OMG!! Tires, Promise, not the usual which one ?

[Different Drummer]

Having some sort of on the edge thoughts on my future new tires purchase. Nothing to do with which brand etc. First, the application explanation.
Two wheel drive Crew Cab Laramie with LSD. Mostly driven on the open highway.
HOWEVER, having done a lot of off roading in my past, I sometimes get the urge to go exploring. I am sensible enough to keep my urges under control and within reason. Mostly it might be loose sandy forest service roads, and desert unmaintained gravel roads leading to abandoned mines and things like that. Maybe even driving up a gravel wash occasionally. Loose rutted gravel can get steep at times. No mud or wet sloppy stuff. Anyone who has done much exploring in the desert southwest areas of AZ or south east CA know what I mean.
i.e. The KOFA, WW11 armored training areas, BLM land etc.
So the idea crossed my mind of running different tires front and rear. They would be the same brand, same size of tires but fronts would be the HT version and the rears would be the AT version. An example could be the Continental Terrain Contact HT = front and the Continental Terrain Contact AT = rear. Not being unidirectional they can be rotated side to side. Fronts stay on the front and rears stay on the rear. ( although I suppose I could occasionally run the AT's on the front for a few thousand highway miles )
I have always been very diligent about tire rotation but have never done side to side only.
I know people who never or at best rarely rotate their tires and they seem to get along just fine. Not my choice but plenty of people seem to do it.
Thoughts and comments on rotating side to side only?

 

[ScLeCo]

I have three different sets of wheels/tires, towing, offroad, and every day street.

I know I wouldn't want to run different tires front to back for aesthetic reasons let alone handling and wear rate.
Maybe get another two wheels/tires with the all-terrains and just throw them on when you know you're going off road?

 

[NJMOPAR]

Whether a tire is 'directional' or not is irrelevant to rotating side to side. It's the steel belts in the radial that develop a 'set' being on one side and so shouldn't be put on the other side to avoid stressing the belts.
Back in the polyglas bias ply days side to side was how to rotate, radials changed that.

 

[kurek]

I think you're putting entirely too much thought into this & over-wringing the difference between terraincontact H/T and A/T .

I don't have first-hand experience with the H/T but I'm on my second set of the Continental A/T's - they don't have any deficiencies on the highway that I can tell except maybe being heavy which likely matters more on a small or mid-sized CUV than it does on a truck whose rear axle is probably 450 lbs.

 

[Different Drummer]

I think you're putting entirely too much thought into this & over-wringing the difference between terraincontact H/T and A/T .

I don't have first-hand experience with the H/T but I'm on my second set of the Continental A/T's - they don't have any deficiencies on the highway that I can tell except maybe being heavy which likely matters more on a small or mid-sized CUV than it does on a truck whose rear axle is probably 450 lbs.

Yeah, before I even typed it I said to myself, you'r over thinking this.
Sounds like your saying just get 4 AT's. Actually the HT's probably would do what I need off road also.

 

[Different Drummer]

I have three different sets of wheels/tires, towing, offroad, and every day street.

I know I wouldn't want to run different tires front to back for aesthetic reasons let alone handling and wear rate.
Maybe get another two wheels/tires with the all-terrains and just throw them on when you know you're going off road?

Makes sense if I am going exploring near my home area. However, I may drive 3,000 miles away from home on the highway before I get the itch to tackle a desert wash. I am not going to carry an extra set of tires across country with me. LOL

 

[ScLeCo]

Makes sense if I am going exploring near my home area. However, I may drive 3,000 miles away from home on the highway before I get the itch to tackle a desert wash. I am not going to carry an extra set of tires across country with me. LOL

I wouldn't drive 3000 miles with two different kinds of tires.

 

[Quyonmob]

Whether a tire is 'directional' or not is irrelevant to rotating side to side. It's the steel belts in the radial that develop a 'set' being on one side and so shouldn't be put on the other side to avoid stressing the belts.
Back in the polyglas bias ply days side to side was how to rotate, radials changed that.

Every major tire manufacturer suggests a cross over from side to side in modern radials if the tread is non directional.

 

[Zoe Saldana]

Every major tire manufacturer suggests a cross over from side to side in modern radials if the tread is non directional.

I always go with the X-Pattern

https://www.tirerack.com/images/techCenter/tires/tireRotation_1.png

 

[Different Drummer]

I wouldn't drive 3000 miles with two different kinds of tires.

I certainly agree with that. However, take a look at the Conti. Terrain contact HT and the same tire in the AT. I am not sure that they can be called "two different kinds of tires".
Having said that, it makes sense to just stay with four of one or the other.
Interesting thing is when comparing the two on Tire Rack the HT gets a better rating in traction than the AT. Maybe they mean paved highway traction or perhaps it is a misprint. It is not wet traction because that is another category unto itself.
Kurek is correct in his post. I guess I am having too much time on my hands lately with nothing to occupy me. Thank you CHYNA!

 

[Different Drummer]

Every major tire manufacturer suggests a cross over from side to side in modern radials if the tread is non directional.

I was actually referring to rotating side to side on the same axle, thus changing direction of rotation which would be OK as the design is non directional. This would be necessitated to keep the HT's on the front and the AT's on the rear. I really cannot see where it would be a problem to do this.

 

[ram1500rsm]

As long as the tires are not directional I don't see why not rotate side to side. I'd guess that's how the Bimmer dudes do it with the staggered setups. How about the Vette dudes with 17' wheels front 18"s back ?

Not sure you'll gain anything with HT front and AT rear or vice versa. Other than looking like you got a wrong set of tires front or rear there wouldn't be anything to write a home run about with that setup. And your tires will wear funny for sure.

 

[Travelin Ram]

As an old guy who can remember when 4x4 was less common-everyone didn’t own a four wheel drive just to commute- it used to be common on 2WD trucks to run HT on the front and MT, AT, bar tread on the rear. The right tire for the purpose.

Today it’s more common to see a lifted 2WD sporting 35” MT all around. Fashion.

Heavy commercial trucks still commonly use different tires on steering axle vs drive axles.

 

[bigred90gt]

As an old guy who can remember when 4x4 was less common-everyone didn’t own a four wheel drive just to commute- it used to be common on 2WD trucks to run HT on the front and MT, AT, bar tread on the rear. The right tire for the purpose.

Today it’s more common to see a lifted 2WD sporting 35” MT all around. Fashion.

Heavy commercial trucks still commonly use different tires on steering axle vs drive axles.

I remember that look quite well. It used to be a very popular thing to do. My grandpa had an old early 80's or late 70s Dodge truck with some pretty large mud tires on the back and some small regular tires on the front back when I was a kid in the 80s. It Just made sense being a rear wheel drive. What would you need an aggressive tread on a set of tires that free spun and were not used to drive the vehicle? Having all 4 match is more of a vanity thing than a necessity thing.

 

[bigred90gt]

I wouldn't drive 3000 miles with two different kinds of tires.

Why not? As long as the rears match and the fronts match, and it is a 2wd, there is no issue at all if you can get over the look of it.

 

[tron67j]

I had a 2wd 2500 that I occasionally took off road to get wood, dirt, etc. Replaced good road tires with a more off-road tire as I was hoping to get more traction. Made zero difference in my 2wd other than getting more road noise, as expected.

 

[Different Drummer]

As long as the tires are not directional I don't see why not rotate side to side. I'd guess that's how the Bimmer dudes do it with the stsggerd setups. How about the Vette dudes with 17' wheels front 18"s back ?

Not sure you'll gain anything with HT front and AT rear or vice versa. Other than looking you got the wrong set of tires there wouldn't be anything to write a home run about with that setup. And your tires will wear funny for sure.

Good points in your first paragraph and I am coming around to thinking the same on your second paragraph.
Seems that we ( OK I will speak for my self and say I ) sometimes look for a solution that is not necessary.
Like I said before, just bored I guess.

 

[Different Drummer]

As an old guy who can remember when 4x4 was less common-everyone didn’t own a four wheel drive just to commute- it used to be common on 2WD trucks to run HT on the front and MT, AT, bar tread on the rear. The right tire for the purpose.

Today it’s more common to see a lifted 2WD sporting 35” MT all around. Fashion.

Heavy commercial trucks still commonly use different tires on steering axle vs drive axles.

I remember what you speak of so well. Probably had something to do with why I was thinking about the idea.

 

[Different Drummer]

Why not? As long as the rears match and the fronts match, and it is a 2wd, there is no issue at all if you can get over the look of it.

That was my original thought. As far as looks go, function over looks takes the win for me. Additionally, I am not too sure the looks would be that noticeable between a Conti Terrain Contact HT vs Terrain Contact AT. The foundation tire design appears to be the same for both.

 

[bigred90gt]

That was my original thought. As far as looks go, function over looks takes the win for me. Additionally, I am not too sure the looks would be that noticeable between a Conti Terrain Contact HT vs Terrain Contact AT. The foundation tire design appears to be the same for both.

Definitely. I'm just saying back in my youth, it was very common to see someone with large mud/all terrains on the back, and stock size radials/street tires of some kind on the front. It does not cause any problems with the truck mechanically, so long as the truck is 2wd. 4wd is a different story, as you have two different circumference tires that travel at different revs/mile spinning at the same speed, which will cause major problems. But 2wd, the fronts are free spinning, so revs/mile are meaningless. As long as the left and right sides match in size, there is no problem mechanically.

Think of it like a tractor. Farmers put thousands upon thousands of miles/hours on tractors with radically different size tires on the front and back without any issues. A passenger vehicle is no different functionally speaking, so long as the front (steering) tires are appropriate for the vehicle.