On 7/28/2017 3:44 PM, Roy Tremblay wrote:
> What do you think about the 4-tire rotation pattern below?
> X > H > X > H year 1
> X > H > X > H year 2
> etsetera
>
> Basic assumptions:
> Assume the alignment is within spec.
> Assume the fronts consistently wear differently than do the rears.
> Assume that F->B differential wear is symmetric per axle.
> Assume the spare is a donut and therefore out of the picture.
> Assume a rotation every change of seasons (about 4K miles roughly).
> Assume bidirectional tread.
> Assume whitewalls on one side (otherwise I could flip them on the rim).
> Assume USA crowns, which is to say almost no crown most of the time.
>
> How does the logic of this X > H > X > H rotation pattern look to you?
>
> Assume tires go on in year 1, front to back, numbered:
> 1 2
> |
> 3 4
>
> The first X-pattern rotation in Spring of year 1 gets us:
> 4 3
> |
> 2 1
>
> The H pattern in Summer of year 1 gets us to:
> 2 1
> |
> 4 3
>
> The X pattern of Fall of year 1 gets us to:
> 3 4
> |
> 1 2
>
> And then, finally, the Winter H pattern of year 1 gets us back to:
> 1 2
> |
> 3 4
>
> At the end of the year, with this X > H > X > H pattern I devised, I think
> the tires would have been on every combination but always as a set per axle
> because my fronts wear differently than do my rears.
>
> If I flip them on the rim, does that help in giving me rotation options?
>


Far too much thought into it. I've rotated front to back and nothing
more. If the car has proper alignment, the tires wear fairly even all
around with proper rotation. Without rotation, the front's usually wear
sooner due to the turning.