View Single Post
Old 06-24-2011, 07:23 PM   #17 (permalink)
Varn
Do more with less
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: North Eastern Missouri
Posts: 930

OD - '05 Ford Econoline
90 day: 18.64 mpg (US)

Joetta - '86 Volkswagen Jetta Turbo Oil Burner
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 49.71 mpg (US)

Benzilla - '85 Mercedes Benz 300D
90 day: 28.08 mpg (US)
Thanks: 66
Thanked 177 Times in 112 Posts
As far as safety narrow tires have superior adverse weather traction in my experience.

In the 70s we used to go to the sports car ice races on the big lakes in northern Wisconsin. I was weird seeing the performance cars out there on the 1-2 mile ice tracks wearing extremely narrow tires. It influenced my thinking on vehicle traction my entire adult life.

In bad weather you want to stay at in contact with the tarmac, wide tires inherently will have more frontal area and will plane quicker. If your tire is 8" wide you have a larger potential for hydroplaning than if you have a 4-5" tire.

The trick with a narrow tire is that some of it will stay in contact with the road when the leading edge is planing.

I used to have a 1969 Renault 10. It had great all weather traction and wore 135x15 Michelin X tires. Later I had similar great luck with a 1978 R5 which wore 145x13.

Good handling is not a problem with dry roads. Even my Econoline is safe driving with the stock 235x16 tires.

Bicycles are resistant to hydroplaning because of their high pressure and narrow design. I only had one instance of hydroplanning with it. I was in a 30+ cross wind on a rainy day near the end of a century. I could only go 12 mph before it would skate sideways.
__________________
“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” George Orwell

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed.”

Noah Webster, 1787
  Reply With Quote