what is harder on tires? city miles or highway miles?

[vshah]

I'm inclined to think highway miles but would like some other opinions. for the past year I've been doing only long distance driving, between NYC, DC, and Pittsburgh.

I'm not having any problems, just curious. I imagine that faster speeds cause faster wear on tires.

 

[Zargon]

I would agree, as tires get hotter at higher speeds, which softens the compound, making them wear faster....generally.

 

[Arkaign]

Stop and go traffic at speeds of 45mph or less is really not bad on tires. That said, many local street surfaces can eat tires if they're very poorly maintained. Lots of variables, but in general yeah, going 1000 miles at 70mph is going to cause more wear than going 1000 miles at ~35mph average, unless you accelerate, brake, and turn like a maniac. I've also noticed over the years that FF cars eat front tires a lot quicker than FR cars eat front or rear tires (regular ~240hp or less cars, not sports/enthusiast cars).

 

[alpineranger]

Acceleration (positive, negative, or lateral) wears tires the most, unless you're talking about extreme speeds (100+ mph). For any typical highway speeds, wear is much less than city driving.

 

[woodie1]

If the tires are properly inflated then city driving will wear them faster than highway speeds.

 

[coxmaster]

I have often wondered the same thing. Will be following the replies to this thread.


Also:

If the tires are properly inflated then city driving will wear them faster than highway speeds.

Sidewall?

 

[JulesMaximus]

City miles will wear your tires more quickly. Honestly though, why does everyone here obsess over wear and tear items on their vehicles? It is what it is.

ZOMG!!! You set your parking brake on your automatic? You'll wear out your rear brakes!!!

ZOMG!!! Your engine has a timing belt? That's unnecessary added maintenance!!!

ZOMG!!! You downshift when driving down a hill? Brakes are cheaper than a clutch or a transmission!!!

I'm not even going to get into hypermiling.

 

[desy]

Cause thats what we talk about in forums?
Don't like it, don't wade in, certainly don't post. . . .

Because I do a lot of HW driving my tires, I think, get old before they get worn out
Van tires are 6 yrs old but I expect a couple or three yrs more before they are worn

 

[ShawnD1]

ZOMG!!! You set your parking brake on your automatic? You'll wear out your rear brakes!!!

I always say the exact opposite of this. Stupid asshole didn't use his parking brake? I hope it pops out of "park" and kills someone. Ok I don't actually want people to die, but having the car roll off into the ditch would be pretty funny.

ZOMG!!! Your engine has a timing belt? That's unnecessary added maintenance!!!

haha! My dad.

I'm not even going to get into hypermiling.

Which side of hypermiling? It sounds like one of those things that wears the car out. Constantly turning the engine on and off, clutch in and out, fucking up your steering and tires because taking corners at high speeds saves gas, etc.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Cause thats what we talk about in forums?
Don't like it, don't wade in, certainly don't post. . . .

Because I do a lot of HW driving my tires, I think, get old before they get worn out
Van tires are 6 yrs old but I expect a couple or three yrs more before they are worn

What I'm saying is that people obsess over these things...like it really matters. Your driving habits and the amount of driving you do is generally necessary so obsessing over these things is, for the most part, completely pointless. The best way to prevent wear on your car is to not drive it. Period.

I bought my car new back in 2003. It has almost 90,000 miles on it now and I couldn't possibly care less about any of the things you people obsess over. I drive it when I need to go somewhere or when I want to go somewhere. Obsessing over wear and tear isn't going to decrease it, it is what it is.

I take good care of my car, it is on its third set of tires, the paint looks good, the interior looks good, and it runs well because I follow the manufacturer recommended maintenance schedule. I don't deviate from it, I don't look for shortcuts, I don't put fuel system cleaners in it or try to cheat the mileage the engine gets by changing my driving habits, and I NEVER inflate to sidewall. I just drive it how I want, when I want...because it's mine! NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!

 

[vshah]

i didn't mean to come across as obsessing. i couldn't care less, and will probably replace these tires well before they're worn because I want summers. I was just curious.

 

[MJinZ]

Neither, it's acceleration and braking.

Only in extreme speeds on the highway or extremely bad roads (well the latter is probably common in some areas), does it really matter.

 

[JulesMaximus]

i didn't mean to come across as obsessing. i couldn't care less, and will probably replace these tires well before they're worn because I want summers. I was just curious.

No problem. I didn't mean to come off as angry about people obsessing.

 

[alphatarget1]

ZOMG!!! You set your parking brake on your automatic? You'll wear out your rear brakes!!!

Putting stress on the rear brake = better than putting stress on your automatic transmission/transaxle. Just sayin'.

 

[StageLeft]

Per mile driven obviously city. I can't believe people are debating that point.

 

[BUTCH1]

Wear is a cumulative process and a few good habits might help, not obsessive ones IMO..for one, try to avoid excessive steering input while the car is standing still (ex. trying to cram into a too-small parking space), this is hell on the entire steering system, ever try to do a 180 with a full shopping cart? it's tough cause it's not moving. Second, avoid slamming doors, this just inevitably loosens up the flimsy plastic retainers. Third, give your alt. a break, turn off DRL lights ect. Fourth, try to avoid pothole-strewn roads (if possible), I'd rather drive a few extra miles than make the suspension deal with it.

 

[Necrolezbeast]

Putting stress on the rear brake = better than putting stress on your automatic transmission/transaxle. Just sayin'.

Not meaning to completely derail the thread here, but I was just painting the picture in my mind about the whole parking brake / Automatic thing... My brains says that I would need to have the car in drive or neutral, set the parking brake, then proceed to move the car into park... otherwise the stress has already been placed on the transmission/transaxle and it won't actually place the stress on the brakes until it has reached the point of moving...right? I'm sure the difference is negligible and the whole argument of using/not using the brake is worthless as well... but how many advocates of using the brake actually engage it before placing their vehicle into park?

 

[ShawnD1]

Not meaning to completely derail the thread here, but I was just painting the picture in my mind about the whole parking brake / Automatic thing... My brains says that I would need can car in drive or neutral, set the parking brake, then proceed to move the car into park... otherwise the stress has already been placed on the transmission/transaxle and it won't actually place the stress on the brakes until it has reached the point of moving...right? I'm sure the difference is negligible and the whole argument for using/not using the brake is worthless as well... but how many advocates of using the brake actually engage it before placing their vehicle into park?

That's exactly how it's done.

It should also be noted that "park" is very wishy washy and allows a lot of movement. You can test this yourself the next time you have the car jacked up. While the car jacked up and the transmission is in park, see how much you can rotate the driving wheels. You'd be surprised how much they can rotate.

 

[jlee]

Not meaning to completely derail the thread here, but I was just painting the picture in my mind about the whole parking brake / Automatic thing... My brains says that I would need to have the car in drive or neutral, set the parking brake, then proceed to move the car into park... otherwise the stress has already been placed on the transmission/transaxle and it won't actually place the stress on the brakes until it has reached the point of moving...right? I'm sure the difference is negligible and the whole argument of using/not using the brake is worthless as well... but how many advocates of using the brake actually engage it before placing their vehicle into park?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2085063

I have yet to see a transmission fail because someone didn't use the parking brake.

 

[Lean L]

I always say the exact opposite of this. Stupid asshole didn't use his parking brake? I hope it pops out of "park" and kills someone. Ok I don't actually want people to die, but having the car roll off into the ditch would be pretty funny.

If there's enough of an incline to break the pawl or force it to slip, the e break will only slow it down at that point.

 

[ElFenix]

Not meaning to completely derail the thread here, but I was just painting the picture in my mind about the whole parking brake / Automatic thing... My brains says that I would need to have the car in drive or neutral, set the parking brake, then proceed to move the car into park... otherwise the stress has already been placed on the transmission/transaxle and it won't actually place the stress on the brakes until it has reached the point of moving...right? I'm sure the difference is negligible and the whole argument of using/not using the brake is worthless as well... but how many advocates of using the brake actually engage it before placing their vehicle into park?

as long as you have your foot solidly on the brake you can put the car in park and then pull the parking brake (also solidly) and it won't move when you take your foot off. putting the car in park, then taking your foot off the brake, then pulling the parking brake will result in your car moving between step 2 and 3 if you're on an incline.

 

[ShawnD1]

If there's enough of an incline to break the pawl or force it to slip, the e break will only slow it down at that point.

Did you watch the video? Cars pop out of park all the time. Sometimes people die from it.
Parking brakes are much stronger than the transmission. While the brakes are applied, the car will not move unless the tires are skidding. You probably noticed that people using the parking brake to "drift" are causing the back tires to lock up and it puts the car into a skid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyG0mWtcp6Y

 

[DVad3r]

Acceleration (positive, negative, or lateral) wears tires the most, unless you're talking about extreme speeds (100+ mph). For any typical highway speeds, wear is much less than city driving.

This. And if you stop hard/start fast you will wear them out quicker. Also if you are like me and take on/exit ramps at unsafe velocities, your tires take a beating lol.

 

[DVad3r]

Did you watch the video? Cars pop out of park all the time. Sometimes people die from it.
Parking brakes are much stronger than the transmission. While the brakes are applied, the car will not move unless the tires are skidding. You probably noticed that people using the parking brake to "drift" are causing the back tires to lock up and it puts the car into a skid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyG0mWtcp6Y

None of the cars I have owned or my family has owned ever had a good strong parking brake. We have been using "Park" since 1984 son. No popping in this motha fu%#*!

 

[Lean L]

Did you watch the video? Cars pop out of park all the time. Sometimes people die from it.
Parking brakes are much stronger than the transmission. While the brakes are applied, the car will not move unless the tires are skidding. You probably noticed that people using the parking brake to "drift" are causing the back tires to lock up and it puts the car into a skid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyG0mWtcp6Y

I have never driven a car with a strong enough e brake to cause the rear tires to skid. I suspect most cars don't have that ability. Didn't watch the video, at work.