Dear mid-60s Buick tire caregivers,
I've still got to make up my mind on the tire upgrade for my trusty 1965 Buick Special wagon. The only uncertainty is whether or not to go with fatter tires on the rear. I'm still not sure there is any advantage, but I'm pondering if there is any real disadvantage either.
If you have all 4 tires of the same size you can rotate them. That's a good idea on a car that gets a lot of miles, but does it make much of a difference for a classic car that cannot be driven very many miles? I promised Hagerty's I would not drive more than 2000 miles a year, and at the moment, I doubt I'll even get close to that. So the limiting factor on tire life will be most likely aging that will occur even if the car isn't driven. There is an article on the Hagerty website that suggests a limit of 8 years for tire life:
https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2014/03/21/shredded-tireIf you want a second opinion, there is this article from the TireRack.com that gives a life expectancy of around 6-10 years:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=138So that's two similar numbers and is consistent with my own experience. If you take the upper limit of 10 years, then you'll never put more than 20,000 miles on a tire when the tread life warranties run from 30,000 to 100,000 miles. As far as I can tell, a classic car will never wear out its tires so long as it is kept in good mechanical condition.
So as far as I can tell, so long as you keep your front end in good condition and well-aligned, you have essentially nothing to gain from rotating your tires.
What do you guy's think? Am I overlooking something obvious?
Opinions solicited!!Cheers, Edouard
P.S. That still isn't a reason for different tires front and back, but it does at least make it plausible.
