|
I didn't know about RR testing accounting for bearing drag, do you have a link to the equipment/procedure behind this? While you don't have any more data, and you have no reason to believe that other tires behave any differently, you also have no reason to believe that other tires don't behave any differently. For one, your sample data set is way too small to draw conclusions about a larger population, and two, even with the small set that you used to validate your assumption, the author of the data you're using came to a different conclusion, that simple physical characteristics are not enough to predict the RRC. You just don't have enough data to make any definitive statements about how tires in general behave. You can assume they behave in a certain way, but that's not scientific. It would be like assuming that everywhere in the world is above 100F in the summer, going to death valley for your first data point, then assuming that everyplace else is like death valley in the summer. Not that you're wrong about your assumption per say, you could be right, just that you don't know, and saying bigger = better as a quantitative statement is wrong in the sense that you can't know that w/o a lot more data. It's fine as an assumption, but presenting it as anything other than that is not scientific. I'm not saying this to be harsh, just to illustrate the difference between what someone can reasonably assume and what they can't reasonably assume in the scientific sense.
|