SEE tires - running fronts backwards for road use

[peakbagger]

While researching for a new addition to the fleet I noticed in the Unimog 1300 operating manual that they recommend that if the unit is used predominately on road that the front tires be swapped so that the tread pattern is reverse of the rear wheels to "provide smoother running while diminishing wear especially in the upper speed range". It does make sense. So the V in the chevron thread point of the front tire digs into the ground when off road but on road the chevron points away from the road when going forward.

I expect if someone has chains for occasional off road use and uses the SEE mostly on road the chains would offset any lost traction from the backward tread front tires.

 

[Special T]

I think the increased wear comes from the tire rotation. Tires with a big void between treads often cup or wear on the back side of the lug. By running the front ones backwards and rotating you would get longer more even wear.

 

[The FLU farm]

It's suggested that R1 ag tires are run "in reverse" for better tread life on pavement, so it makes sense that any chevron pattern would benefit from it.
There's another reason for running the fronts backwards; when/if you get the SEE into a compromised situation and need to back out of trouble, there's now more traction to be had from the front tires. Especially since those situations often occur when the front is lower than the rear.
But anyone using a SEE "predominantly on the road" probably has bigger worries than tire wear.

 

[simp5782]

Just get rid of those crappy tires the unimog has on it. Go to a G177 or a 272. Wont bounce as much and they wear like iron

Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk

 

[peakbagger]

If someone is mostly using a SEE on the road I agree that there are better choices for tires than the Michelins. For off road I think the intent of the Michelins is that they are relatively soft and deformable. In my area when cutting paths I try to cut the trees in the way off close to the ground but I can only get so close without running the chain in the dirt. That means stubs of various sizes sticking up 4 to 6 inches and they can on occasion have sharp edge. I try not leave "punji sticks" but on occasion they happen. I also have a fair share of NH's "renewable" resource, rocks. With a deep frost cycle a person can clear a road completely of rocks and come back next year and it looks like it was never cleared. About the only option is getting a power screen, excavate down to below frost line and then fill the hole back in with the accepts from the screen, then take the pile of rocks left over from the screen and build a stone wall.

In this situation,which is what a SEE was designed for, I think the Michelins are preferable.

 

[The FLU farm]

Peakbagger, here I would respectfully disagree. Completely. For driving over rocks and punji sticks I would much rather be on bias ply tires, with their inherently better conforming carcasses and stronger sidewalls.
Radials have their place, and while the SEE's Michelins aren't a good example, that place is on the pavement.
Not that I've tried, but I suspect that the Michelins would do well in sand, with the rounded crown and mild tread pattern. Which might be why they were chosen.

 

[peakbagger]

Not a problem, I am not an offroader. When I am speculating about a SEE I just revert back to what it was designed for which was combat operations support for a ground war against the Soviet Union in the northern forests of Europe. I expect the terrain is similar to NH which is frozen ground along a few months of with mud.

 

[The FLU farm]

Not a problem, I am not an offroader. When I am speculating about a SEE I just revert back to what it was designed for which was combat operations support for a ground war against the Soviet Union in the northern forests of Europe. I expect the terrain is similar to NH which is frozen ground along a few months of with mud.

Ah, I had no idea that's what the SEE was designed for. I thought it was for the big sandbox. Then the Michelins being the tire of choice makes even less sense to me.
You may not consider yourself an offroader, but it sounds like you do more of it than the majority of decked out four wheel drives get to experience. You just do it more out of necessity than as a hobby, right?

 

[Special T]

What sized tire are we talking about?

 

[The FLU farm]

The Michelins that come on a SEE are 12.5R20.

 

[snowtrac nome]

we also ran tires backwards on grader steering axles for the same reason it helps to prevent cupping

 

[Special T]

The Michelins that come on a SEE are 12.5R20.

That's what I thought. What are the replacement sizes you guys are using? Are you strictly using off-road only farm sizes?

 

[peakbagger]

I am too cheap to buy tires yet I don't need any additional ground clearance. When I need a tire I will probably stick with the same size and see what is best deal.

 

[The FLU farm]

That's what I thought. What are the replacement sizes you guys are using? Are you strictly using off-road only farm sizes?

I have one set of 39.5x16.50-20 Pitbull Rockers on 2-inch widened wheels, and am about to mount a set on 40x13.5-20 Super Swamper TSL II tires on stock 20x11 wheels.
Like peakbagger, I have no need for more ground clearance, but wanted less contact pressure (with the 16.50s) on one SEE, and primarily just wanted to get away from the radials on the other one.
Maybe I wouldn't lose another Michelin sidewall for months, but I rather change tires on my terms than when faced with a flat, wherever/whenever it occurs.
Those tires mentioned above are DOT approved, but since I rarely stray onto pavement, that doesn't really mean anything to me.
Also, most Michelins I've seen on SEEs and HMMHs are way past their "Best by" date, so especially if venturing out on public roads, I wouldn't want to run them.

 

[Special T]

Cool I was wondering if those tires would have enough carrying capacity to do the job. I have a buddy that is in a similar situation with his Mog but those wheels are too wide for the 1200R20 xml truck tires and the 395s are to large. The 14.5x20 ag or the Mich xlz are too scarce up here for an inexpensive replacement. Those 4x4 tires are not cheap either new, but it's good to know they are a possibility.

 

[The FLU farm]

Well, there's technically only a 200-lb. margin per tire on a 16,000-lb. SEE, but I've been assured by the owner of Interco that there's a healthy margin in that tire's load rating.
I was primarily concerned with the big lateral loads they can be subjected to when scooting the rear end around with the backhoe, but told not to worry. Time will tell.
Besides, it's not like a SEE is going to subject any tire to much high speed driving - which builds heat, which kills tires.

 

[Special T]

If I might ask why did you go the Super Stomped route instead of a ag/industrial tire?

 

[The FLU farm]

I searched for something ag/industrial for quite a while, but failed (something I'm pretty good at) to find something suitable.
Had I made it to SEMA last year, chances are good that I would've found several options, but I failed in accomplishing that, too.