04-21-2011, 01:29 PM
|
#41 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 65
Thanks: 6
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
|
If I have two bicycles with the same tread but one with wide tires and the other with narrow tires, would doing a coast down comparison be a fair test of the theory?
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
04-23-2011, 03:27 PM
|
#42 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,268
Thanks: 24,393
Thanked 7,360 Times in 4,760 Posts
|
width
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngrimm
If I have two bicycles with the same tread but one with wide tires and the other with narrow tires, would doing a coast down comparison be a fair test of the theory?
|
My opinion is that it would take a wind tunnel with extremely accurate load cells to be able to pull out the difference.Your own body is the largest drag contributor and its interference drag would play into at least the drag of the rear tire.
Technically however,the narrow tire would tunnel out with the lower CdA.
|
|
|
04-23-2011, 05:35 PM
|
#43 (permalink)
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 161 Times in 107 Posts
|
There are several MB models where they specify different CD numbers for the base skinny tire version vs the optioned up big engine big tire version.
C220 coupe 0.24
C350 coupe 0.27
|
|
|
04-23-2011, 05:48 PM
|
#44 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 16,268
Thanks: 24,393
Thanked 7,360 Times in 4,760 Posts
|
skinny/wide
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjts1
There are several MB models where they specify different CD numbers for the base skinny tire version vs the optioned up big engine big tire version.
C220 coupe 0.24
C350 coupe 0.27
|
Yeah,my CRX was that way.Porsche 911s ditto.Trans Am Firebird.
One caveat.The wider tire may get it flush with the flanks of the car,reducing some turbulence,buying back some gain over the increase in frontal area.
|
|
|
04-29-2011, 12:22 AM
|
#45 (permalink)
|
live, breath, Isuzu-Ds
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: oregon
Posts: 231
Thanks: 1
Thanked 20 Times in 17 Posts
|
comparing 33"X12.50X15 to 33"X9.50X15 tires on a older SUV with about 100hp.
the tires had the same tred lay out, and where very aggressive about 20/32" of tread.
there was on average a 3 mpg difference
0.01C
__________________
1 86 T\D trooper with rare GEN 3 rods TRANS FIXED NOW DD
1 86 4WD 5sp pup is 2.3L gas, but plan on 2.2L diesel repower
1 91 trop, long term plan is a group buy of imported Isuzu 4JB1-T 2.8L I-4 engines, hoping to get price down to 2K not 3K plus
1993 sidekick my MPG toy, epa rating 26.
i get 29/31 with stock drive train.
|
|
|
09-07-2012, 12:36 AM
|
#46 (permalink)
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,530
Thanks: 4,078
Thanked 6,978 Times in 3,613 Posts
|
Just adding this relevant tidbit to the thread for further consideration:
Toyota's latest Avalon was designed with weight reduction as a goal. It is 110 lbs lighter than its predecessor, which permits narrower tires to retain acceptable grip:
Quote:
“Less mass makes Avalon more responsive and engaging near handling limits,” Katarzynski [Program Manager of Avalon Vehicle Development] explained. “Also, with less mass, less tire width is needed to reach competitive grip levels. The smaller width helps minimize drag losses to help enhance fuel economy, too.”
|
Source: Toyota's weight reduction strategy makes 2013 Avalon lighter, more fuel efficient
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MetroMPG For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-17-2012, 07:04 AM
|
#47 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Skokie, IL
Posts: 17
Z28 - '95 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 90 day: 17.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
extra fact supporting the narrow tires,
the new malibu ls has a cd of .29 w/215s on 16s but the maibu eco has a cd of .30 because of the change to wider 225 on 17s
|
|
|
10-17-2012, 03:46 PM
|
#48 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 568
Thanks: 1
Thanked 73 Times in 58 Posts
|
Seems like the wider tires cause the lion's share of increased drag, eclipsing reduced rolling resistance, if any.
Maybe we need to work on fairings for the tires, as an adjunct to belly pans, with an eye per Hucho's Calibra wind tunnel photo, which shows airflow hits the front tires at an oblique angle.
|
|
|
10-18-2012, 06:50 AM
|
#49 (permalink)
|
Tire Geek
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Let's just say I'm in the US
Posts: 796
Thanks: 4
Thanked 393 Times in 240 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto
Seems like the wider tires cause the lion's share of increased drag, eclipsing reduced rolling resistance, if any.......
|
I don't know about that. My calculations say the opposite.
Barry's Tire Tech
Last bit on the page.
|
|
|
10-18-2012, 01:29 PM
|
#50 (permalink)
|
DieselMiser
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 985
Thanks: 46
Thanked 232 Times in 160 Posts
|
Reducing tire width isn't always going to give you a lower CD. If you go too narrow your wheel wells become big gaping holes in the side of your car that cause drag.
__________________
|
|
|
|