Tire size

[JCH13]

Like I've said before, the tread depth difference is a demonstrated issue on wet roads. Numerous tests and testing organizations have shown the severe risks of having considerably thinner tread on the rear wheels. I know you think that as long as you're able to steer you'll be fine, but that is overconfidence.

Not to be a dick, but didn't you smack up a Lexus when the rear end kicked out from too much throttle? Same thing would happen if the rear tires hydroplaned, only the rear tires would come around even faster. Also, you wouldn't be as ready for it because hydroplaning can be quite unpredictable (as opposed to rolling onto the throttle in a high-hp car, where everyone will be anticipating some sideways action).

Now, obviously, everything in moderation. If you want to put the tires with 1-2/32nds of more tread on the front, no big deal, I do that as part of normal tire rotation. The dealer apparently put brand-new tires on the front axle, and nearly worn-out tires on the rear axle, of Kiatech's car. That is a whole different situation. On a wet/raining road that would be equivalent to removing the front roll bar and stiffening the rear roll bar.

 

[phucheneh]

Sigh. You're back to the same irrelevant point that was previously brought up in the 'oh noes more tread on front' thread.

Power oversteer is not the same as oversteer induced by cornering forces. And in the case of the mentioned car, the tires at both ends were new, and water was indeed involved. I was going straight at about 35-40mph, and spun two or three times upon the rear tires breaking loose. Slight complicating factors there. ;P

 

[JCH13]

Sigh. You're back to the same irrelevant point that was previously brought up in the 'oh noes more tread on front' thread.

Power oversteer is not the same as oversteer induced by cornering forces. And in the case of the mentioned car, the tires at both ends were new, and water was indeed involved. I was going straight at about 35-40mph, and spun two or three times upon the rear tires breaking loose. Slight complicating factors there. ;P

I guess I do not understand why you think my point is irrelevant. Please explain.

Also, FWIW, sliding mid-turn is generally more difficult to recover from because of the lateral acceleration of the car and rotational kinetic energy of the car.

 

[phucheneh]

The previous argument was essentially that SallyJoe McAveragegirl was going to wipe out in her Corolla if she had more tread on the front tires. This is a fallacy, as Sally is not driving her car at squealing-tire speeds.

Being able to overpower the grip of the rear tires on a RWD car is kind of entirely completely not the same thing at all.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Phuc you are totally wrong here bud.

I'm very comfy with swinging the rear out from 'driving fast' and it is totally different from snap oversteer in wet conditions due to worn out rear tires on a FWD car.


The issue isn't someone having fun in the rain... It's from having to swerve to avoid something and ending up in a ditch.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I'd never heard of them. Most people around here have probably never even heard of Cooper, TBQH. Perhaps it's a regional thing. Cooper dealers just tend to be very rare. I don't think I've ever seen them at any of the big chains; only small shops. And honestly, I don't know why anyone would buy tires at a small shop...there's a reason many of them just decline to sell tires. They can't come close to competing on price with the big stores.

Maybe it's an Ohio thing since Cooper's based in Ohio, but they're pretty well-known where I was growing up. Cooper is the #2 US tire manufacturer, they just concentrate heavily on making a lot of the house brands.

Cooper owns Avon, Micky Thompson, and Mastercraft as well as a few other brands, and they manufacture a wide variety of house brands.

ZV

 

[phucheneh]

I will accept that as valid. I was thinking more of regular cornering, be it normal city driving or more sustained stuff like circular on/off-ramps. Jerking the wheel suddenly is a bit different.

However, I will contend that recovering from said 'snap oversteer' in a FWD can still be easier than trying to keep the back end in check on a RWD. I have video proof of that. :awe:

(no, I'm not posting it)

 

[Zenmervolt]

I will accept that as valid. I was thinking more of regular cornering, be it normal city driving or more sustained stuff like circular on/off-ramps. Jerking the wheel suddenly is a bit different.

When you hit a patch of standing water mid-corner and the rear hydroplanes from low tread but the front doesn't, it doesn't matter if you were "jerking the wheel suddenly" or not.

However, I will contend that recovering from said 'snap oversteer' in a FWD can still be easier than trying to keep the back end in check on a RWD.

Yes, but that's not really relevant. It's easier still to overcome understeer regardless of whether the vehicle is FWD or RWD.

ZV

 

[JCH13]

Phuc you are totally wrong here bud.

I'm very comfy with swinging the rear out from 'driving fast' and it is totally different from snap oversteer in wet conditions due to worn out rear tires on a FWD car.


The issue isn't someone having fun in the rain... It's from having to swerve to avoid something and ending up in a ditch.

This is exactly it. Any sort of unpredictability in a car will bite you in the ass, and hard, during an emergency situation.

Will the FWD car under-steer like it always does? Or will the ass-end fly out and put you sideways into a guard rail or oncoming traffic? The difference could be a fraction of an inch of standing water on the road.

To bring unpredictability back to the OP: the single larger wheel with fresh tread... will it slip more because of the larger moment arm on the brakes? Or will it grip more because it's tread is deeper than the existing tires? Either way it's going to impart some sort of yaw moment on the vehicle that could be disastrous.

 

[Craig234]

OK, here's the latest. Based on the little bit of feedback here about Hercules Iron Man tires, I'm thinking of getting something else, basically because no one has heard of them, though a google did find them rated 4/5 stars in reviews and comments like 'really great tire for an affordable price'.

I don't know why I didn't think of Costco, but that's the place I'm thinking of as an alternative to the local repair shop (they're primarily repair, not tires).

So, I still have the basic decision of whether to get two new wrong-size 215/65 to match the rears, or four new 205/70 correct size, wasting two good tires on the rear.

Also, what brand to get.

I'm thinking of checking the Costco price, seeing if the local dealer will come close enough to it with the return - if not, just get them from Costco.

That leaves the new tire, whether the local shop will provide any return if I don't buy the new tires there. Unfortunate, because they're my 'go to' repair shop, if this is a problem.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Michelin is my personal tire, but any name brand (hankook, pirelli, continental) are ok IMHO. I prefer the 'main' tire brand, not the side company that pumps out tires for other markets (which is what hercules is)


Also, you cannot trust online tire reviews.

The VAST majority seem to be kids with their first car, who go from worn out no name tires to any new tire and OMFG wet dry grip it's all amazing!!!!!


Replace all 4 tires with the right size. Good grief man, you've had about 5 people give you this advice already. We are here to help, but you make it pretty difficult at times.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

And any shop that charges you $50 (or $40, whichever) would not be my "go to" shop.


Most places around me charge $25 to mount and balance a tire that you bring in off the street. To charge $40 on a tire you bought from them is shitty, IMHO.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I prefer the 'main' tire brand, not the side company that pumps out tires for other markets (which is what hercules is)

That's not what Hercules is.

Hercules has exactly zero manufacturing facilities. They are merely a marketing company that buys tires from Cooper (and Cooper is not a "side company") and has Cooper put the Hercules brand on the tires.

Cooper makes quality tires. They're not what I'd want on my summer-only sportscar (which gets ultra-grippy tires with 200 treadwear ratings), but they're good everyday tires for things like classic American sedans like a Buick or something.

The idea that a tire made by Cooper would somehow be "unsafe" is absurd.

ZV

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I don't believe I ever said they were 'unsafe', but I would say that they're probably 'less safe'.


And yes, I see what you mean about side brand vs relabeling.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I don't believe I ever said they were 'unsafe', but I would say that they're probably 'less safe'.

Equally ridiculous. These aren't random Chinese tires. These are made-in-America tires from a company that's been around for 99 years now. It's older and more established than Bridgestone for Pete's sake.

ZV

 

[JCH13]

Read my post:

Get.
Four.
Properly.
Sized.
Tires.

Sell the other two on CL. I'm sure someone will want them.

Also very much agree with SA. Any shop that charges more than $25/tire is ripping you off. My go-to shop for tires does a Hunter Roadforce mount and balance for $20/tire.

 

[Craig234]

Zenmervolt, thanks for the update on Iron Man tires. Based on that I wuuldn't mind having them, but since I can go to costco and get michelin for $117 (+$14 install and $1 disposal fee), I think I'll do that rather than the $99 Iron Man from the repair shop (that are $63 + $14 shipping online).

I am thinking of just getting the two 'right sized' fronts for now though. I see people suggesting four all same size is better, but not sure how important it is for this situation - the rears show very little wear, this is front wheel drive. If people say 'yes the benefits justify replacing the two smaller rear tires anyway', and it's posted soon, I'll do that.

I saw the 3% guideline suggested, but not sure if 215/65/15 and 205/70/15 are in it.

On the repair shop - they've offered to give me around $120 store credit for oil changes or repairs on the $136 purchase. (Also tried to say they can only sell it for $50 now it has 5 miles' use).

 

[JCH13]

215/65-15 and 205/70-15 are within 2% of each other, so that's not a huge concern.

Remember all that discussion of unpredictability being a bad thing earlier?

Two different brands, two different models, and two different tread widths between your front and rear axles? One of your axles will do better dry, one will do better in wet/hydroplaning situations.

Rotating your tires now becomes an issue too. Once those wider tires wind up on the front you'll loose more of that understeering nature designed into your car.

Buy 4 goddamned tires.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Equally ridiculous. These aren't random Chinese tires. These are made-in-America tires from a company that's been around for 99 years now. It's older and more established than Bridgestone for Pete's sake.

ZV

No, it's not ridiculous.

There is no real metric for measuring the overall performance of a tire. You can combine UTQG and treadwear with online reviews and get some sort of baseline idea, but similar rating tires can feel and react different from one another just based on the tread pattern.


Based on that alone, I personally feel like no name tires TEND to be less safe than an equally rated premium brand.

And the longevity of a company doesn't really mean that much to me, neither does the country of origin (for the most part..)

I care about their current (last 10-15 years) track record.

 

[Craig234]

Thanks for the help, getting closer to a solution as noted above, looking at 4 Michelin.

Mistakes were made. Embarrassingly, I had a spare in the car and had forgotten it was even there, when I got the tow and bought the new tire.

I'd completely forgotten about Costco which would have been a far better choice. Worse, that's where I went last time for tires.

 

[Zenmervolt]

No, it's not ridiculous.

There is no real metric for measuring the overall performance of a tire. You can combine UTQG and treadwear with online reviews and get some sort of baseline idea, but similar rating tires can feel and react different from one another just based on the tread pattern.

Based on that alone, I personally feel like no name tires TEND to be less safe than an equally rated premium brand.

And the longevity of a company doesn't really mean that much to me, neither does the country of origin (for the most part..)

I care about their current (last 10-15 years) track record.

Again, Cooper is not a "no name" company. There are reasons to prefer other brands (e.g. sportiness, etc.) but safety isn't among them. Being worried about the safety of Cooper tires is like being worried that Hydrox cookies might be poisonous since they're not made by Nabisco.

What you feel is irrelevant to what's true and the truth is that Cooper tires are just as safe as any other tire in their performance class. The fact that the tires are general all-seasons instead of super-grippy performance-all-season tires doesn't make them "less safe" and there are, to the best of my knowledge, no known systematic defects in the tires.

Bridgestone (my personal preferred brand) makes some very shitty OEM tires because the OEM specs call for basic general all-season tires with no real performance consideration (the Potenza RE92 comes readily to mind). That doesn't make those tires "less safe" and it doesn't make Bridgestone as a company "less safe." All it does is point out that the general-purpose non-sporting tire is going to be optimized for a long tread life (80,000 miles or more) and will not grip like a sports tire.

A Goodyear "Regatta" tire or a Michelin "Symmetry" will be no better than the Hercules Iron Man. They're all playing in the same relatively low-performance segment.

By phrasing it as "less safe" you're implying that a Cooper tire will spontaneously blow up or otherwise be defective. That's simply not true by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm not saying he should buy the Hercules, mind you. $140 total per tire it's way too much to pay for a tire in that class. But that doesn't make the Coopers "unsafe" or "less safe" or however else you want to phrase it.

ZV

 

[Throckmorton]

Again, Cooper is not a "no name" company. There are reasons to prefer other brands (e.g. sportiness, etc.) but safety isn't among them. Being worried about the safety of Cooper tires is like being worried that Hydrox cookies might be poisonous since they're not made by Nabisco.

What you feel is irrelevant to what's true and the truth is that Cooper tires are just as safe as any other tire in their performance class. The fact that the tires are general all-seasons instead of super-grippy performance-all-season tires doesn't make them "less safe" and there are, to the best of my knowledge, no known systematic defects in the tires.

Bridgestone (my personal preferred brand) makes some very shitty OEM tires because the OEM specs call for basic general all-season tires with no real performance consideration (the Potenza RE92 comes readily to mind). That doesn't make those tires "less safe" and it doesn't make Bridgestone as a company "less safe." All it does is point out that the general-purpose non-sporting tire is going to be optimized for a long tread life (80,000 miles or more) and will not grip like a sports tire.

A Goodyear "Regatta" tire or a Michelin "Symmetry" will be no better than the Hercules Iron Man. They're all playing in the same relatively low-performance segment.

By phrasing it as "less safe" you're implying that a Cooper tire will spontaneously blow up or otherwise be defective. That's simply not true by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm not saying he should buy the Hercules, mind you. $140 total per tire it's way too much to pay for a tire in that class. But that doesn't make the Coopers "unsafe" or "less safe" or however else you want to phrase it.

ZV

I didn't know Hercules was made by Cooper. That's better than no-name although Cooper has had quality control issues. I used to want Cooper all terrain tires until I started reading about blowouts or thread separations or something like that a few years back.

 

[kitatech]

Costco's policy prohibits installing tires that do not meet OEM specifications.

....in 3 pages of advice the vast majority urges you to get 4 matching OEM specific tires that are at least one grade above the minimum requirements...we all want you to be wise and safe...

If you do not get 4 matching tires little of the advice given here is of any use....but it wouldn't be the 1st time advice has been asked on the net...and not taken...

 

[unokitty]

Thanks for the help, getting closer to a solution as noted above, looking at 4 Michelin.

Mistakes were made. Embarrassingly, I had a spare in the car and had forgotten it was even there, when I got the tow and bought the new tire.

I'd completely forgotten about Costco which would have been a far better choice. Worse, that's where I went last time for tires.

I've got Michelins on my Element. While they cost more than some other tires, they have been very good.

If you get a chance to study decision making, you will see that most people do not make good decisions when they are anxious. Its a human trait.

Now, buy some tires!

Uno

 

[Craig234]

Update, I got four new Michelin tires at Costco. I was still pondering whether to get 2 or 4, and they had $70 off 4, so I went for it - and they have a policy that they would not install two tires of a different size on the front, so it would have had to be two of the 215/65 tires matching the rear. I think it worked out well. Now to return the 'new' tire probably for $120 in repair shop credit, and figure out what to do with two used tires.

It feels pretty good with new right-size tires as a bonus.