Tires made from orange oil, not petroleum

[Sven7]

This is definitely worth buying a new set of wheels for.

The tire calculator says the 185/55/15's will fit my car. I will definitely buy these and put Azenis on my 14's.

Thank you for this easy choice!

[mikeyjd]

Maybe CapriRacer will chime in with some insider information??

[jeff88]

Looks like 15" tires is the smallest option unfortunately Yokohama Tire Sizes (Just click the sizes and specs tab)

I guess I will have to look into 15" wheels. I was planning on going away from the steelies anyway. The question is what the ROI would be and if it would be worth it (as in a decent payback time period).

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted by mikeyjd

Maybe CapriRacer will chime in with some insider information??

I'm not a rubber chemist, so this is a bit out of my area

- BUT -

Oils are used in rubber to a) Provide additional cross-linking sites, b) reduce the amount of rubber needed, and c) Aid in processing (utilizing the lubrication properties of oil).

I suspect it is the last one that is where citrus derived oils would be of most benefit.

And did I mention the PR? I think the marketing department would be all over anything even remotely sounding "Green". There's nothing more important to the marketing department than something positive they can talk about.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

Which is another reason I think it is all hype.

Edit: I wish we had some data that didn't come from yokohama or was just regurgitated from their PR machine.

Tire rack does their own testing.
Customers can post reviews too.

I just compaired prices of the other "grand touring all season" all season tires in 225/55R17 and 225/60R17 (hyundai sonata sizes) and the yokohama ascends are $30 to $80 dollars per tire cheaper than the other ones.
The main test it didn't do so well in was wet traction.
So you can slow down 5 to 10 mph in the rain if your speed limit is 70mph or higher or you can pay a lot more for the tires just so you can burn more gas.
Usually wet traction is not a problem for me living in eastern newmexico, driving around west texas and near mexico.

[oil pan 4]

Some of their customers aren't the brightest:
"If your "innovation" doesn't translate to noticeable improvement in mpg in the real world, then you should expect low ratings. Unfortunately, I don't see an mpg rating in the survey. I was getting about 37mpg with the old worn out tires and now average 35. I like the tires well enough--but I would not recommend the tires to anyone expecting increased mpg."

Most of us on here already know you are going to get better milage with warn out tires. The rubber hardens over time, they weigh less and have better aero due to lack of tread.

Another person claims they wore out a set on a mini van in under 30k miles. My guess is they did not get an alignment when they bought their tires and/or they need new shocks.
The pair that have been on the back of the hyundai have over 7k miles, have at least 90% tread and still look brand new.

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Most of us on here already know you are going to get better milage with warn out tires. The rubber hardens over time, they weigh less and have better aero due to lack of tread.

This is not a sure thing to expect as tires age.

"Change in Rolling Resistance Versus Tire Wear
The rolling resistance of each tire was measured using the ISO 28580 test procedure. All tires were measured prior to beginning the testing. At the severe wear condition, the tires were also measured after 400 miles and at the end of the 800-mile test. At the mild wear condition, the tires were measured at the end of the 800-mile test. Tires were also weighed prior to the rolling resistance test and after 400 and 800 miles of wear. The data is shown in Appendix 3. Figure 47 shows the rolling resistance versus the weight of the tires. Some tires, such as type G12 and B11, seem to show consistent decreases in rolling resistance with tread loss, and there seems to be a tendency for lighter tires to have lower rolling resistance. However, many tires show no clear relationship between tread loss and rolling resistance for this testing."

http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NVS/V...res/811154.pdf

[oil pan 4]

Looks like that test took place over 4 months and they only put several hundred miles on them, unless I missed something.
I can't see where they tried to account for the rubbers oxidization and hardening over the course of years.

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Looks like that test took place over 4 months and they only put several hundred miles on them, unless I missed something.
I can't see where they tried to account for the rubbers oxidization and hardening over the course of years.

The also didn't account for weakening side walls and steel belts which would offset that.

[CapriRacer]

I think the big issue for the wear vs RR test was the ability to measure RR. There was not a lot of difference between the wear points, so small differences might not be measureable.

I've seen tests where the tread rubber is shaved off, and the results were quite measureable.

But I think that the hardening of rubber over time doesn't really affect things much. Rubber is so much softer than the steel and the ply cords that for practical purposes you can ignore any changes in rubber properties.

I also think steel and ply cord don't change much over time as well.

I tend to think that the material affects of aging on tread rubber would INCREASE the RR, but that would be more than offset by the affects of having less tread rubber. It would be interesting if someone did this for a wide range of tires.