I plan to get some new tires for our coach. The front tires (Michelin X-line Energy, load rating G) were new last year. I planned to move these two to the back and buy two more G rated Michelins for the back to match them as closely as possible. And buy two H rated tires for the front.
But one of the dealers here in Tucson thought that was a bad idea and that I should buy four H rated tires. That way one side in back would be H and the other side G rated. He thought having 4 H rated tires would allow me to rotate the four tires and get better wear. I really didn't like this idea because I would have two different pressures on the back tires.
What do you think of his idea? And does it sound OK to go with H rated tires in front and G rated tires in back.
Thanks in advance for any advice.
Gs in the rear, Hs on the front are just fine. As far as rotating is concerned, unless your rear wheels are polished on both sides the tires would have to be remounted. IMHO not worth it.
It is probably OK but as soon as you have 4 Gs in the rear you are stuck with them. If you are thinking in six years replace then with Hs what happens if you have a tire problem between now and then? You can't replace it with an H. Find a buyer for the Gs, get 6 Hs.
Every three years I buy 2 or 4 tires. Spread out the cost. And I always have front steer tires that are no more than three years old.
Rotate? we never get enough miles on our coaches to worry about rotating. Your G's on the back and new H's on the front are the way to go.
They will age out before you need to worry about rotating them. I personally would not want to combine a G and H rated tire on the same dual. Not sure if you would run the same pressure in both or inflate to the proper pressure per the manufacture chart for each rating.
All G rated on the rear or as suggested .... all six H rated.
I never rotate RV tires. They age out before they wear out. H in front and G in back should be fine if you have checked the load ratings and with proper inflation.
Long term goal should probably be H all the way around - but front axle is the critical one.
Why do you need H rated? It will ride rougher.
We switched from LRG to LRH and think the ride improved noticeably. Much better cross wind stability. LRG will not be sufficient to carry maximum axle loads especially in the front. The only way to know which tires to use is to weight the coach in its normal in-use state.
George with all the 1st class upgrades you are making to your new coach, buy LR-H. Ask no more. You will not be sorry or have future regrets. What tire dealer are you going to use.
Obviously it depends on the RV. My 34' 270 is pretty light. I'm not even close to capacity of the G's.
Thanks, everyone.
Barry, I'm thinking about using Redburn Tire of Tucson. The estimate I got was the lowest of the two I checked and the person I talked to actually listened to what I wanted (two G and two H). Both quoted FMCA prices, but Redburn had slightly lower labor costs.
We had this setup on our '03 and it worked well. Same deal... when we bought that U295 coach it also had G load rating tires on it. So I traded in the two fronts on H rating tires and had no problems.
If you go with the 2 new G's have them mounted on the same side in the rear. Otherwise the diameter difference causes tire wear. There is no issue on the differential doing this. I have always bought my tires in pairs on the crane as it gave me the most bang for the buck. I did wear tires out before aging.
Redburn is a quality act, they did our Michelins in Phoenix. They 'force balanced' ours. ^.^d
Roger in Reply #7 you said:
"We switched from LRG to LRH and think the ride improved noticeably. Much better cross wind stability."
This really surprises me!
What brand of tires did you replace, what brand of tires did you buy, and what pressures are running?
Roger in Reply #7 you said:
"LRG will not be sufficient to carry maximum axle loads especially in the front."
I do not believe this statement! It indicates that Foretravel put undersized tires on George's 2000 U295 which has a GVWR of 33,000 pounds. My 1996 U320 has a GVWR of 32,000 and the tire pressure placard beside the driver seat indicates 97psi front, 90psi rear, while the maximum pressure for "G" rated tires is 110psi, so "G" tires on the front of my U320 could carry 12% more load than they do. This does not seem like overload to me.
The reason I have resisted replacing my "G" tires with "H" tires is the firmer ride that other folks have reported with "H" tires.
Now you indicate a softer ride with "H" tires which I am very interested in.
I considered replacing my 275 80 tires with 305 70 Michelin XRV tires but there are very few 305 70 tires in the market so finding an emergency replacement could be impossible.
I would also be concerned about the much wider tires interfering with body and suspension components like the drag link (or really negatively affecting cut angle).
I use different tires on each axle Steer tires on the front and drive tires on the rear, So long as you are within the load rating of the tire stay with it. Rotating tires is not needed with the low miles we put on our coaches. Do not mix load ratings on the same axle.
Keith
Likely quite the opposite when it comes to "Why do you need H rated? It will ride rougher"
LR-H can carry more weight and PSI, which means when you put in the correct PSI for the weight of the coach, we will not be pushing tire to max capacity.
Also loads on a tire from our 30,000 + vehicles are not just scale weight. Consider side wind, PSI lower than optimum at any time due to higher altitude, cold temp, leakage, etc... Always allow for a safety margin
LR-G may be ok, but don't assume there are disadvantages to LR-H other than cost.
Minus 10 psi all around going from g to h greatly increased the ride quality on square edged bumps.
Bottom line IF LR G are sufficient to carry the actual load they will perform just fine properly inflated. LR H will carry the same load at a lower pressure. 99% of folks won't be able to tell the difference. As far as brand is concerned, blindfolded I'll bet one in ten could tell the difference in one brand or the other. Sorry for the rant, I'm done. In the end as always DWMYFG.
Wyatt. The maximum load for the LRG tires that we on our coach was less that the GAWR for the front. We were weighed at under the front GAWR but very close to the max load of the G tires on one side. Plenty of weight room in the rear. So we switched to LRH. As I said ride and handling improved especially in windy conditions.
Michelin LRG tires at 110 psi carry 6175 each or 12,350. Front axle weight rating in my coach is 13,880 as I reacall. LRH at 120 psi carry 7,160. At 100 psi they carry 6190.
I have no idea who put what or why or at what pressure on George's coach or what his GAWRs are. My guess is the LRG tires are undersized tires as far as GAWR and maybe inflated about as needed for an empty coach to feel good.
I know my coach is not over weight on any corner and I know my LRH tires can carry the weight. Good enough for me. Everyone else gets to do what they want, please don't have a blow out in front of me.
The front axle is 13,880 and the rear 21,000
"As far as brand is concerned, blindfolded I'll bet one in ten could tell the difference in one brand or the other. "
My real world experience says otherwise. I felt an immediate degradation in steering when I switched from Michelin to Continental. In the first 10 miles I knew I preferred the Michelin steering by FAR.
Now on tag and drive I expect it would be true to be hard to tell the difference. On steer axle the difference was immediately and dramatically noticeable. So much so that I will be changing back to Michelin on steer within the next year. (they were installed Mar 2018)
A number of factors here:
Old (more cross-links/stiffer) vs new (more pliable rubber)
Tires not yet "broken in". Handling, particularly during the first few hundred miles is more "squirrely"
Tread pattern and tread depth differences
Also a decrease in fuel economy with new tires for several thousand miles if both sets are the newer lower rolling resistance types.
"New, Full-Treaded Tires Generate More Rolling Resistance Than Shallow-Treaded, Worn Tires. ... Since the automotive industry estimates a 10% increase in tire rolling resistance will result in a 1% to 2% decrease in vehicle fuel economy, drivers should expect to experience a potential 2% to 4% decrease in mpg."
Pierce
The bolded info above has always not set well with me. The air supports the weight. How can the same size tire hold more weight at the same PSI? So I started doing some research and stumbled upon this guy's post (which I presume he is actually a tire engineer/expert).
A Little Confused Over G vs H Rated Tires And Load/Inflation Data -- Updated... (https://community.fmca.com/topic/3692-a-little-confused-over-g-vs-h-rated-tires-and-loadinflation-data-updated-at-end/)
EDIT: I suggest reading the FMCA thread I linked. Lots of interesting information.
Michelin 275/80R22.5 (H) tires require 10lbs less PSI to support the same weight as a comparable Continental tire. 10lbs less PSI up front is meaningful to me on roads like I-10 in Louisiana.
It is always easy to find some information to support any thinking, right or wrong. I was just quoting right out of the Michelin pressure/load charts. Tires have different designs, different stiffnesses, different sidewalls. Load capacity is likely based on lots more parameters than just air pressure. It is way over simplified to just assume all tires at some psi will carry the same load. Use what the tire manufacturer's inflation charts say.
Of all the things in your coach tires are probably the most important for your safety. Why cut corners?
I had the new tires installed yesterday at Redburn (Tucson). This is a small facility relative to others, but they handle mainly large truck tires and my job was nothing unusual. One thing they mentioned is that the front tires (LRG) are "steer tires" and will wear a bit faster in the back (put them on the passenger side). I doubt this will be a problem given how much tread was left on the old tires (from 2013). As planned I put two LRH tires in front. I went for a short drive after the install and the coach steers even better than before... I can take my hands off the wheel and it tracks straight. This is not a big change, but I think it is better than it was. They used a Norbar to torque the lug nuts to 475 foot-pounds. It took about 3 hours for the install but I was able to watch and ask questions. Also, the store is near the Davis-Monthan Air Force base and it was fun watching the A10s come in to land. Lots of them.
My fronts on our fully loaded 97 320 are at 97 psi.
Rears are 87.
Both from the Michelin charts.
More than a few pounds low is noticeable to me as is more than a few pounds high.
The other tire brands long ago did not show as much difference in ride and handling as do the Michelin's.
I found long ago it was worth the time to get them exactly right.
That way any other changes are noticeable. At least to me.
George's comment on not cutting corners i my case applies to the battery systems