New winter tires needed

[dave07]

incorrect. If half of your tire is on each surface, then half of its force is on each surface. having a wider tire just distributes the weight over more area, thus reducing pressure. you gain no traction.

Ok bad percentages. If the edge of your wider tire is on the good pavement while all of the narrower tire is on the bad pavement. The wider would have more grip.

You understand the point I am trying to make is that the wider tire is better suited to handle the road irregularities.

We know this from real world testing and the track. There is a reason why guys don’t throw skinny tires on their cars at the track.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aseibel]

6 minutes ago, dave07 said:

We know this from real world testing and the track. There is a reason why guys don’t throw skinny tires on their cars at the track.

yes, we covered that above. That reason is the shear force of the rubber is too weak to translate the engine torque into traction, the rubber would just shear off a skinny tire. Those track tires also wear out in 200 miles. Do you want to put new rubber on your truck every day? Not applicable for road driving.

 

For your specific scenario of having a wide tire where only 10% of it is touching a surface with higher friction- well there you go, I guess you found a loophole. So make sure you drive your big wide tires right along the edge of two different road surfaces to gain the benefits. Most of the roads I drive on are relatively constant surfaces from the left edge to the right edge.

[dave07]

yes, we covered that above. That reason is the shear force of the rubber is too weak to translate the engine torque into traction, the rubber would just shear off a skinny tire. Those track tires also wear out in 200 miles. Do you want to put new rubber on your truck every day? Not applicable for road driving.
 
For your specific scenario of having a wide tire where only 10% of it is touching a surface with higher friction- well there you go, I guess you found a loophole. So make sure you drive your big wide tires right along the edge of two different road surfaces to gain the benefits. Most of the roads I drive on are relatively constant surfaces from the left edge to the right edge.

Or you know it’s because of the different coefficient of friction in the pavement which a wider tire will capture, like you said no surface is perfect.

Aggregates in the wheel path get polished and the adjacent pavement does not. You drive on varying frictions of pavement everyday. It’s not uncommon at all. It’s very common actually.

A loophole? Really, it’s called the real world!!!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aseibel]

5 minutes ago, dave07 said:

Or you know it’s because of the different coefficient of friction in the pavement which a wider tire will capture, like you said no surface is perfect.

You are assuming the extra 1" of pavement you are touching has more friction than that under the center of your tire, which may or may not be the case. Unless you are driving on top of the painted line, the entire lane of traffic shouldn't differ that much if your state has decent roads. If your roads are a sheet of glass in between the lines and the only way to gain traction is to drive on the shoulder, you have a different problem.

 

Of course you can always find very specific places where this situation might occur, But for the most part the road surface is going to be very similar across any 12" wide area that your tire may be touching at a given time.

[L86 All Terrain]

Here is an interesting read, turns out we are all right however it states that winter conditions, snow and ice, that the benefits of the increase of tread width go out the window because of the friction coefficient of the driving surface has decreased significantly. In all other aspects, it remains true. http://www.rimsandtiresmag.com/7-things-you-should-know-about-wide-vs-narrow-tire/ my butt-dyno is always right. 

[aseibel]

1 hour ago, L86 All Terrain said:

Here is an interesting read, turns out we are all right however it states that winter conditions, snow and ice, that the benefits of the increase of tread width go out the window because of the friction coefficient of the driving surface has decreased significantly. In all other aspects, it remains true. http://www.rimsandtiresmag.com/7-things-you-should-know-about-wide-vs-narrow-tire/ my butt-dyno is always right. 

I'm not sure I trust the source of that article to explain science correctly. Seems like some guys just created their own website. I can't find any legitimate company behind it.

 

But you obviously will continue to believe wider tires = more traction no matter what I or any physics book say.  So I'm going to have to just leave you to it. Hopefully if anyone else reads this thread and the links I posted, they might learn something.

[dave07]

I'm not sure I trust the source of that article to explain science correctly. Seems like some guys just created their own website. I can't find any legitimate company behind it.
 
But you obviously will continue to believe wider tires = more traction no matter what I or any physics book say.  So I'm going to have to just leave you to it. Hopefully if anyone else reads this thread and the links I posted, they might learn something.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9e6e/6f9b1bf0a0c8f52a641a0a2f22b22c83d2f2.pdf

“It is generally considered true that the resulting friction force is not proportional to the surface area of contact. However, this is far from the truth when a rubber tire is considered. This dissimilar behavior is due to the viscoelastic nature of rubber. Thus, as force is applied, deformation occurs both elastically and plastically in a non-linear fashion due to the mechanical behavior of polymer chains (Ref 6). Viscoelasticity also explains why the coefficient of friction of a tire is load dependent. As a tire is loaded, the surface area grows larger increasing the total friction force but lowering the coefficient of friction (Ref 1). Since a tire does not follow Newton’s laws of friction”

The last sentence should be of interest to you....



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aseibel]

11 minutes ago, dave07 said:

 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9e6e/6f9b1bf0a0c8f52a641a0a2f22b22c83d2f2.pdf

“It is generally considered true that the resulting friction force is not proportional to the surface area of contact. However, this is far from the truth when a rubber tire is considered. This dissimilar behavior is due to the viscoelastic nature of rubber. Thus, as force is applied, deformation occurs both elastically and plastically in a non-linear fashion due to the mechanical behavior of polymer chains (Ref 6). Viscoelasticity also explains why the coefficient of friction of a tire is load dependent. As a tire is loaded, the surface area grows larger increasing the total friction force but lowering the coefficient of friction (Ref 1). Since a tire does not follow Newton’s laws of friction”

The last sentence should be of interest to you....

Thank you for proving my point. the highlighted sentence is exactly what I've been trying to get across to you.

 

If you don't cut off your quote in the middle of a phrase you would also see, "Since a tire does not follow Newton’s laws of friction, a coefficient of friction above unity can be obtained."

 

Which simply means that for RACE CARS the soft rubber can deform into the imperfections in the road and give you a coefficient of friction greater than 1.0. Which is not possible for passenger cars.

 

Drag tires, which your article is specifically talking about achieve traction because they are specifically designed to be very soft rubber which grips into the miniscule texture in the pavement. They also wear out very fast and cannot drive on wet roads. You cannot compare those to the tires on your truck which are designed to operate in a wide variety of weather conditions and temperatures.

 

The only evidence you can find supporting wide tires is specific to racing, or drag racing. I have already explained why this is, because the rubber tire shears off and you just spin the tire. The wider tire distributes the shear force over more rubber area, allowing it to not shear under higher torque. If you are drag racing your truck, then you should follow the same principles. On the highway is a different story.

[dave07]

Thank you for proving my point. the highlighted sentence is exactly what I've been trying to get across to you.
 
If you don't cut off your quote in the middle of a phrase you would also see, "Since a tire does not follow Newton’s laws of friction, a coefficient of friction above unity can be obtained."
 
Which simply means that for RACE CARS the soft rubber can deform into the imperfections in the road and give you a coefficient of friction greater than 1.0. Which is not possible for passenger cars.
 
Drag tires, which your article is specifically talking about achieve traction because they are specifically designed to be very soft rubber which grips into the miniscule texture in the pavement. They also wear out very fast and cannot drive on wet roads. You cannot compare those to the tires on your truck which are designed to operate in a wide variety of weather conditions and temperatures.
 
The only evidence you can find supporting wide tires is specific to racing, or drag racing. I have already explained why this is, because the rubber tire shears off and you just spin the tire. The wider tire distributes the shear force over more rubber area, allowing it to not shear under higher torque. If you are drag racing your truck, then you should follow the same principles. On the highway is a different story.

You are just plain wrong! You don’t think a passenger tire deforms when you load it now?

Also the article mentions you cannot apply newton friction principles to tires which you have been trying to do on this whole thread.

Not to mention all the pictured tires in the references article are all passenger vehicle tires. The article applies to all tires not just race tires.

Admit it, you are wrong! Have a good day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[L86 All Terrain]

57 minutes ago, aseibel said:

But you obviously will continue to believe wider tires = more traction no matter what I or any physics book say.  So I'm going to have to just leave you to it. 

That's not my point at all, it's exactly what you've been trying to explain the whole time. See you don't even know what side of the argument you're on. 

 

My points are as follows: wide tires, better in dry conditions, skinnier tire better in winter conditions. I run a 385 Michelin on my class 8's with 16,000# front ends, in the winter I put 12" Michelin steers on them, why would I do this? Because the fat tire doesn't work worth a **** on ice or snow, and it sure as hell isn't because of the rubber compound, its weight displacement. If you run the fat tire, your going to slide off the logging road, the 12" tire will make the turn. As someone who plows snow, this should be a PAINFULLY obvious phenomenon to you. 

[aseibel]

7 minutes ago, L86 All Terrain said:

That's not my point at all, it's exactly what you've been trying to explain the whole time. See you don't even know what side of the argument you're on. 

 

My points are as follows: wide tires, better in dry conditions, skinnier tire better in winter conditions. I run a 385 Michelin on my class 8's with 16,000# front ends, in the winter I put 12" Michelin steers on them, why would I do this? Because the fat tire doesn't work worth a **** on ice or snow, and it sure as hell isn't because of the rubber compound, its weight displacement. If you run the fat tire, your going to slide off the logging road, the 12" tire will make the turn. As someone who plows snow, this should be a PAINFULLY obvious phenomenon to you. 

If I'm getting your arguments confused with Dave, I'm sorry.

Skinny tires are definitely better for driving in snow (you said logging roads, which i presume are not plowed)

 

If you go back to my first post that apparently set Dave off, I said, "the width of the tire does not matter for traction on ice. It is solely based on the rubber compound and its coefficient of friction. BUT where the width of the tire does matter is when driving through deep snow- a wide tire has to push more snow, so it is harder to drive. So if you are driving on unplowed roads, yes, use a skinny tire. If you are on plowed roads, it doesn't matter."

[aseibel]

11 minutes ago, dave07 said:

You don’t think a passenger tire deforms when you load it now?

Also the article mentions you cannot apply newton friction principles to tires which you have been trying to do on this whole thread.

Not to mention all the pictured tires in the references article are all passenger vehicle tires. The article applies to all tires not just race tires.

Passenger tires definitely do deform a bit, but nowhere close to drag racing tires. Huge difference in how they interact with the surface of the road.

 

So we might as well throw all the laws of physics out the window because that's what you think this article is saying. Newton's laws are about forces, inertia and motion. There are no "newton law's of friction". Try googling "Laws of Motion" and read them as well, as I presume you aren't aware of those either.

 

I have taken college level physics and statics classes. What training has your arse had to redefine the laws of motion?

[L86 All Terrain]

15 minutes ago, aseibel said:

If I'm getting your arguments confused with Dave, I'm sorry.

Skinny tires are definitely better for driving in snow (you said logging roads, which i presume are not plowed)

 

If you go back to my first post that apparently set Dave off, I said, "the width of the tire does not matter for traction on ice. It is solely based on the rubber compound and its coefficient of friction. BUT where the width of the tire does matter is when driving through deep snow- a wide tire has to push more snow, so it is harder to drive. So if you are driving on unplowed roads, yes, use a skinny tire. If you are on plowed roads, it doesn't matter."

Okay based on your theory, let's choose a tire size for your pickup. What size would you choose for your plow truck if you had to pick between 2 tire sizes, same tread, a 265, or a 295 section tire and why? I assume you will say 265 because you don't want to push a fat front tire through the deep snow, especially with the added weight of your plow? So if you had to pick new tires for a 2wd Silverado that primarily drove on plowed, but icy, paved or concrete surfaces you would choose the 295 because it is not pushing through snow and the wider section width will give you more traction on the icy pavement/concrete regardless of the decrease in ground pressure? 

 

I would also choose the 265 for the plow truck, but because of the increase in ground pressure not because they push through snow, I want them to cut to the solid ground and not "float" and chatter on the softer surface like a fatter tire (less ground pressure). I would also choose the 265 for the 2wd truck because of increased ground pressure to combat the reduced friction coefficient of the frozen driving surface, because I know reducing that ground pressure will reduce overall traction (again a happy medium, parabola, intersection on a graph). You cant go overboard either way. 

[aseibel]

9 minutes ago, L86 All Terrain said:

Okay based on your theory, let's choose a tire size for your pickup. What size would you choose for your plow truck if you had to pick between 2 tire sizes, same tread, a 265, or a 295 section tire and why? I assume you will say 265 because you don't want to push a fat front tire through the deep snow, especially with the added weight of your plow? So if you had to pick new tires for a 2wd Silverado that primarily drove on plowed, but icy, paved or concrete surfaces you would choose the 295 because it is not pushing through snow and the wider section width will give you more traction on the icy pavement/concrete regardless of the decrease in ground pressure? 

 

I would also choose the 265 for the plow truck, but because of the increase in ground pressure not because they push through snow, I want them to cut to the solid ground and not "float" and chatter on the softer surface like a fatter tire (less ground pressure). I would also choose the 265 for the 2wd truck because of increased ground pressure to combat the reduced friction coefficient of the frozen driving surface, because I know reducing that ground pressure will reduce overall traction (again a happy medium, parabola, intersection on a graph). You cant go overboard either way. 

You are mostly correct, except I would not choose the wider tire for anything. I would choose the 265 for both trucks because wider tires hurt fuel mileage and offer no gains in traction on ice. I would put bags of sand in the rear of the 2wd bed to help even out the weight distribution because more weight on the rear axle = more normal force = more traction.

[dave07]

Passenger tires definitely do deform a bit, but nowhere close to drag racing tires. Huge difference in how they interact with the surface of the road.
 
So we might as well throw all the laws of physics out the window because that's what you think this article is saying. Newton's laws are about forces, inertia and motion. There are no "newton law's of friction". Try googling "Laws of Motion" and read them as well, as I presume you aren't aware of those either.
 
I have taken college level physics and statics classes. What training has your arse had to redefine the laws of motion?

Friction is a force there bud.

I’m not redefining the laws of motion, just quoting the article.

I have an engineering degree and I am a licensed PE. Have taken college static’s, dynamics, physics, concrete, steel, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk