Choosing drive tires?

Fuel mileage trumps longevity and price by far. RR #s = 1/10th mpg for every 10 points RR. An open lug tire with a RR # of 150 compared to a fuel saver tire with a RR # of 99 will save you 1/2 mpg in fuel that is equal to around $7,000 a year in fuel that will buy a lot of tires with $14,000 over 2 years (250,000 miles).

Truck Smarter Not Harder!

 

Surprised to see the rolling resistance rating of my retreads is 136 compared to Yoko TY577 tread they replaced was 132. Averaging 4 tenths better fuel mileage from these recaps with deep tread than the TY577's were achieving worn down smooth.

 

In your math above did you consider all 18x wheels (or10 ) equipped with low rr or only the drives?
what are you suggesting 4 x super singles or 8 x low road resistance ? brands ?

 

I went from beat to hell recaps with a RR of 165 to virgin Yokohama TY517 M2's with a RR of 102 and got 0/10th more mpgs. Where is my $7000?

 

Rolling resistance is a huge factor in picking tires, but I run in some very desolete, far flung places. So, redundent systems, like having duals, is very important. I get the best quality tires with characteristics that fit my operation and a low RR. I run low profile 24.5 aired to 120lbs cold. Super singles won't do for where I go and surely don't hold up on my spread axle.

 

I don't buy into the whole RR thing. I have ran open and closed shoulder tires with differing RR#'s and have not seen even 1/10th of a difference in mileage. To me, it is nothing more than a sales gimmick to make tree huggers feel good about themselves.

 

Aww come on now, ye know KR CANT possibly be wrong! His legions of loyal followers will descend upon you like the wrath of the flease operator in times to come...beware!

I think people need to realize a few items here...
Not everyone "needs" these supposed fuel savings to make a very good living.
Not all operations are the same. Some of us end up in fields to load/unload, on mud regularly, and so on.
Some of us actually drive in bad weather. Amazing I know, but there ye have it.
When stuck in mud/snow/ice due to those amazingly low RR tires, do you count the wrecker bill in with the possible savings? I doubt it.
Give me nice deep tread lugs that grips, or digs down and finds grip, and I'm happy. You can keep the possible 1/10th of a MPG difference, and I'll keep rolling.
Martin

 

i have kelly kda, they wear off very bad off road, dealing with big rocks.

 

Are you kidding me? I can sure tell a difference when I buy a fresh set of drives. My fuel mileage drops 2-3/10ths going from 4/32" tread up to 28/32" tread. Same type of tires;just worn tread vs. fresh tread.

Also, my pickup truck with 33" MTs got 1.5mpg less vs the oem tires.

Also, put some knobbies on a bicycle a pedal around for a few minutes. Then mount race slicks on the same bicycle and pedal around. Notice a difference?

Really, though. You anti-RR conspiracy types can disbelieve physics all you like...Not even physics...disbelieve COMMON SENSE!

I don't care what you guys believe. If your lack of common sense makes you burn more fuel; well then, as your competitor, that's just better for me. You guys help to lift rates!