I need to replace my front tires but have decent tread on the rear tires so I'm considering just replacing the front tires to save some cash. I would normally replace all four but since I can't rotate these tires I'm thinking I might as well get some more miles out of the rear tires.

I'm currently running Michelin PS A/S on all four corners of a 2004 Roadster; should I buy two new PS tires for the front, or replace all four with a less expensive brand?

 

It really depends on how much "decent tread" you have on the rear tires. If there's less than 3/32nds remaining, it's probably worth replacing all four tires. Beware of sudden hydroplaning on your ZR if you put new tires up front, but keep the older tires in the back.

 

replace all 4, save the rear 2 for if you have a blowout or in a pinch later

 

Also, by buying a full set, you're not locked into buying the same tires to match the rears. Gives more tire choices to choose from. (Of course, lots of people do mix their tires but I do NOT recommend it. Can lead to unpredictable handling.)

 

The fact that it's staggered is a no no. You never out the new tires in the front. Regardless of drivetrain. So the fact you cant put your old tires to the front means your more safe getting all four

 

Buy new front tires. You are good running these with your serviceable rear tires.

I've done this during the 14 years I have owned my 350z, and I have never had a problem. --Spike

 

This a controversial topic. Cars benefit from having the new tires in the front because new tires are less likely to blow. In highways speeds a front tire blowout is much more dangerous than a rear tire blowout thus one could use this argument to put new tires on the front. Front wheel drive vehicles benefit from putting the better 2 tires in the front because the front tires wear faster. This will allow for a longer life of the tires. All wheel drive should have even tread all around so 4 new tires is necessary every time and frequent rotates. so this argument doesn't really apply to all wheel drive vehicles one way or the other. The negative to having new tires in the front instead of the back is the increased chance of spinning out especially in snow. Im not saying which is better front or rear but there certainly is a logical argument behind both. I am under the impression that all tire shops / mechanic shops will place the new tires in the rear though.

Am i missing any other reason to put the new tires in the rear or the front?

 

Well, while we're getting away from the OP's original question, this DOES bring up an important fact that HRMoneyPit very correctly mentions in his post a couple above and Brook points out in viewing both sides of the argument.

But there really is only one way good tire shops will do it...

Given a square setup (moot point vis a vis Z33) with only two worn tires, where do the new ones go? "HR" is 100% on the money. Always the REAR tires should be replaced (or new on the rear and move the rears to the front).

The reason is simple. It's a matter of control (and yes, it does relate to "performance" as well, e.g., understeer versus oversteer). In any driving situation - and regardless of which wheels are driven - notably in wet driving, worn tires up front will tend to wash out (or lose grip) before the rear and it can be "felt" by the driver and allows for the driver to slow down or dial in more steering to correct. (Classic understeer.)

Conversely, in a situation where the rears are worn to replacement depth of 2/32" (not bald as so many people believe), the rears will be the ones to break grip first and possibly put the car into a spin (or "waaaaay oversteer", if you prefer ) - a situation in which most drivers don't have the reactions nor skills to handle, unlike an understeering/plowing car that can be righted/corrected more easily, as above.

DOT/NHTSA tests have validated this more times than I care to think about and therefore, there are some regulations (not everywhere) that stipulate that a tire dealer cannot replace only fronts WHERE ALL FOUR ARE WARRANTED.

You don't want to know how many times I've had to explain that to irate customers who only thought my sales people were trying to get bigger paychecks by selling full sets of tires. (That's only half the reason.... laff....)

Lost many customers to the cheap, unethical, used tire store down the block through this. But I didn't care. I went to bed without anything on my conscience.

Back to the original question, if OP only needs new fronts then so be it. Not like we have a choice with staggered setup.

 

Thanks for all the replies, I appreciate the info! While the idea of suddenly hydroplaning sounds exciting , I'd rather spend a little more money and have some peace of mind. I think I'll replace all four and enjoy the occasional "spirited" ride home from work without worrying about ending up in a cornfield.

 

Smart choice