Tire (tyre) surveys from the EU
While looking for car safety, I found this UK web page with references to several European tire testing results:
Buying better tyres - Why Better Tyres | Campaign for Better Tyres Some of the government and organizations reports include the following:
After nearly a decade of "noise" about the importance of tire rolling resistance measurements, the USA continues to fall behind. About four years ago, California tested just under 400 tires yet never published the list. Tire Rack writes 'this is important' fluff but again, fails to give any rolling resistance ranking by tire. Only Consumer Reports gives a tire rolling resistance score using their 5-value, scale ... no numbers. Heck, even our EPA has given more 'eyewash' than facts and data about tire rolling resistance. Rather than curse the darkness, this web page is an index of EU tire (tyre) test listing brands and models. Now we may not have the same models but knowing who is doing a good job is a good, first step. Bob Wilson |
...OK, we know which 'brand' knows *how to* make LRR tires, but we still don't know which of their USA tires is good/better/best.
|
I have been thinking about the problem and it occurs to me that there will be a collection of various tires at HybridFest/GreenCarExpo in about eight weeks. Now if someone had a portable, tire tester, Madison would be an ideal place to test a collection of tires.
Bob Wilson |
Quote:
You mean this list? http://www.energy.ca.gov/transportat...95%20MEANS.doc |
Thank YOU!
Working from the URL, I found the transcripts, presentations and the associated spreadsheets: http://www.energy.ca.gov/transportat...uments/#061009 I had given up on the California Energy Commission when I knew they had measured the tires but didn't include a published list. With the 'Governator' in charge and his approach to budgets, I figured he'd zeroed the money needed to report the findings. Thanks, Bob Wilson |
Actually, I think the problem was one of intent. They intended to write a regulation to forbid the sale of tires with high RR values - and they found they couldn't. The physics involved is so complex that simple, easy to understand, easy to administer regulations would not work.
They also discovered that wear, traction, and RR are in a 3 way opposition of each other. That means that if they wanted only low RR tires, they would force people to either buy tires with low traction (Obviously a safety issue) or that wear rapidly (and what do you do with the additional scrap tires?) There was no good answer here. Besides, the Federal Government (NHTSA) stepped in a started to write a regulation - and that would superceed anything done at the state level. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://hiwaay.net/~bzwilson/prius/pri_tire_200.jpg Since we live in North Alabama, braking on ice is rare as the whole area shuts down. As for wet braking, our roads are exceptionally slippery when it rains and it really doesn't matter what tires are on the car. So I went with Sumitomo T4s which happened to be Toyota's replacement tire. They also are sidewall rated at 51 psi. Quote:
Bob Wilson |
Quote:
They wanted to do RR Force, which makes larger tires look worse for RR. but if RRC (Rolling Resistance Coefficient is used larger tires are better - which is the way most folks would look at it. The GSA asked NHTSA to reconsider - and that was a year ago. In the meantimm, NHTSA has gotten tied up with a lot of Toyota issues! |
Quote:
I want "RR Force" but realize it is a function of load. If "RRC" can be multiplied by the load to give "RR Force," I would be satisfied. I need "RR Force" adjusted for current vehicle weight to calculate the energy loss. Bob Wilson |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:39 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com