Quote:
Originally Posted by Daox
I would imagine it has to do with the deformation of the tire. As you narrow the contact patch it must expand due to the increased load per sq/area. This means it has to grow longer. Longer means the tire itself is going to need to deform more while rotating.
|
i understand completely but it seems to me that having a wide tyre would result in a contact patch that is wider, but not very long. where as having a skinny tyre would result in a contact patch that is not wide, but skinny. and because of this the contact patch would have to be longer to make up for it.
so what is better, a wide but short patch as is on a wide tyre,
or
a skinny but long contact patch as is on a skinny tyre,
what would result in lower rolling resistance? i would bet the overall square inches of the contact patch would be the same no matter if the contact patch was wide and short or skinny and long. because the tyre needs a certain amount of area touching the road for a given weight being placed on it by the vehicle.
since bicycles and all the other things i mentioned greatly benefit from skinny tyres with longer patches, why wouldn't this same logic work on a car?
does anyone have examples of some oem car that has better or worse fuel economy when using wide tyres vs skinny ones?
i do know that virtually anywhere that rolling resistance is a major factor, skinny tyres are used. even downhill soapbox cars with no engines that rely on gravity. those also use skinny tyres.
i could be wrong as i am only guessing at all of this, but why wont it work on a car....