My experience in this situation is most shops won't rotate the less tread life to the front. More liability for the shop.

Since the rears are closer to end of life, best to buy new set of tires and sell 6/32" set to try to recoup some money for new set.

How are road conditions currently? Less snow than last year or more than before?

 

Eh... they're close enough that I would leave the front tires on the front, so that they get worn down faster. Then replace all 4 tires at once when you need to.

You're supposed to put the better tires on the back, as you pointed out.

On my Honda that I purchased used last year, it came with two very new tires and two slightly more worn (but still plenty of tread) tires. I had them rotated for a separate vibration issue, but I've since decided to put the newer tires in front until they wear to the same level as the rear ones. I've always purchased 4 tires at once.

If you had two brand new tires with 11/32" and two tires with 4/32", then I would probably recommend putting the newer tires in the back like you're supposed to, and then just getting 2 new tires when the oldest ones wear out. In your case, I'd try to get them to wear together so I could replace all 4 at the same time.

 

75aces-
The signs in the Discount Tires stores I've visited, say to always put the new tires on the rear. Probably that's because in wet/snowy weather, a spinout from losing rear traction is more dangerous, than understeer or not getting moving at all from losing front traction.

 

Oh, my bad. That's for the one with lower tread on the drive wheels.

 

The drive wheels with FWD should have the better tires for traction and steering response. Rotating tires front to rear and back is the way to go to increase tread life and insure equal wear. Here in snow country, its standard practice with car dealers and tire shops to rotate tires front to back on the same side of vehicle. The old method of crisscrossing tires is no longer used since the spare is not a real tire.

 

Rotating tires should be done with 2 fronts going straight back, and the 2 rears criss-crossing to the front. Meaning, driver front goes to driver rear and pass front goes to pass rear. Driver rear goes to pass front, and pass rear goes to driver front. That way, the tires experience wear at all 4 corners for more even wear.

Passenger and driver sides can experience different rates of wear, especially since the weight is different and most drivers tend to make right turns faster than left ones.

 

Leave them, they were probably rotated recently, like my wife's car. I like the better tires on the front but winters here are fairly mild. My objective is to have all 4 worn out at the same time, she has 48k on the original tires on her car.

 

Drive wheels get the best tires

 

We live near snowy-rainy Chicago.
Our daughter just bought a 2016 Corolla LE and it came with Michelin all season tires.
The front tires are 6-7 /32" tread depth, and the rears are more worn at 4-5 /32" tread.
The dealer is willing to rotate the tires front-rear for us or leave them where they are; our choice.

Normal practice is to put the tires with most tread on the rear, to reduce any tendency to slide or fishtail in poor traction.
But if we leave the good tires up front, that will help her get moving in snow. Most front wheel drive cars wear the front tires faster, so she could end up with equal tread front and back, by the time they are worn out.

What is your experience and suggestion?
Thanks!

Those are close enough that I wouldn't worry about it but I never would go into a winter with any tires at 6/32 or less as that is asking for trouble. I would purchase a set of winter tires since you live in Chicago. I did that for my daughter years ago so that she was safe going back and forth to college in her 2008 Yaris. I mounted them on the OEM steel wheels and bought her a set of new alloy wheels for her 3 season tires.

 

Michelin says their compound/tread design is good until the tire is worn to very low levels... something like 3/32". I remember this was the case for the Premiers I used to have... not sure if it applies to the Defenders I have now. The tire performed very well in snow conditions, even when worn. I was more confident driving in the winter with my one Camry that had Premiers at probably 4/32" or so, than my other Camry that had Bridgestone Ecopias that were at 9/32" or so. Obviously, the more tread, the better, and snow tires are probably a good idea if you're going to drive a lot in the snow, but I think replacing Michelins at 6/32" is a little premature. Just my 2 cents.

 

Hydroplanning risk goes up a lot in as a tire wears down. I wouldn't want to use a tire in the wet season with 4/32" but it would be fine in the dry season. Those seasons are different depending on wear you live. A/S tires are average at best in snow and it's just not worth it. For anyone that lives in an area that receives snow it would be dangerous to use a tire with 4/32". The Premier is the only tire designed to be okay as the tread wears down to be okay in the wet. The tread blocks get smaller and the channels get bigger to help with water but dry performance does get worse. Even though Michelin says that their compound is okay down to 3/32" it won't handle any where near as good and snow traction will never be as good as a winter tire will be, even when the A/S tire is brand new.

 

After having my father in law turned down by Michelin with 90% of the tread left on his tires (dry rot at 5 years), I take anything they say with a huge grain of salt. My aunt had a set put on her 1965 Cadillac when the OE bias ply tires wore out in 6k miles and the Michelins lasted 13 years to 70 k miles before she had them replaced due to dry rot (car was garage kept).

Reputations like Michelin and Toyota can become liabilities when the corporate officers decide to sacrifice their reputations for greater profits. Seen it happen many times over my 70 years. There are numerous examples of reputations that once were impeccable and then declined when management decided what GM said in the 50s and 60s when they stated " what's good for general motors is good for the USA". They had 600,000 employees at the time and today are just a shadow of the corporate giant they were when they had 50% of the US market share.

 

After having my father in law turned down by Michelin with 90% of the tread left on his tires (dry rot at 5 years), I take anything they say with a huge grain of salt. My aunt had a set put on her 1965 Cadillac when the OE bias ply tires wore out in 6k miles and the Michelins lasted 13 years to 70 k miles before she had them replaced due to dry rot (car was garage kept).

Reputations like Michelin and Toyota can become liabilities when the corporate officers decide to sacrifice their reputations for greater profits. Seen it happen many times over my 70 years. There are numerous examples of reputations that once were impeccable and then declined when management decided what GM said in the 50s and 60s when they stated " what's good for general motors is good for the USA". They had 600,000 employees at the time and today are just a shadow of the corporate giant they were when they had 50% of the US market share.

That's why I get my tires from Discount Tire as I've had them take care of tire swaps for me and they dealt with it on the back end. I had a set of Continental tires get bulges in all 4 tires over a period of a year after I'd had them a few years. They replaced 3 of them over that year and when the 4th tire did the same thing they replaced all 4 with some new Yokohama tires for no charge. This is why they get my business. Best price. Best service.