[itsnice2be]

Does this logic make sense to anyone else?
You rotate your new tires at 5000 miles as suggested. Now when you get to 10000 miles, shouldn't the wear on all 4 tires be exactly the same. (5000 miles on the front and 5000 on the rear) That being the case, why rotate them at 10000 miles. Wouldn't it make sense to do the next rotation at 15000 miles, skip rotating at 20000 miles for the same reason and then rotate again at 25000 miles.
I thought of this after my dealer told me they charge $24.95 to rotate the tires.

 

[hyperion]

This is my first Toyota and this is the way Toyota does it and my service manager was "VERY" adamant about this. Also is in the scheduled maintanence guide I believe for every model they make.
All my previous cars have had the suggestion to rotate at some signs of wear and that usually occurs at about 20,000 miles on the front tires if the cars alignment is correct.

 

[Hep]

Does this logic make sense to anyone else?
You rotate your new tires at 5000 miles as suggested. Now when you get to 10000 miles, shouldn't the wear on all 4 tires be exactly the same. (5000 miles on the front and 5000 on the rear) That being the case, why rotate them at 10000 miles. Wouldn't it make sense to do the next rotation at 15000 miles, skip rotating at 20000 miles for the same reason and then rotate again at 25000 miles.
I thought of this after my dealer told me they charge $24.95 to rotate the tires.

You are essentially switching to 10,000 miles after the first 5K. Probably that wouldn't be a big deal. I think the biggest benefit of 5K rotation is that the tires will at get inspected and pressurized at least that often. For some people it will be the only time the tires are looked at or thought about.

 

[wayneswhirld]

It depends on how tires are normally rotated. If from just front to rear to front, then I think this would be a money saving deal. But if diagonally and then across, then diagonally, etc., then it should be every 5,000 for optimal wear. I'm not sure of the tire rotation sequence that's normally used. I'll find out from my Toyota dealer and go from there.

Another related issue is I probably should have marked the position my OEM tires were in before mounting snows (on separate wheels) for the winter. Going back to OEMs, I won't know what rotation they were before.

 

[hyperion]

Your owners manual has an indexed page concerning tire rotation along with diagrams.
And you are correct. On any wheels with balancing weights applied, it is a smart idea to mark all seasonal tires before removing. If you had it done at a commercial store you can be assured "it was done." If the weights were changed upon the application of snow tires, it will have to be done again.

 

[wayneswhirld]

Thanks, Hyp...I looked at the stored OEMs and they did mark their positions. And checking the '05 owner's manual on page 295, the rotation illustration shows front to rear only, so I think itsnice2be's suggestion is a good one (and I'm vigilant about inflation so I won't forget), unless someone can say otherwise.

 

[DanMan32]

And if you look at the Goodyear warranty manual, it says cross 'em.

 

[DanMan32]

All I am saying is, there's different sound viewpoints on the issue.

Crossing is clearly better if nothing prohibits it from being worse because of the change in tire direction, since the tire would then experience the wear given by each wheel location. I would think a tire manufacturer would be best at saying whether a tire regularly changing direction is harmful to its integrity or not.

I honestly don't see a problem with crossing them, especially if the manufacturer of the tire says it is OK, as then each tire will get the same wear. This is especially true of independent suspension, where it is possible for just one wheel to be out of specs and wear abnormally compared to the other 3.

But if you're not comfortable with crossing them, then going front to back should be nearly as good without the risk.

 

[hyperion]

And Goodyear is just selling a tire. Not driving a Japanese hybrid. I expect Toyota must have some reason for advising front to back and no cross changing as they did on the "classic" models.
Then again, tire rotation, like oil and air pressure is a personal choice and the imagination is a wonderfull thing.

 

[DanMan32]

What does being a Toyota Hybrid have to change the characteristics of how a TIRE is handled? From what I have observed, all cars have wheels, tires and suspensions. The Goodyear Integrity is not specific to the Prius, nor is the Prius specific to the Integrity; you can put other makes and models of tires on the Prius, and other cars use the Integrity.

 

[KTPhil]

Depending on the amount of toe-in on a given wheel, you can get a sawtooth effect on the segments of tire tread (when viewed from the side, not from behind).

Rotating without crossing will not even out such wear. Perhaps they found the Classic created such wear, and wanted to cross rotate to even it out. Maybe the new models don't exhibit this effect, and are fine with non-crossing rotation. Just a theory.

But the car can change how the tire wears in this respect. Front to back evens out camber-induced wear, but not toe-induced wear. Cross rotation changes the rotation direction, and this can even out the sawtooth treadwear.

(edit: above observations are from old VWs which had wildly variable rear camber, and typically maladjusted rear toe, exaggerating the above effects. I do not know of the better geometry of the Prius suspension has these effects to any level of significance.)

 

[hyperion]

Sorry DanMan I disagree with you here. I'm sure Toyota looked at many tires before choosing the Integrities for the Prius and for some reason chose with this car to change the procedure they used with the Japanese tires used on the Classic. If you don't believe the Prius is a different breed of car than a Coralla which I know has an entirely different braking system then I have no point, but there certainly has to be a reason for the change made by Toyota. Whatever the reason, my bet they would state in the manual the same thing even if the car was delivered from the factory with Michelins.
Hey, tires are a personal thing. You go with what makes you happy. If you have no set opinion and like what the kid at Goodyear recommends, "go with it" If you are looking for a benchmark, Toyota has placed one in the owners manual.

 

[ken1784]

Thanks, Hyp...I looked at the stored OEMs and they did mark their positions. And checking the '05 owner's manual on page 295, the rotation illustration shows front to rear only, so I think itsnice2be's suggestion is a good one (and I'm vigilant about inflation so I won't forget), unless someone can say otherwise.

It is interesting that the Japanese owner's manual is written on different way.
http://gazoo.com/nvis/im/torisetu/2506/M47516_7_1.pdf
On page 7 of the PDF file or page no.358, it says...
FL-(straight) -> RL -(cross)-> FR -(straight)-> RR -(cross)-> FL rotation.

[email protected]

 

[wgaustria]

On page 7 of the PDF file or page no.358, it says...
FL-(straight) -> RL -(cross)-> FR -(straight)-> RR -(cross)-> FL rotation.

[email protected]

Hi Ken!

Were can the rest of Japanese owner manual be found?

Walter

 

[DanMan32]

When it comes to the ground to the axle, yes, it is about the same as any other car. How the brake shoes are controlled may be different, but that doesn't change how the tire interacts with the ground.

 

[ken1784]

Were can the rest of Japanese owner manual be found?

Walter,

The base link is...
http://gazoo.com/auto/torisetupdf/2506/index.asp

The top page of PDF file is...
http://gazoo.com/nvis/im/torisetu/2506/M47516_a.pdf

Enjoy,

[email protected]

 

[hyperion]

When it comes to the ground to the axle, yes, it is about the same as any other car. How the brake shoes are controlled may be different, but that doesn't change how the tire interacts with the ground.

.
.
.I suggest that every car has a differant suspension system and most are designed with a cost factor in mind. The Prius does not have a Ferrari or Corvette suspension system and does not because of cost and of course because it is not necessary in a small family sedan and the cost would be prohibitive and a waste. The suspension in the Prius was designed as such to keep the cost of the car around twenty thousand dollars but I'm sure it is considerably different from that of something like the Highlander and as such probably has been outfitted with a differant tire both in cost and size. And of course in tire pressure which alone would explain any differances in suspension. Try to get 35 front and 33 rear in your tires without specifying it at tire rotations or oil lubes. You will find Toyota putting in 26 just like they do in all their other models.
The Prius does operate under differant requirements. The air pressure itself is part of the suspension system and should be adhered to for much more than milage. Change it, and you change your suspension whether you add air for extra milage or by mistake Toyota removes air to be standard with the rest of their medium size sedans.
.
.
.

 

[DanMan32]

The added air pressure is due to the added weight. Otherwise, it is like any other car.

 

[wgaustria]

Walter,

The base link is...
[email protected]

ありがとう Ken!

Walter

 

[hyperion]

The added air pressure is due to the added weight. Otherwise, it is like any other car.

.
.Best I could determine by "googling" Gross weight of Prius "3795lbs"
.
Gross weight of Camry "4486 lbs" ----- I do not believe the Camry specifies more tha 32 psi and probably closer to 26 for ride purposes. I believe the Prius went to the higher pressures as a balance between handling, roadability, comfort and the necessity for higher milage figures.
I believe you surely gain in milage figures by super inflating to 44 psi but you have to be loosing something in the other designed considerations in the Prius suspension system. The 35/33 specified by Toyota is probably a "happy medium."
My old Cadillac weighs in at over 5,000 lbs and yet I am told to keep 26psi in my Goodyear Eagle high performance tires. (course I grant you, tires do come in all sizes so air pressure will become a different designed in feature, as will the footprint.)
.
.
.