Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Michelin Airless

michelin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 316 posts

Re: Michelin Airless

#91

Post by zaptrem »

sgarrity wrote: post #78

I have airless tires in the same bucket as flying-cars and video-phones (things that sort of exist, but are always just around the corner from being widely adopted). (I realize that video-phones are kind of widely adopted now via Zoom/Facetime/etc. - I'm thinking more of the vision from the 90s of a telephone with a screen in your kitchen)

Those are also widely available now (ie Facebook Portal + similar), but nobody needs them. My grandparents had a similar model which they used until a few years ago.

Re: Michelin Airless

#93

Post by throwaway803453 »

bkanber wrote: post #13

Former automotive engineer chiming in. "Tweels" have been around a long time, but have always failed in terms of "NVH" (noise, vibration, harshness). Michelin is claiming that this generation of tweels are appropriate for passenger cars, which means that they think they've solved the NVH problem. They seem to be marketing these alongside EVs, I wonder if they're only really intended for lighter, compact-style cars. (…

Does the focus on NVH imply that the increase of rolling friction over time is negligible compared to the tread lifetime ? Or is that partly of the reason to target lighter vehicles.

The above assumes the spokes(?) become stretched over time it would increase displacement of the center of rotation from the center of mass which if recall is what creates rolling friction.

Re: Michelin Airless

#94

Post by cjrp »

sfe22 wrote: post #36
cjrp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the point is if they can be removed for demonstrations, then they're not critical to the structure.

They may be for real world usage, you dont want rocks or sticks getting inside

Absolutely, my point was that if you can remove them for this sort of demo, then if they get damaged by a pothole then it's probably easy to replace them.

Re: Michelin Airless

#95

Post by [deleted] »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #7
bb123 wrote: post #5

I always wonder how these things would stand up to stones getting caught in between the rubber “spokes“.

I don't think that part of the tire is open to the outside -- you're seeing a cross-section in the pictures and video.

[deleted]

Re: Michelin Airless

#96

Post by thinkling »

tootie wrote: post #92

"Every year, 20%* of tires are discarded as scrap " Really? They cite a survey, but don't link to it.

Tires are usually rated for 40 ,000 to 60,000 miles. Americans drive 13,500 miles per on average[1]. That would cause tires to be replaced on average after ~4 years. So yeah, seems believable.

[1] https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm

Re: Michelin Airless

#97

Post by xxpor »

arghwhat wrote: post #82
ddlsmurf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Complete layman here, every 6 months or so for the past decade I see an article claiming someone got air-less tires working. What are the chances this would be it ?

A lot of heavy equipment drives around with water-filled tires, so it's already there. Definitely not what you meant though.

Hmm, why water filled? I can't think of any advantages, but can think of downsides such as a massive increase in unsprung weight.

Re: Michelin Airless

#98

Post by whatever1 »

Weren’t we trying to reduce plastic waste? This seems to need multiple times the amount of rubber that a normal tire needs. And for what? To prevent a fixable puncture that may or may not happen in a lifespan of a tire?

Re: Michelin Airless

#99

Post by kube-system »

ggreer wrote: post #72
mitigating wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BMW is a particularly heavy sedan. The Honda Civic is 2877 to 3126. Even the Golf R which has a rear diff, DCT, and a 2.0 turbo is only 3100 pounds.

I picked a gas car of comparable size. The Civic and Golf are much smaller than the Model 3.

The Civic is 2 inches shorter and 2 inches narrower than the Model 3, but it actually has a larger interior volume by one cubic foot.

Size up to the Accord which is 8 inches longer and a half inch wider than a Model 3 (and 9ft^3 more interior space), and it still only weighs 3131-3362 lbs.

Re: Michelin Airless

#100

Post by ytechie »

Wouldn't these be great for trailers? Trailer blowouts are common, and often unnoticed, or can heavily damage the trailer. I have no interest in these on a car, but for a trailer, sign me up!
Post reply on HN