To rotate or not to rotate

I have a 2008 Civic with about 13,500 miles. A few weeks ago I took
it into the local dealer because the maint mider was indication oil
change so I asked for the oil change and a tire rotation. I'd had
them rotated at about 6,800 when the last oil change was called for.
When I got the car back the service person said they didn't totate the
tires for me "because there were no signs of wear yet'.
I thought that was the whole idea of rotating tires, so that they wear
evenly and you don't see "signs of wear" for a longer time. And what
kind of dealer service outfit turns down an easy twenty five dollar
charge in the first place? I am bewildered.

 

Right, rotating tires is to even out uneven wear. If you have zero uneven
wear, then what are you accomplishing by doing a rotation? Nothing to be
gained. On the other hand, disrupting things could cause a problem.

Others may disagree. But I am very conscience of my alignment and never
rotate my tires and have no uneven tire wear.

As for what type of shop turns down an easy $25 charge? The answer would be
a reputable one.

 

It must be twenty years since new advice came out from the Japanese
makers, do not rotate tyres this only accelerates wear. Just how far
behind the rest of the world are the Merkins?

 

I'm not sure you come out ahead cost wise paying $25 a pop to rotate tires
regularly vs. just getting a few thousand less miles on unrotated ones and
replacing them a little earlier.

 

I'm not advocating tire rotation...

On the one hand, costs aside, uneven tire wear can be a safety hazard so
there is money to be saved by doing it in avoiding accidents.

But again, rotating tires is a band aid on a different problem. What is
causing uneven tire wear? For some it could just be from being too heavy on
the gas and brake pedals (front to back differences in tire wear). Uneven
tire wear on different sides of vehicle could be alignment.

Me, I don't rotate my tires and haven't seen evidence that I need to (my
side to side wear is even). I replace my tires 2 at a time replacing the
rears with the fronts and new tires up front. So yeah, a little bit of a
rotation cycle, but that's it.

 

If they show signs of uneven wear it is time to find out what part of the
suspension is out of wack. Rotating has become common since front wheel
drive. By regular rotation tire wear is even on all four tires. Without
rotation front tires wear out faster so when it is time to change you have
two good tires and two worn out tires. Rotating in the correct sequence also
helps wear on all four tires even which improves handling and gets you the
maximum miles on a set of tires.

 

FWIW

I try to buy tires 4 at a time, when I'm more likely to find a discount
($ off per set, buy-3-get-1, etc.). Since every FWD car I've owned has
worn the fronts faster than rears, I usually wind up doing 2~3 front <->
back rotations over the life of the tires.

 

but driving on freshly rotated tires also causes you to have less rubber
on the ground because of the wear patterns. chalk a piece of smooth
surface, then drive a freshly rotated tire over it and look to see for
yourself.

this is why, as stated by others, many japanese, and also many european
vehicle manufacturers, do /not/ recommend rotations. indeed, on many
vehicles with different tire sizes front and rear, and directional
tires, you can't!

 

Where do you get your erroneous information? Honda still includes tire
rotation as a maintenance item. The following is from the Honda website
for the current Accord:

"The Maintenance Minder(TM) tracks services on a mileage basis such as the
miles between changes to the air filter, spark plugs, coolant and tire
rotation. In addition, engine sensors detect driving conditions to
recommend when an oil change is recommended and send that information to
the Maintenance Minder."

 

My advice comes from the Nissan N16 workshop manual, there is no higher
authority.

 

For a Nissan. I believe ww're talking Hondas here.

My 2008 Honda Service History booklet (must remember to put it back in
the car!) Says that A1 mainanence minder alerts specify oil change and
tire rotation. I had my oil done at a local oil place that I trust
very much (they've never, for instance, said "here's your air
filter"). I can rotate the tires myself. I log this in the booklet,
including the torque figures at rotation and 100 and 250 miles.

When I a-x'ed my Civic, my BFG R1s were always marked for the corner.
Anyone want to buy a set of R1s mounted on 96 alloy rims with about
1/64 inch tread? Still a-x legal. Central Texas area only.

--

- dillon I am not invalid

The RMS Titanic sank on April 15th. US income taxes
are due on April 15th. Coincidence? I think not.

 

got to an auto parts store and buy a tire tread depth gauge for $2 or
$3. measure tread depth along the inside, middle and outside of each
of your 4 tires. if you find the outer edges of the front tires are
1/32 less deep than the inside edges and the rears are even, then
you'll know you need to have your tires rotated. see tirerack links
for some additional info.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=1
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=43

If you drive gently, a car like the Civic won't wear tires very
quickly and tire rotations are not needed very often. The harder you
drive, the more quickly the tires, especially the fronts, will wear.
See alignment info below re. tire wear patterns;
http://www.familycar.com/alignment.htm

happy motoring

 

My 2008 Nissan Altima manual specifies tire rotations every 7500 miles, but
it is in the owner's manual, not the shop manual. I think somebody is
looking in the wrong place.

 

I don't know anything about the Altima. I have had seven Nissan cars
over the last 30 years and each one has been an improvement on the last,
so imagine how disappointed I was to have a Dodge Avenger as a hire car
last I visited the sates, only to find that it STILL had drum brakes on
the rear.
How backward can you get, no wonder that the rest of the world is
avoiding Merkin cars and going Japanese, at least you're getting state
of the art, or as you would say, "more bang for your buck".

 

Er, drum brakes in rear applications are a whole lot simpler than disks.
much less costly to repair and MUCH easier to repair.

Sometimes, new is NOT better...

JT

 

disk brakes are more linear in application. technically, that makes for
a better brake.

and these days, most manufacturers on the high end at least, sensibly,
are using a hybrid disk/drum brake. the service brake is disk. the
parking brake is a drum inside the hub of the disk. that keeps both
sets of working parts simple and reliable. and in the event of
emergency, you still have a cool brake to use that hasn't faded yet.

 

Which doesn't amount to a hill of beans regarding rear brake performance.

Oh sure, complicate the assembly which only gives marginally improved
performance at triple the price when considering original cost and
maintenance/repairs.

You sure are a gem to muddy the waters...

JT

 

It's taken you a long time to catch up, most European/Japanese cars have
been like this for 20+ years.

 

why not just say front brake performance too and really get the old
cranium well below the sand?

actually, it's cheaper for the manufacturer. drum brakes are cheap.
simple calipers are cheap. complex calipers with hand brake actuation
are complicated and difficult to implement, expensive and not too
reliable. and in addition to price, the combined drum/disk solution
gives better performance and safety! seems like a decent idea to me.

you're the kind of guy that would complain about a strawberry shake with
real strawberries and real cream not being plain tepid milk.

 

i am retired but work for hertz . hertz does not rotate tired and now
we put as much as 60000 miles on a car before it is taken out of
service. have noticed when tires are not rotated after about 25000
miles that start getting noisy. i usually rotate tires on my 2 cars
every 5000 miles and have not noticed this .