General Cycling Discussion - When you replace your tires....????

When you replace your tires, do you replace just one or both?

Yesterday I noticed that my rear tire felt as if the rim were bent, a subtle bumpy ride. I stopped and inspected my wheel, but didn't see a problem.
After the ride I inspected the wheel and noticed that it wasn't the wheel at all but the tire. The sidewall had widened and the tire looked distorted, yet luckily no blow out. On further inspection I noticed that the sidewall had rotted and the threads were easily split open by hand! I also noticed that the tire liner (Mr Tuffy) helped to prevent a sidewall blow out! Glad to be alive! I should have stopped and made a more thorough check of my tire before continuing riding.

Get some new ones.

Normally if you ride a lot you will wear the center tread section off the rear tire first. Most people then just swap the front & rear, and wear the center off the other tire before buying new ones.

If your tires are dry-rotting it might be wise to replace them both just for that reason.
Also make sure you're not storing them in bad conditions--some common ones being in direct sunlight, near oil or fuel vapors or near an electric motor that runs a lot.

Buy new ones. And do not rotate!
If you can only buy 1 new tire put it up front.

Normally if you ride a lot you will wear the center tread section off the rear tire first. Most people then just swap the front & rear, and wear the center off the other tire before buying new ones.

There is no way I am placing a worn rear tire up front.

Buying a new tire is much cheaper than a hospital stay. ;)

Rotating tires is fine and a great idea, most riders do that and have been doing so for many years. The front tire wears about 2/3rds less then the rear, so why waste a perfectly good front tire? Simply move the front to the rear and put a new one on the front. This way you only really need to buy one tire, though I away's have an extra tire in storage just in case so I don't have to run to an LBS immediately when a problem develops with a tire.

There is no way I am placing a worn rear tire up front.

Buying a new tire is much cheaper than a hospital stay. ;)

I agree. My brother suffered a fast fall one time when he put an old clement tubular on his bike and rode, the tire blew on a curve!
He broke his fall landing on this left hand, sprang his wrist. Even to this day he can't lift anything greater than 30 pounds.

My front tire is as old as the rear. I will replace both.

Thanks for all the responses! It confirms my hunch!

I find that the front tire wears far more slowly than the rear tire. I seem to replace about 5 rear tires for every front tire. Rotation is fine, the way to do it would be to put the front tire on the rear and the new tire on the front. A front blow out is far more problematic than a rear blow out. Also, the front tire has far more effect on turning and handling than the rear tire so that is where you want your "best" tire.

Rotating tires is fine and a great idea, most riders do that and have been doing so for many years. The front tire wears about 2/3rds less then the rear, so why waste a perfectly good front tire? Simply move the front to the rear and put a new one on the front. This way you only really need to buy one tire, though I away's have an extra tire in storage just in case so I don't have to run to an LBS immediately when a problem develops with a tire.

This

Don't put a worn rear tyre on the front to try and even out the wear- you need the extra grip on the front wheel. Simply wait until the rear tyre wears out, then, if the front tyre is still good, move the front tyre to the back and put a new one on the front wheel. You'll get the same tyre life as rotating both tyres, but without having to put a worn out tyre on the front. If they're both knackered, obviously replace both.

I have said this before on another thread. I don't believe in rotating tires. it's to labor intensive for the gain. Just replace the worn tires as necessary.
My bike uses 3+ rears to 1 front. I don't need all that work.

Never put a worn rear tyre on the front... it is a dangerous practice and really has little to do with tread or grip as a slick tyre will hold the road better than one with a tread.

Issue is that if the rear is badly worn it can be subject to punctures or blowouts and having that happen on the front is bad with a capital B.

If you like matching tyres and can buy replacements, replace your tyres as they wear out.

Considering that a decent tyre can last 10,000 plus km on the rear, that front tyre can probably be run for 20,000 km or more.

This does not apply to racing tyres which usually do not get the same mileage life.

When you replace your tires, do you replace just one or both?

Just because one tire wears out, doesn't mean that you have to replace both tires. The rear tire wears faster than the front.

I replace the tire that wears out when I notice that it is starting to wear out, and I don't rotate my tires ... I've never seen the point.

However, I do always have extra tires on hand at home. So in your case, I might put a new tire on the rear, and then buy a couple new tires knowing that I'm going to have to replace the front one in 1-2000 km.

When the back wears out, I move the used front to the rear and put a new one on the front. Perhaps it takes a bit more work (like maybe 10 minutes), but I always have a new or reasonably fresh tire in front and the only tires I discard are well worn out.

I replace the tire that wears out when I notice that it is starting to wear out, and I don't rotate my tires ... I've never seen the point.


Come on, Machka. Surely the point is to make sure that most of the time you have your newest tyre on the front? If you rotate, the front tyre is never more than half worn. That has significant safety benefits...

If the front tire is Still Good, I leave it on the front.
I have had many cuts on brand new tires, front and rear.

Rotating tires is fine and a great idea, most riders do that and have been doing so for many years.

Most riders don't rotate, that I am aware of. I don't. I don't hesitate to replace a tire, either.

Most riders don't rotate, that I am aware of. I don't. I don't hesitate to replace a tire, either.

+1

I see it mentioned here on BF sometimes, but I don't think I've ever actually met anyone who does it.

This post has turned out very weird. I know so many people...real people...real riders, that rotate their tires. In fact people have been doing this for many years. Sheldon Brown even comments about this here: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/tire-rotation.html

Some cyclists rotate tires. I don't doubt that.

I say, use common sense. Anybody should be able to visually inspect a tire in order to determine the degree of wear the tire manifests. Just like with automobile tires, we don't change all of the tires, simply because one or two show wear.
Customarily, we rotate our tires, in order to get the maximum amount of wear and service from each tire.

Hey! Guess what? ...We do the same with our bicycle tires, as well...

- Slim :)

+1

I see it mentioned here on BF sometimes, but I don't think I've ever actually met anyone who does it.

+1...I'e met a ton of riders and forum members. Some have asked "so what do you think of this rotating tire thing?" but none have ever actually said they do.

Not saying it doesnt happen but I've also never met another rider that actually does. :D

I say, use common sense. Anybody should be able to visually inspect a tire in order to determine the degree of wear the tire manifests. Just like with automobile tires, we don't change all of the tires, simply because one or two show wear.
Customarily, we rotate our tires, in order to get the maximum amount of wear and service from each tire.

Hey! Guess what? ...We do the same with our bicycle tires, as well...

- Slim :)

I usually buy 4 car tires at the same time. I rotate car tires but I don't rotate bike tires.

I don't bother either. I did try it out a couple times and found that moving a somewhat worn front tire to the rear simple resulted in me replacing that tire quicker.
duh

I usually buy 4 car tires at the same time. I rotate car tires but I don't rotate bike tires.

I once had a front tire that would not show wear no matter what. My rear tire blew out, so I replaced it. Next, it wore out. I replaced it again. The front tire still looked good. I then moved that same tire to the rear, where it promptly blew out less than three weeks later. Since then, I've had very similar experiences with that same bike.
So clearly, in this case, there is never any reason to replace both tires, simultaneously.

Replace a tire that looks perfectly alright! I'd bang my head up beside a wall first! :bang:

- Slim

PS.

However, if it looks slightly worn, then yes, I will change the both of them...

I don't bother either. I did try it out a couple times and found that moving a somewhat worn front tire to the rear simple resulted in me replacing that tire quicker.
duh

Ok, so you don't rotate, how many miles on the average do you get out of the front tire and how many out of the rear?

The only rotating of tires that I do is when the wheels go round and round when I ride. :D

Ok, so you don't rotate, how many miles on the average do you get out of the front tire and how many out of the rear?

3000 km on front ... 2000 km on the rear.

The only rotating of tires that I do is when the wheels go round and round when I ride. :D

But you haven't answered my question. If you simply replace the tyres as they wear out, then at some point you have a nearly worn-out tyre at the front. Whereas if you rotate (as I do, by the way) your newest tyre is always on the front and is never close to being worn out. It makes sense to have the sounder tyre at the front, and the work involved in swapping front to back is trivial.

That has significant safety benefits...
Such as?

The idea of rotating tyres may have had merit in the days when every tyre had a tread pattern cut into it. The theory then was that the tread needed to be in tip-top shape on the front tyre, so it was best to rotate it to the rear and put a new one on.

But Machka and I ride the majority of the time on tyres with only a teensy amount of pattern on them, and that pattern, I suspect, is more to determine wear than offer any increase in grip, even siping water outward..

I admit that a long time ago, I rotated tyres, but llke others, I found the tyre that went from front to back just wore out very quickly compared with a new tyre on the rear. That meant more work for me. I figured it was far better to just keep replacing the rear as needed, and leave the front one alone.

I also got into the habit when doing randonnees of changing even half worn tyres front and rear prior to significantly long events (400km and over, and certainly for 1000s and 1200s).

Of course, all this idea of keeping the front tyre in place doesn't mean an astute rider ignores the condition of his/her tyres, front or rear.

Ok, so you don't rotate, how many miles on the average do you get out of the front tire and how many out of the rear?

Sorry, I have no idea. It does seem that I replace the rear twice as often as the front.

Cyclomania, I just replace the worn tire, which is more often the rear. I do keep both tires the same brand and model.

Brad

The only rotating of tires that I do is when the wheels go round and round when I ride. :D

If your tires go around and around when will they stop? does anyone know?

Sorry, I have no idea. It does seem that I replace the rear twice as often as the front.
So lets assume your front last twice as long. Let's assume your front lasts 5000 miles and the rear 2500, this is just for math purposes not for real life mileage. So you start out with a new set of tires. At 2500 miles you replace the rear, then 2500 miles later you replace both the front and rear (now the second set for the rear), thus in 5,000 miles you replaced 3 tires. Now lets assume you rotate, so you put on a new set, at 2500 the rear is worn so you take the rear off and move the front to the rear and put a new one on front, 2500 miles later the rear is worn again so you move the front to the rear and replace the front one. In 5000 miles you only replaced 2 tires not 3 by rotating.

You can argue against this all you want but I've been doing it this way for many years. Originally though I was putting the new tire on the rear because that's were the majority of the flats occur. but I got into a discussion about this with some of my racing buddies and they said no put the new on the front. Then I actually sent a letter to Sheldon Brown in 1987 or 88 and he actually responded saying to put the best tire on the front due to preventing blowouts and recommended rotating to accomplish that. So my racing buddies were right, I wasn't...if there is such a thing as right or wrong in all of this. But I know I replace fewer tires by rotating. Sometimes due to the rear getting removed before it's truly worn out I use it on the trainer instead so it will be worn out by the time winter ends.

And as a side benefit your putting the best tire on the front increasing the odds against a blowout on the front which "could" result in a loss of control and a crash. Note I said could, not would.

this seems too logical?


I have said this before on another thread. I don't believe in rotating tires. it's to labor intensive for the gain. Just replace the worn tires as necessary.
My bike uses 3+ rears to 1 front. I don't need all that work.

this seems too logical?

I have said this before on another thread. I don't believe in rotating tires. it's to labor intensive for the gain. Just replace the worn tires as necessary.
My bike uses 3+ rears to 1 front. I don't need all that work.


Lets assume this is correct, and lets assume the rear last 2500 miles and the front 7500 (I've never had a tire last that long but let's just go with it). You put a brand new set of tires all around, by the end of 7500 miles you would had replaced 3 rears and 1 front for a total of 4 tires. Now if you rotate; at the first 2500 you move the front to rear put new on front, next 2500 front to rear new on front, then the next 2500 front to rear new on front. How many tires have you replaced in 7500 miles?

Personally none of my fronts have ever out lasted 3 rears it's more like two rears. There was a short time I was goofing with putting a 700c x 28 on the rear and a 23 on the front and they would wear out about evenly.

Just call me lazy then.

I'm not sure the math works out differently than just replacing any tire that is worn, when it's worn. The only argument that actually makes sense to me (not that it matters since I don't really know what I'm talking about), is that IF it's better to have the best tire upfront at all times, then I can see the logical in rotating.


I have said this before on another thread. I don't believe in rotating tires. it's to labor intensive for the gain. Just replace the worn tires as necessary.
My bike uses 3+ rears to 1 front. I don't need all that work.


Lets assume this is correct, and lets assume the rear last 2500 miles and the front 7500 (I've never had a tire last that long but let's just go with it). You put a brand new set of tires all around, by the end of 7500 miles you would had replaced 3 rears and 1 front for a total of 4 tires. Now if you rotate; at the first 2500 you move the front to rear put new on front, next 2500 front to rear new on front, then the next 2500 front to rear new on front. How many tires have you replaced in 7500 miles?

Personally none of my fronts have ever out lasted 3 rears it's more like two rears. There was a short time I was goofing with putting a 700c x 28 on the rear and a 23 on the front and they would wear out about evenly.

lazy!


Just call me lazy then.

only cuz you asked :)

lazy!



only cuz you asked :)

Danka :)

So lets assume your front last twice as long. Let's assume your front lasts 5000 miles and the rear 2500, this is just for math purposes not for real life mileage. So you start out with a new set of tires. At 2500 miles you replace the rear, then 2500 miles later you replace both the front and rear (now the second set for the rear), thus in 5,000 miles you replaced 3 tires. Now lets assume you rotate, so you put on a new set, at 2500 the rear is worn so you take the rear off and move the front to the rear and put a new one on front, 2500 miles later the rear is worn again so you move the front to the rear and replace the front one. In 5000 miles you only replaced 2 tires not 3 by rotating.

You can argue against this all you want but I've been doing it this way for many years. Originally though I was putting the new tire on the rear because that's were the majority of the flats occur. but I got into a discussion about this with some of my racing buddies and they said no put the new on the front. Then I actually sent a letter to Sheldon Brown in 1987 or 88 and he actually responded saying to put the best tire on the front due to preventing blowouts and recommended rotating to accomplish that. So my racing buddies were right, I wasn't...if there is such a thing as right or wrong in all of this. But I know I replace fewer tires by rotating. Sometimes due to the rear getting removed before it's truly worn out I use it on the trainer instead so it will be worn out by the time winter ends.

And as a side benefit your putting the best tire on the front increasing the odds against a blowout on the front which "could" result in a loss of control and a crash. Note I said could, not would.

Um, you won't make it to 5000 miles replacing only 2 tires in your rotating example. The tire you moved to the rear was already half worn, so you will need to replace it after another 1250 or at 3750 total. At that time you will use the third tire on the front, moving the front to the rear which is now 25% worn. If you continue on this path, you will eventually be replacing a tire every 1666 miles, which works out to 3 every 5000 miles, just like if you don't rotate. You will have the benefit of always having the better tire on the front, but you are not using less tires (well, you are a little bit but it's a very small difference in that you get about 500 extra miles total in the first few tire changes). The math works out the same regardless of how much faster the wear is on the rear. Note: I'm not saying you are wrong to do this, you are getting the benefit of always having the better tire on the front, I"m just saying that you are not using less tires by rotating.

I take the term "rotate tires" to mean periodically switching front and back with the intent of evening wear between the two. I don't do that. If I'm replacing a worn out or irreparably damaged tire, I put the new tire on the front, which means that if it was the rear that was worn out or damage, the used front goes on the rear. IMO, this provides the best balance of safety and economy which justifies the small amount of added work.

Such as?


Such as minimising the risk of failure on the front. Admittedly tyres don't fail often, but it does happen. Only a couple of weeks ago I had a sidewall fail - in my experience sidewalls often give out before the tread. I noticed it, and there was no problem, but it happened on a hilly ride with some fast descents so I'm still pleased it happened on the rear tyre rather than the front.

And I too run slick tyres, I don't think the tread pattern is the issue here.

I'm not sure the math works out differently than just replacing any tire that is worn, when it's worn. The only argument that actually makes sense to me (not that it matters since I don't really know what I'm talking about), is that IF it's better to have the best tire upfront at all times, then I can see the logical in rotating.

Yes, it is better to have the best tire on the front. If you have a well worn tire on the front and are going around sweeping turn at 20mph and hit something on the road that cause sudden PSI loss then your going down. And the result of going down is the possibility of hurting ones self and/or damaging the bike. If you have a front blowout while going straight it's usually not a big deal, just don't brake with the front brake.

You can lose control of a bike with a rear blow rounding a turn if your not careful, but using the front brake instead will help you keep it stable.

And for the reasons of loss of control if a front fails is the reason most riders I've ever known put new tires on the front, and it's why Sheldon Brown recommended it. This isn't new knowledge by the way, I've been riding road bikes since the early 70's and they knew about back then, I didn't buy into myself until 10 years or so later.

Um, you won't make it to 5000 miles replacing only 2 tires in your rotating example. The tire you moved to the rear was already half worn, so you will need to replace it after another 1250 or at 3750 total. At that time you will use the third tire on the front, moving the front to the rear which is now 25% worn. If you continue on this path, you will eventually be replacing a tire every 1666 miles, which works out to 3 every 5000 miles, just like if you don't rotate. You will have the benefit of always having the better tire on the front, but you are not using less tires (well, you are a little bit but it's a very small difference in that you get about 500 extra miles total in the first few tire changes). The math works out the same regardless of how much faster the wear is on the rear. Note: I'm not saying you are wrong to do this, you are getting the benefit of always having the better tire on the front, I"m just saying that you are not using less tires by rotating.

Typically a front tire wears about a 1/3 less then the rear sometimes a bit more but rarely half, so when then it's put to the rear. Most rear tires won't make it to complete wear out anyways, by complete I mean cords showing, they start getting frequent flats and it's time to replace them, or something destroys it. So I dump the rears or save them for the trainer because on the trainer their not being subjected to road debis that will cause flats. My examples I used both 1/3 and 1/2 in to cover both possiblities.

Good enough rationale for me. I'm sold.


Yes, it is better to have the best tire on the front. If you have a well worn tire on the front and are going around sweeping turn at 20mph and hit something on the road that cause sudden PSI loss then your going down. And the result of going down is the possibility of hurting ones self and/or damaging the bike. If you have a front blowout while going straight it's usually not a big deal, just don't brake with the front brake.

You can lose control of a bike with a rear blow rounding a turn if your not careful, but using the front brake instead will help you keep it stable.

And for the reasons of loss of control if a front fails is the reason most riders I've ever known put new tires on the front, and it's why Sheldon Brown recommended it. This isn't new knowledge by the way, I've been riding road bikes since the early 70's and they knew about back then, I didn't buy into myself until 10 years or so later.

Ok, best tire on the front for road bikes as a safety factor. Got it. Makes sense, especially since I like to rotate tires from bike to bike sometimes. Never paid that much attention to it before because I can hardly see the tread on a road tire. Front and back always look the same.

Around here a lot of us like to ride front suspension mountain bikes in the city because of the crappy roads, so the opposite would be more appropriate. Any flats I've had have always been on the rear tire, so I usually put the best tire on the back, since it's easier to see which one is best because of the exaggerated tread on mtb tires. Naturally this came about before the cheap full suspension wallymart bike craze.

Ok, best tire on the front for road bikes as a safety factor. Got it. Makes sense, especially since I like to rotate tires from bike to bike sometimes. Never paid that much attention to it before because I can hardly see the tread on a road tire. Front and back always look the same.

Around here a lot of us like to ride front suspension mountain bikes in the city because of the crappy roads, so the opposite would be more appropriate. Any flats I've had have always been on the rear tire, so I usually put the best tire on the back, since it's easier to see which one is best because of the exaggerated tread on mtb tires. Naturally this came about before the cheap full suspension wallymart bike craze.

It's true most flats occur on the rear, but this is because you see something as you roll up and can swerve around the object but your rear trails in a little late hitting it; or your front hits the object pointing it upward but safety got the front past it but now the rear hits it and flats.

And that was the same common sense I used for 10 year, the best on the back due to more flats and flat changes took longer due to the mechanical's on the rear.

But once I figured out that the safety factor was more important then the flat factor then I stopped putting the best on the rear.

Here's a site on MTB tires. Even at this site they recommend putting the best tire on the front and the explanation they give is true for road tires. SEE: http://ezinearticles.com/?Mountain-Bike---About-the-Tires&id=790320

If I have concerns about my front tire I would be replacing it along with the rear. As such I still find rotating useless.

If I have concerns about my front tire I would be replacing it along with the rear. As such I still find rotating useless.

+1