Why get AWD?

So far in rain the Toyo on our '17 do seem pretty good. I'll probably replace with 4 Michelin Premier once they're worn though.
 
Appreciate the friendly discussion(hi). But to further refute the tire manufacturers example of the dangers of losing traction and oversteer on wet roads:

In a scenario where you purchase 4 new tires, surely the weight of the engine (rear/mid engine excluded) would force the front tires to be more resistant to hydroplaning. If the front and rear have equal tread, the rear would hydroplane first in these wet weather turns, which defeats the whole idea of noticing the front hydroplaning first and letting off the gas to correct the problem before the rear hydroplanes. In this situation, equally worn tires (from regular tire rotations) also would not be safe.

But all tire manufacturers recommend for "optimal vehicle performance" all 4 tires should be replaced. Are they messing with our safety? Maybe they should shave down the new front tires a predetermined amount to make sure the best tires are on the rear, lol. Or only sell 2 tires at a time, always on the rear and never allow rotations. New cars ship with used tires on the front.
It's not really the weight of the engine that will make the front tires more resistant to hydroplaning, but the deeper treads on the tires will help evacuate the water. You cannot compress water. So no matter how heavy the engine is, if the tires don't have deep enough treads, there will be no way to quickly evacuate water and so the tire will hydroplane. If the front and rear have equal tread, the rear would hydroplane later considering the front tires are sweeping the water out of the way. Same thing would happen with equally worn tires as all tires would have the same tread depth.

I agree that all four tires should be replaced at the same time. In the event that the driver is only able to replace a pair, I'm still of the opinion that the new pair of tires go on the rear. The issue with decreased stopping distance and traction during braking is a valid concern, but I think that can be mitigated by increasing your following distance when it is raining. I think oversteer caused by hydroplaning is a much bigger safety issue since most of the general population aren't skilled enough to handle it.
 
Yup replace in sets of for and at 4/32 min tread depth is the best plan. But if only two I do also agree put them on back. Really that front set still needs to be 4/32 though or you really just need to buy 4.
 
So far in rain the Toyo on our '17 do seem pretty good. I'll probably replace with 4 Michelin Premier once they're worn though.

They wear pretty quickly- that's the main rub on OE Toyos and not untrue but I'd rather have good all weather traction/hydro resistance and replace more frequently..though they were priced egregiously they're not anymore, they're very good tires overall. That new Mich is all the rage now..Michelin..still say over(rated and priced) until proven otherwise but they look good on paper..other than lack of tread depth which leads me to think it would struggle in anything beyond light snow but large majority A/S tires do anyway I guess...
 
Yea I'm buying a dedicated winter set. The new Michelin also have grooves that widen as they wear to maintain wet traction better.
 
^^good idea I did same, I run 17" Dunlop Wintersport 3Ds- great handling and wearing winter tire, will go Mich Xi2 next time for better winter weather capability.
 
I would've chosen those or the Conti SI but they didn't have when I purchased last fall..I stretched the Dunlops out still have like 5/32 on them..
Wait..still don't see Xi3s ..what size?
 
We have GT with 19" so I'm still going down a wheel size. Wife didn't like how the 17" looked also.
 
It's not really the weight of the engine that will make the front tires more resistant to hydroplaning, but the deeper treads on the tires will help evacuate the water. You cannot compress water. So no matter how heavy the engine is, if the tires don't have deep enough treads, there will be no way to quickly evacuate water and so the tire will hydroplane. If the front and rear have equal tread, the rear would hydroplane later considering the front tires are sweeping the water out of the way. Same thing would happen with equally worn tires as all tires would have the same tread depth.

More weight on properly inflated tires will increase the contact patch and will help prevent hydroplaning. Most of the weight is on the front tires, and much more so when braking (although that doesn't seem to matter near as much to some). A RWD pickup and a FWD car both trying to accelerate quickly in standing water will spin their tires, but the pickup will spin much worse because there is little weight on the rear tires. Deeper tread wouldn't help, but a bed full of firewood would.

From Tirerack:
Hydroplaning: the Role Tires Play. The speed at which a tire hydroplanes is a function of water depth, vehicle speed, vehicle weight, tire width, tread depth and tread design. It depends on how much water has to be removed, how much weight is pressing down on the tires and how efficient the tread design is at evacuating water. https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=16

From Smart Motorist:
Hydroplaning (called aquaplaning in Europe and Asia) occurs when water on the roadway accumulates in front of your vehicle's tires faster that the weight of your vehicle can push it out of the way. The water pressure can cause your car to rise up and slide on top of a thin layer of water between your tires and the road.
http://www.smartmotorist.com/driving-guideline/hydroplaning-aquaplaning.html
 
More weight on properly inflated tires will increase the contact patch and will help prevent hydroplaning. Most of the weight is on the front tires, and much more so when braking (although that doesn't seem to matter near as much to some). A RWD pickup and a FWD car both trying to accelerate quickly in standing water will spin their tires, but the pickup will spin much worse because there is little weight on the rear tires. Deeper tread wouldn't help, but a bed full of firewood would.

From Tirerack:
Hydroplaning: the Role Tires Play. The speed at which a tire hydroplanes is a function of water depth, vehicle speed, vehicle weight, tire width, tread depth and tread design. It depends on how much water has to be removed, how much weight is pressing down on the tires and how efficient the tread design is at evacuating water. https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=16

From Smart Motorist:
Hydroplaning (called aquaplaning in Europe and Asia) occurs when water on the roadway accumulates in front of your vehicle's tires faster that the weight of your vehicle can push it out of the way. The water pressure can cause your car to rise up and slide on top of a thin layer of water between your tires and the road.
http://www.smartmotorist.com/driving-guideline/hydroplaning-aquaplaning.html

Larger contact patch makes for more risk of hydroplaning.
More weight on the tread will increase the PSI, and help the tire to evacuate water faster/better.
This is why you rarely hear of a semi hydroplaning. Skinny tires, significant weight.
 
^^Right and skinnier means more weight per sq inch of contact..need decent tread but the weight helps no doubt.
 
Same with snow a narrow tire is actually better. It's always a compromise with tire design/specs.

Yep, unless you're light and the snow is deep and you plan to go OVER it. Only thing narrow really sucks at is the drag strip and sand.
 
Last bit on the best tires on rear from me.

Scrutinizing new tires on rear axiom, tire age debate

"New-tires-on-rear" is a universal axiom propagated by tire manufacturers that doesnt hold up under scrutiny, according to John M. Baldwin, principal scientist at Exponent Inc. and Ford Motor Co.s polymer technical expert for more than six years.

Using figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and interpolating from the rules of straight probability, Mr. Baldwin said the minimum number of vehicles in the U.S. with at least 9/32 inch of tread on the front and 4/32 or less in back is 8.8 million.

"Youd think there would be a heck of a lot of accidents because of this, based on the videos," he said. "From NHTSA accident statistics, we should be able to pick out whats going on with new-on-rear vs. new-on-front."

Yet a statistical analysis of NHTSA data did not indicate an increase in accidents when new tires were on the front of vehicles, Mr. Baldwin said.

He was hired as Assistant Vice President at Discount Tire not long after this was published and has not spoken on it since.

Full article here: http://www.tirebusiness.com/article...onew-tires-on-rearrsquo-axiom-tire-age-debate
 
I have a FWD 2012 RAV4 and am about to buy a new CX-5. When accelerating from a dead stop into a corner with the RAV, the front end does some extreme wheel hopping . . . this is downright scary! Will the new FWD CX-5 do the same? Will a CX-5 with AWD eliminate the problem?
 
I have a FWD 2012 RAV4 and am about to buy a new CX-5. When accelerating from a dead stop into a corner with the RAV, the front end does some extreme wheel hopping . . . this is downright scary! Will the new FWD CX-5 do the same? Will a CX-5 with AWD eliminate the problem?

No, the mazdas chassis is much more composed and shouldn't do that. AWD will help, but not necessary
 
Back