Rotating tires and when to change them out.
 

Well, it looks like I shouldn't have been lazy and just rotated my tires every 5000k like my other cars. Instead I followed the MM and rotated them when it told me too. My tires are 2mm front and 4mm rear and the tire shop won't rotate them since they can be dangerous. I didn't believe it at first but it seems that you have to have the better tires on the back for FWD cars to avoid spin out. My factory Dunlops on the 16inch sport rims are only at 26K and worn out this much. Is it time to replace these, maybe I can go another 4K to reach 30K.

I plan on buying the Continental DWS 205/50 16. Best price I can find is about $600 OTD from American's/Discount Tire. This is in CA after tax and disposal, tire fees.

I never realized the MM tells you when to rotate tires. What was the interval?
I rotated the OEM Dun's at every oil change and got 31K out of them, with a bit of life left - but not for a NE winter. If I lived in CA I would have stretched it out.

I just went with the Conti DWS like you're looking at. It is a great tire. Ride well, handling is improved and MPG is, or seems to be, up.

I would suggest that after you get them on the car have the alignment checked. I was seeing uneven wear on the front OEM's so I took it to a shop and they found the car was tracking left. After they did their voodo it's dead on and I'm happy.

If you are spinning out due to 2mm difference in tire wear you are driving wrong.
Let's be honest, the Fit is not such a perfectly razor's edge sports car where you were pushing the limits and that last 2mm of tires suddenly made a drastic difference.

What are you measuring? You should be using the wear bars to judge safety.
If you are in doubt, just change them. What are you trying to save by stretching another 4k, especially since we're going into winter (wet weather).

Its part of the A or B service description. So basically every oil change.

ROFL, let me guess...they offered you a SMOKING good deal on a new set of tires?

Tell em to shove it and go take it somewhere else...

People change profiles, sizes and even run different sets of tires front to back and i dont see cars piled up in ditches in every turn.

With the way todays FWD cars are setup they all understeer...A LOT! I wish my ass would come out instead of my front plowing straight...

Having the tires with more tread in the back would be much safer than having them up front. Why? If you were to be driving in the rain, the tires in the rear would have a larger contact patch with the road due to being able to evacuate more water thus having less of a chance of spinning out from hydroplaning (because of having more tread). Mind you, with the worst tires up front you can still hydroplane; you just will understeer off.

On the other hand, having worst tires in the rear while in a hydroplaning situation could allow the car to oversteer. While some oversteer situations are quite fun, it can be quite a handful when trying to keep the car in check all the way to your destination. Potentially speaking, you could be putting yourself at risk for a snap oversteer situation (Think/look up Toyota MR2 snap oversteer).

Now it that said, if within budget I'd pick up another set of tires if mine were worn to or pass the head of a nickle. I understand that cost is one thing especially with holidays right around the corner but safety is another.

The Conti DWS is a great tire. My folks had a set on their E60 BMW 535I and it was a much quieter tire compared to the factory Goodyear's the car came standard with as well as improved the ride comfort. They lasted very well too despite our rather "spirited" driving habits. :D

Whenever "1" is indicated during a service (which is pretty much every service I think). All "A" signifies oil only change, "B" signifies oil AND oil filter change.

Once again, if the difference of 2mm of depth between front and back is making THAT much of a difference, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the entire design of the car. We all know thats not true.

Please dont sensationalize the issue more by bringing up the MR2. A car that was well known for snap oversteer...MR2 has as much in common with a Fit as does an F150. Mid placed engine, RWD and a very short wheel base compared to the width were all the contributing factors for the snap oversteer. Fit has NONE of those...in fact the Fits problem of too much weight in the front just adds to the understeer issue.

A refusal to rotate tires because of 2mm depth distance is just insulting someones intelligence. A refusal to work on the tire/wheel combo because of low thread level and other safety issues is acceptable.

First of all, I wasn't trying compare the MR2 to the Fit. I was stating that one could POTENTIALLY experience a snap oversteer situation due to having the tires with least water evacuation capabilities in the rear and used the MR2 as an example. I feel that you're kinda reading a bit too hard between the lines on that point but that's okay. :rolleyes:

Secondly... Yes, the Fit does have most of its weight up front. 61% to 64% if I recall correctly depending on the chassis and whether manual or auto. With the remaining 36 to 39% of its weight being in the rear, the Fit wouldn't have much weight in the back to really help keep rear in check if it were to begin to kick out/oversteer with 4 tires of equal tread hydroplaning. Weight distribution wise, its just as balanced as a pick up truck (not talking chassis, drive-train, steering, or suspension setup here, just weight distribution); if you don't believe me look here at the Fit auto and manual then look at the balance of a single cab long wheelbase 4.7L Ram or a Ridgeline (would have linked Crew Cab LWB F-250/F-350 but yahoo auto went down).

And finally I do agree that a 2mm difference in tread depth a isn't much, especially if said set of tires have plenty of tread remaining; though, coming from my view point as a licensed vehicle inspector having 2mm of tread remaining is already unsafe since that barely gives you any tire tread to begin. Actually leaving ~0.0162 of an inch (~0.0411mm) of tread from failing the car in a safety inspection in my state were minimum tread depth is 2/32 (0.0625) of an inch or ~1.59mm. In addition to that, putting the 2mm tire(s) in the rear of OP's Fit could have been a huge liability for the shop since they measured the tires and still KNOWINGLY put them on the rear. If the OP would have gotten into an accident after that, the shop can be held accountable.

I just realized, I meant 2/32 for front and 4/32 rear. I wrote mm cause of my old engineer days. I checked the front tire and it has reached the wear bar yet.

On the other hand, the rear tires ride in the patch that the front tires just cleared out, so they are less likely to hydroplane, all things being equal.



Flea

Flea On paper, maybe, but things are never that equal negotiating a rain soaked road at speeds sufficient to cause hydroplaning. And water ain't like snow - it quickly fills the void.

I've had one serious bout with hydroplaning, and it was years ago driving a 72 Impala 70mph with a mixed set of tires on a turnpike curve. It's a sudden event, and when it breaks free the whole vehicle goes and all you can do is corrective steering to try and keep it on course and shed speed to regain traction. Any thing drastic puts you into a full out of control situation. Brakes are a huge no no it's a hang on keep your foot in it slightly and steer your way out.

Parnelli Jones would have been proud ;-)

Straight road hydroplaning typically breaks the front free and is a whole lot more manageable. Your analysis might very well apply here, but when the front goes the rears become a critical part of control, so maybe not.

You must be doing some hard driving. All the Honda's I've owned never had uneven wear when changing them with the oil. I have 23k on my stock dunflops and still have about another 20k to go before replacement.

That is a fact. Too bad half the asshat drivers out there slam on the brake pedal when they start going out of control!

The only other Honda I've put tires on (97 Odyssey) lasted about 35K on the factory goodyears. Subsequent sets of tires lasted 50-60K (michelin).

My Fit's dunlops (Base) lasted 30k with uneven wear (wear bars showing on front, rears still had 2-3/32s good tread). I drive mildly. At replacement the mechanic noted that it was pretty far out of alignment. I suspect it's a combination of OE dunlops, alignment, and too infrequent rotations (8-10K @ oil change). 2 rotations over 30K miles were not enough; the front tires had been on the front 20K, and the rear tires only 10k (on the front).

I complained to my dealer at about 5K that it wasn't tracking well. They drove it, eyeballed it, and said it was fine. They did not put it on an alignment rack. I should have insisted.

Since having it aligned, and replacing the tires (with michelins) it drives like it should (much less steering correction) and the MPG increased from 32 to 36mpg over the same daily drive.

I'd recommend having the alignment checked at first rotation (at about 7K) and rotating every 7k or less.

Oh and the wear bars show at 2/32s, not sure about the OPs situation with them not showing and having measured tread of 2/32s. The tire dealer was correct in not touching them and recommending replacement. Replace all 4 and get it aligned. You'll be glad you did.

My stomach is churning because tires are so expensive. I negotiated a bit under $580 for 4 Continentals DWS 205/50/16. $580 is installed with all disposal fees etc. Wondering if I should keep going at 2/32 front and 4/32 rear for a couple of more thousand miles. Car is only at 27K. But it will start to rain here soon.

Now the mention of alignment, that's another $60 if I want that. All the tires wore evenly except the front right as more wear on the outside, could be because I didn't properly inflate.

I may only keep this car until March whent the Prius Plug-In comes out, that's why I'm so hesitant to spend money on it.

The front tire wear is not related to inflation. I can tell you've never rotated these tires. With the wear bars showing it's time, but if you're positive you're going to dump the car... with decent tires you'll most likely fetch a better value on it.

Noobs, please read up!
Tire Tech Information - Where to Install New Pairs of Tires?

It is not so much about a 2/32nd difference between the front and rear tires, it's more about the front tires measuring at the end of the tire's life according to all tire manufacturer, which is exactly 2/32nd of an inch.

As Hootie mentioned, worn out tires in the rear will cause the rear end to oversteer regardless of the drivetrain (fwd, rwd, awd). Worn out tires in the front but new on the rear will cause understeer, however understeer can be easily corrected by letting off the gas.

On top of that, no legitimate shop will take the risk of having some cheap ass customer as a liability by rotating their worn out tires. Most people only think of themselves, but shops think of you and everyone else around you out on the road.

Installed the 205/50 16 Continental DWS tires on the fit. Been driving around for a week now. My wife who did not know I got new tires, made the comment that the car felt more solid when she was driving on the freeway and was less noisy. It could be the wider tires, makes the car more solid when driving on the freeway. Very grippy, when I do a hard turn on to the freeway, my old Dunlops, even when new would skip a bit, the new tires don't.