If you have to ask the question, you need new tyres, not a discussion about which is less safe. If they are bad enough that you are asking the question, the only real answer is to replace all four.
Please don’t cheap out with tyres.
I know that the so-called “experts” won’t agree but I agree with the OP .
Based on the OP’s original post I would say it is important not to make decisions, especially ones that impact your safety and well being, on “gut instincts”. Researching the facts is most important. Posts, such as EllyEllis above, do not contain factual data but simple opinions. Stick with the facts. If you do your research you will find that all of the facts point to “best tires on the rear”. All other discussions are really opinions or habits that are self-justified using anecdotal evidence or sweeping generalizations that are factually unsupported.
The rear becomes very obvious if you drive in true slippery conditions like snow or ice. Best tires on front mean the rear will swing around since rear lacks the stability and stopping power of fronts. Also cornering it will tend to kick out.
Right, my post above is not factual, it is just my opinion after driving 64 years in Missouri. It does snow some here. I have probably driven more than any of the experts
@TRIEDAQ I hove only had 2 blowouts, on the on the rear tire, motorcycle does not count but I had no problem controlling the van. My info comes from my shop teacher in the 70’s, but that was when radials came into style. I still think I would rather have a rear tire blow out than the front, but do not have the personal experience to back that up. All things considered keep good tread on all 4 then deal with whatever happens.
Elly Ellis…with all due respect, when you have drive just 5 years in central to northern Maine, upstate New York or mountainous areas with winterlong snow conditions, then you automatically become an expert on snow/tire combinations.
When you have to deal with ice and snow, day after day after day…the learning curve is high and the memory or white knuckle times are more acute.
@Triedaq: I agree. I have had both happen to me in my lifetime and I would rather have a front tire go any day if one has to.
Maybe this will help:
I’ve conducted demonstrations where we equipped 3 identical cars with tires of different tread depth.
A) 4 new tires
B) New tires on the rear, shaved to 4/32nds on the front
C) New tires on the front, shaved to 4/32nds on the rear
We have people drive around a large paved skid pad at about 45 mph. It’s a little harder than most people would drive but it serves the purpose.
There is a section of the skid pad that has a 1/8" deep stream of water running across it - about 50 feet long. Just after that is a large paved recovery area. Nothing to hit for a couple hundred feet.
When folks drive Car A, nothing happens.
When they drive Car B, the front tires hydroplane, and the car takes a decided lurch but once it leaves the wetted area, the driver can recover and continuing driving around the circle.
When they drive Car C, the rear comes around and they have no ability to steer the vehicle. They have to wait for the car to come to a complete stop before they can can do anything. By then they are 50 to 100 feet off the circle.
We have done this with FWD and RWD and short wheelbase FWD works best - Car C will turn within the wetted area and continue in a straight, but sideways trajectory.
Literally thousands of people have been through this exercise. Some didn’t believe before they did it - and some had great difficulty reconciling what they experienced with their preconcieved notions. But it is hard to argue when you experience it.
Now we have a definitive answer!
can’t beat visual evidence. Not exactly the scenario you are thinking of, but provides the best demonstration
about 1 minute in: