I personally had no trouble in the Ohio winter last winter. Plenty of snow and ice and I never got stuck once. Fwiw, I weigh about 245-250. The question is whether the tires are bad in the snow or if there's simply not enough weight on the front from the little 1.4. Perhaps the hankook optimas would perform admirable in snow with say, a v6 sitting on top of em?
10.27 1/8 mile
That added weight is what would give it increased traction. As long as our front wheels are gripping, the back ones are going to follow the course unless you're driving like andretti in the snow. I had a fwd car's tail come out on me once in the snow, and it was because I was just going too quick. (5 under speed limit but still not enough for the conditions) oops... I think in average safe winter driving, the more weight up front the better. That's just my opinion
10.27 1/8 mile
Yes, but the balance of traction is going to be further offset, because now the rear is even lighter than the front (proportionally). It may make snow handling even worse - that's my point. However, I'm not sure what the our engine weighs vs a v6.
Way back when, we used to shave half of the tread off for auto cross. Tires perform better with lower tread depth. Also they wear better as they get lower in depth. Of course not for wet or winter![]()
You're right, but there's a catch to that. The catch is that new tires with low tread depth perform better. So, shaving tread off makes a lot of sense when used for performance.
As tires wear, natural heat cycles of heating up and cooling, plus exposure to elements degrades rubber. Age is also a factor. With all those factors combined, tires that are naturally worn to 4/32nd will perform noticeable worse than the same tire new, which was shaved down to 4/32nd.
Just went over 72k on my tires this week, will probably be looking or replacements soon.
72k? holy smokes, are they bald??![]()
I changed mine at 72k and they still had 5/32" tread depth!!
:banana: