"Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote in message
news:Qb6dnTkFDb9hGi3fRVn-gQ@ez2.net...[color=blue][color=green]
>> Jeff, pasted from one of your earlier posts, you said:
>>
>> "Rotating might fix it, IF they balance the tires at the same time.
>> Rotating alone will only move the vibration from one place to another."
>>[color=darkred]
>> >
>> > The car works good, but the tires are worn.
>> > New tires are purchased.
>> > The car now shakes.
>> > There is a suggestion to rotate the tires.
>> > I suggest that the rotation might help, but is more likely to help if[/color][/color]
> the[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > tires are rebalanced at the same time.
>> >
>> > I go on to suggest that rotating and balancing may have no affect if a
>> > tire
>> > is defective, but a defective tire on the back may not be felt as[/color][/color]
> readily[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > as
>> > a defective tire on the front.
>> >
>> > Then, you come along and say pretty much the same thing.[/color]
>>
>> We are not saying the same thing. Mabe this is splitting hairs, but
>> rotating tires is not part of the cure and has nothing to do with the[/color]
> cure.[color=green]
>> The only part of the cure is balancing the tires. If the tires are[/color]
> properly[color=green]
>> balanced, then whether or not you rotate the tires will not make the
>> least
>> bit of difference.
>>[/color]
>
>
> You are taking a reply out of context. I did not introduce tire rotation
> as
> a sole solution, somebody else said that. I REPLIED that a rotation might
> fix the problem IF <an all caps "if"> the tires are rebalanced at the same
> time.
>
> I did concede the point that it is possible -- however remote -- that a
> shaking tire on the front might not be felt if moved to the rear. But,
> this
> was also a point that was introduced by somebody else, not me.
>[/color]
Maybe my Catholic school English has made me a little too anal on "if-then"
logic statements. If one takes the statement "Rotating might fix it, IF
they balance the tires at the same time" and re-state as an if-then
statement, it would read: "If they balance the tires at the same time, THEN
rotating might fix it". Your suggested fix has 2 components or variables -
rotating and balancing. What I'm saying is, the only component or variable
that is actually contributing to the cure is balancing, and rotating is
irrelevant.
The relationship between rotating tires and balancing a wheel/tire assembly
is the same as the relationship between rotating tires and fixing a slow
leak in a tire. The statement "rotating tires might fix a slow leak if you
patch the hole in the tire" is not a logical one. If you rotate the tires,
then the slow leak moves from one end of the car to another, but it is still
leaking. The exact same thing is true of tire balance.
My point is, tire rotation is not part of the fix at all, whether a tire
balance is included or not. When you are chasing a vibration, rotating the
tires can help identify the problem wheel but it does not contribute to the
cure. If the tires and wheels were balanced on the vehicle, then rotating
them could actually cause a vibration.
If, as you're suggesting, a vibration is cured by rotating and balancing the
tires at the same time, then logically, the next time the tires are rotated,
the vibration would re-appear.
I do agree 100% with your bottom line, which is that the OP should go back
to where the tires were purchased for a proper balance.
I'll give some related advice to anyone who is going to bring their vehicle
in for service, and that is to tell the service advisor what the vehicle is
doing as completely as possible WITHOUT suggesting or recommending a cause
or cure. If someone goes back to the tire shop and asks them to rotate and
balance the tires, there is a good chance that the shop will charge to
rotate the tires because it is unrelated to the repair.
--
Ray O
correct the return address punctuation to reply
Linear Mode
