wackiest of all are directional >asymmetric left/right specific. Yep. Like the NSX. A different tire on each corner. It's not that bad once you get used to the idea.  SignatureDan. >>There are all sorts of wacky configurations. My current Pirelli >>PZero Nero M+S tires are non-directional asymmetric. Some tires [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Yep. Like the NSX. A different tire on each corner. It's not that > bad once you get used to the idea. It's highly optimized for handling purposes, and if you think about it, the front tires are doing different work than the rears, so it makes sense from a performance point of view. The outside of the tire also does different work than the inside... But yeah, it can kinda suck if you get a nail in one tire and they happen to be back ordered on the left front tire for two weeks... and your only spare is the donut... especially because cars like Vettes look absolutely silly on the spare. Imagine a Viper with two donuts on the back.... now imagine trying to drive it. :) >>> There are all sorts of wacky configurations. My current Pirelli >>> PZero Nero M+S tires are non-directional asymmetric. Some tires [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > absolutely silly on the spare. Imagine a Viper with two donuts on the > back.... now imagine trying to drive it. :) That's just one of the reasons why most people who own them never use either a Viper or NSX for basic transportation without a backup car. Worse than that, imagine getting a flat on a cross-country trip in the middle of nowhere... > That's just one of the reasons why most people who own them never use > either a Viper or NSX for basic transportation without a backup car. > Worse than that, imagine getting a flat on a cross-country trip in the > middle of nowhere... Well, I don't own a Viper, but I don't run a spare either. The Nitrous bottle is there. :) And it's doubly crazy because I attract nails in my new tires. 6 month old Goodyears on my Trans Am in 2001 - nail. 3 month Kumhos on my Trans Am in 2004 - nail. Whereas my stupid truck had the same Hankook junktires forever... they wouldn't die, nor did they wear... (I would take the bottle out and put the spare in before going on a long trip tho... but both flats have been close to home.) > SNIP > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > RichieP No, but when you have different size front and rear tires in combination with unidiriectional tires, then a MOUNTED tire/wheel combo is unique to each corner of the car. You COULD dismount the front tires and swap them side to side and re-mount them, but SHEESH! Why bother? Some, like both of my Jeep owners manuals also recommend only front to back rotation with the spare going to the main drive wheel, the RR and the RF going to the spare. Mike 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's > Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36893 > http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69037 > Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? Tyre rotation hasn't made much sense since ever. Signature*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? > >Tyre rotation hasn't made much sense since ever. I agree. So does BMW. Even for same size unidirectional tires on all four corners. According to BMW, the only time tire rotation makes sense on a rear-wheel-drive performance vehicle is if you do it yourself every 3000 miles (before any wear becomes too great to affect handling). On rear-wheel-drive performance automobiles, once you pass the 3000 mile mark, you start noticeably wearing the rears in the center and the fronts on the side. At this 3000-mile point-of-no-return, adverse handling will occur if you rotate. If you do rotate within the 3000 mile limit, make sure you readjust the pressure differential between the rears and the front or you'll have other handling problems you didn't bargain for. Also, if you do rotate, use any pattern you like (crossing sides at random, using the fifth tire, changing rotation direction, etc). Studies have shown that none of these rotation patterns adversly affect anything and none are any better than any other rotation pattern. Again, if you pass the 3000 mile point of no return, stop rotating for the life of those tires (should get you at least 30,000 miles depending on how aggressively you drive). If you have a front-wheel-drive econobox (all fwd cars are compromises for the sake of costs), things might be different though I've no experience with low-performance fwd cars. Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason for this? >>> Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? >> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > with > low-performance fwd cars. > Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever > really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason > for this? Dunno. The last UK car driver's handbook I can find (and I've got a fair old collection) where tyre rotation - including spare - is recommended dates from the mid '50s, when crossply tyres were the norm. And 3000 mile oil changes.;-) Perhaps the US isn't as up to date as most think? ;-) Signature*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. > > Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever > > really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > dates from the mid '50s, when crossply tyres were the norm. And 3000 mile > oil changes.;-) Come to that, 3000 mile tyre changes on a Mini Cooper 'S' ISTR SignaturePaul Mc Cann > > Dunno. The last UK car driver's handbook I can find (and I've got a > > fair old collection) where tyre rotation - including spare - is > > recommended dates from the mid '50s, when crossply tyres were the > > norm. And 3000 mile oil changes.;-) > Come to that, 3000 mile tyre changes on a Mini Cooper 'S' ISTR The *wheels* didn't last that long on the first Minis running crossplies. Seems the designers thought the buyers of this tiny car would slow down for corners. Of course they might have if the brakes worked. ;-) Signature*Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. Huh? We're at least 50% Japanese, whether Euro or American, japanese create all these headaches. My both Nissan and Oldsmobile had rotation in service manual as required > Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever really > mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason for this? The main rationale is to maximize tire mileage/life. On a FWD car, the fronts always wear more and won't last as long as the rears. On a RWD car, the rears wear more. And the spare tire doesn't wear at all. Floyd > On a RWD car, the rears wear more. On both my E34 and E39, all tyres wore out pretty well at the same time without rotation. It of course depends on driving style and power of the vehicle. But with a 50/50 weight distribution it's what you'd expect, in theory. Signature*Snowmen fall from Heaven unassembled* Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever >> really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > fronts always wear more and won't last as long as the rears. On a RWD > car, the rears wear more. And the spare tire doesn't wear at all. Well, sort of... I've said this before, but I'll say it once more; Rotating tires is is not, not has it ever been, about increasing the total mileage of a tire, *except* when considered as a set. By rotating tires one can even out the wear at the 4 corners and thereby equalize the wear so that the set of 4 all wear-out at the same time. Or to state it another way, it will not extend the life of any single tire, but rather will allow the 4 to be spent at the same time and be replaced as a set. The value in that is especially evident when considering how often a particular tire model is obsoleted and replaced with a new one in any particular brand. Some folks advocate replacement of the spare tire after a certain amount of age regardless of how much wear it has attained, for safety reasons. Obviously, any scheme that allows the spare into the rotation will extend the life of the "set" by ~20%. OTOH, if you have a brand/model of tire that is readily available over a long time period (or if you wear them out quickly due to high annual mileage) just replacing the axle that wear quickest would be equally as economical as replacing the set. -Fred W -Fred W Here's what I've been told. Dealers don't like doing rotations because very often people come back to complain of vibration, noise, etc. Dealers suggest doing an alignment and dynamic balancing (tire mounted on car), but customers balk at the cost and infer that the dealer is just trying to charge for unnecessary work. The upshot is poor ratings for the dealers, who need to maintain their customer satisfaction indexes under pressure from BMW NA or CA, so they would rather just not do a job that doesn't make them much money, especially when the car is in for service and the customer requests a rotaion, expecting to pay very little or nothing if the wheels are off for say, a brake inspection. Never mind the fact that the whole concept of rotating tires is open to discussion at best. So I've been told by a BMW tech. >Here's what I've been told. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >So I've been told by a BMW tech. Hmm... But new BMWs have all routine maintenance included in the price of the car (notice I didn't say "free") - so what price is there for the customer to balk at? SignatureLife is short - drive fast! http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/ > > Hmm... But new BMWs have all routine maintenance included in the price > of the car (notice I didn't say "free") - so what price is there for > the customer to balk at? The cost of a dynamic balancing after the rotation, not the cost (if any) to rotate the tires. >>>Hmm... But new BMWs have all routine maintenance included in the price >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The cost of a dynamic balancing after the rotation, not the cost (if any) to > rotate the tires. There is no need to dynamically balance the wheel unless the tires are removed and reinstalled on different wheels for some reason. Dynamic balancing is not done "on the car", but rather, on a dynamic balancing machine. -Fred W >>>> Hmm... But new BMWs have all routine maintenance included in the price >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > -Fred W Actually, dynamic balancing can be done either on the car (using a machine made for that purpose) or with just the wheel/tire combo on a balancing machine. "Dynamic" merely means that the tire is spun on the machine and balance is measured in 2 axes, as opposed to the old static balance using a bubble level. Really, "on the car" balancing should never show much improvement over off-the-car balancing unless the hub is out of balance or the wheel doesn't index properly onto the hub- both mechanical defects that SHOULD be repaired. >There is no need to dynamically balance the wheel unless the tires are >removed and reinstalled on different wheels for some reason. Dynamic >balancing is not done "on the car", but rather, on a dynamic balancing >machine. Well we sure had the ability to dynamically balance tires on the vehicle when I was in school. I know you don't see them very often, but you can do it both ways. >>There is no need to dynamically balance the wheel unless the tires are >>removed and reinstalled on different wheels for some reason. Dynamic [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > vehicle when I was in school. I know you don't see them very often, > but you can do it both ways. Yes, it is a possibility to do "on the car" balancing, but that is not (necessarily) what is meant by dynamic balancing. Dynamic balancing only refers to the idea that the wheel is rotated (either on or off the car) during the balancing. I'm of the mind that "on the car" balancing is only a band-aid approach to some other problem with the wheel, hub or axle. You should be able to balance a wheel&tire and then mount it on any axle and be good to go. -Fred W > Here's what I've been told. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > So I've been told by a BMW tech. Tech, Makes sense to me. I think this falls under the old adage of; "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The more time you let someone (including one's self) change things, the more opportunities there are for problems and mistakes. -Fred W >Tech, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >The more time you let someone (including one's self) change things, the >more opportunities there are for problems and mistakes. Mine cannot be rotated as I have different sizes on the fronts! pete > Tech, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > -Fred W I'm glad you see that. I've given this explanation before and lots of people thought it was ludicrous. Your point is bang on. Tire rotation may possibly increase the tread life of tires (especially if you throw the spare into the rotation). But even if it makes sense for this reason alone, a dealer gets absolutely no benefit from your extra tire life, but potentially has all the grief to deal with if you end up with shimmy and shake as a result. I've even hear that service reps will tell a customer, in low tones with a wink "You know, I just can't give you a reasonable deal on a rotation because (insert some stupid justification here), but (and please don't say you heard it from me), Bobby down the street will do it lickety split for next to nothing". >Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever really >mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason for this? The idea is to have all tires wear approximately evenly, so that they all wear out at the same time. Then you can replace them with a matched set of new tires, rather than have two new tires and two partly worn old tires (or having to waste some of the tread life of the old not worn out tires). Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy J. Lee Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. No warranty of any kind is provided with this message. >>Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever really >>mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular reason for this? It all depends on what you're trying to maximize. If you're trying to extract the utomost performance from every tire, then don't rotate because once a wear pattern is established, switching it to a different corner of the car would result in a sub-optimal contact patch. On the other hand, if you don't expect to push your car to its absolute lateral G limit all the time (as in the case of 99.9% of daily driven cars!) then rotating the tires and tolerating a slightly sub-optimum contact patch right after rotation WILL get longer service life out of each tire. The vast majority of cars on the road- ESPECIALLY front-drive vehicles- benefit a lot from tire rotation in the long run. >>> Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever >>> really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > contact patch right after rotation WILL get longer service life out of > each tire. I don't uderstand the theory of this statement. If you are running a tire which has worn a particular way, and now has a sub-optimal contact, wouldn't you think that the "high spots" (the areas with greater pressure in the new location) would wear faster and therfore negate the total tire life assertion? -Fred W >>>> Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever >>>> really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > -Fred W Yes, but the tire thus lasts longer than it would if you left it where it was so that it wore through to the cord in the first high-wear area. Frankly, most cars don't wear tires that badly except some FWD vehicles. Its entirely possible to wear two sets of front tires on an FWD down to the wear indicators without showing significant overall wear on a single set of rear tires. But by that time the rear tires are so aged that they don't have the grip they should and are subject to tread separation and other problems. It seems to me, based on several experiences now, that modern tire designs are more sensitive to the aging of the rubber compounds than the tires of the 70s. Even if you had a set of tires stored in a dark, dry garage for 6 years, the odds of them lasting a full lifetime when you put them on the car will be VERY small- they'll probably develop cracks or separations long before they wear out. >>>>> Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else ever >>>>> really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any particular [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Yes, but the tire thus lasts longer than it would if you left it where > it was so that it wore through to the cord in the first high-wear area. I agree, rotation will lengthen the life of the individual tire, but the tires will still wear at the same rate as a set. Here's an example: Because of the large amount of rear camber, my Z3 wears the rear tires (on the inboard edges) twice as fast as the fronts (which wear pretty evenly) . I can either replace the rears only at ~20k miles and get a total of 40k miles out of 6 tires, or I can rotate the fronts to the back and thereby get a bit less than 30k miles out of the original set of 4, and then have to buy 4 new tires. Plus you either have to swap the wheels yourself or pay someone to do it. -Fred W >>>>>> Tyre rotation seems to be a mainly American thing, no one else >>>>>> ever really mentions or uses it, as far as I've seen. Any [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > -Fred W I have noticed most BMWs have a lot of rear camber. Why is this? > I have noticed most BMWs have a lot of rear camber. Why is this? The negative camber tends to keep the loaded wheel upright when cornering fast and the car rolls slightly. To prevent oversteer. Signature*Why is it considered necessary to screw down the lid of a coffin? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >>>Do any other manufacturers other than BMW not recommend tire rotation? >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > the sake of costs), things might be different though I've no experience with > low-performance fwd cars. Can you point me to the BMW site the recommends no tire rotation? > Can you point me to the BMW site the recommends no tire rotation? Says so in my driver's handbook. Signature*Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.