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

California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

grist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 275 posts

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#151

Post by mc32 »

legitster wrote: post #71

There are basically three major trade-off when it comes to tire compounds: rolling resistance, traction, and tire wear. You can pick 2 of the 3. When you shop for tires, manufacturers will try to make this eminently clear in the marketing - you pay a premium for tires that maximize on one or two of these features. The changes that California is proposing basically means you are going to have to choose between tractio…

Unless people never see any snow, I think all weather is the only choice to be made and the large tire makers all have decent offerings in the all weather category.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#152

Post by Aurornis »

mdasen wrote: post #114
legitster wrote: post #71

There are basically three major trade-off when it comes to tire compounds: rolling resistance, traction, and tire wear. You can pick 2 of the 3. When you shop for tires, manufacturers will try to make this eminently clear in the marketing - you pay a premium for tires that maximize on one or two of these features. The changes that California is proposing basically means you are going to have to choose between tractio…

Yes, there are trade-offs, but you can get really great tires on all three. The Michelin CrossClimate2 tires are arguably the best traction tires, Consumer Reports estimates 95,000 miles of tread life in their testing (higher than basically anything else), and they got a 4/5 for rolling resistance on Consumer Reports' dynamometer testing. There's a lot of tires that are poorly made and just bad tires. For example, on…

> The Michelin CrossClimate2 tires are arguably the best traction tires,

In their class, but not in general.

They are all-season tires. They don't perform as well as winter tires in the winter, and they don't perform as well as summer tires in the summer.

They're also a terribly mushy tire. They feel like you're floating around on the road and wallowing through the turns. This doesn't matter in the slightest to someone commuting to work in their 15 year old Honda Accord with blown struts, but if you enjoy driving they're on the list of tires to avoid.

Everything is a tradeoff. Some tires do a better job of optimizing within their class, but the Michelin CC2 is assuredly not the best traction tires in general.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#153

Post by hadlock »

Two of my cars wear specialty tires, one is a citroen that uses specialty Michelin Pilot-X tires designed exclusively for Citroen (and a handful of Renault) of that era, the other wears very limited production tires designed to go on spoke rim with center nut spline hubs. Pretty concerned I am going to have to "manually import" these from Nevada as they need replacement every ~3 years.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#154

Post by hadlock »

Aurornis wrote: post #152
mdasen wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are trade-offs, but you can get really great tires on all three. The Michelin CrossClimate2 tires are arguably the best traction tires, Consumer Reports estimates 95,000 miles of tread life in their testing (higher than basically anything else), and they got a 4/5 for rolling resistance on Consumer Reports' dynamometer testing. There's a lot of tires that are poorly made and just bad tires. For example, on…

> The Michelin CrossClimate2 tires are arguably the best traction tires, In their class, but not in general. They are all-season tires. They don't perform as well as winter tires in the winter, and they don't perform as well as summer tires in the summer. They're also a terribly mushy tire. They feel like you're floating around on the road and wallowing through the turns. This doesn't matter in the slightest to someo…

>They don't perform as well as winter tires in the winter, and

A lot of people don't live in climates where winter tires are even sold; particularly California, Texas, Florida, three of the most populous states. Many people in those states aren't even aware "winter tires" are even a product category. That's like complaining the Walmart in Anchorage, Alaska doesn't carry SPF 50 sunscreen.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#155

Post by whatevaa »

hamdingers wrote: post #65
lukeify wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of this is a solvable problem, insofar to the best of my knowledge there is no fundamental workaround for the fact placing heavy objects moving fast on rough surfaces generates friction which leads to the erosion of surfaces? I think particulate pollution would be an acceptable outcome if the tires themselves were biodegradable over 10+ years. But to my understanding the vulcanisation process that's employed…

> insofar to the best of my knowledge there is no fundamental workaround May I introduce you to the steel wheel rolling on a steel rail?

Yup, make a rail to everybodys home instead, that will solve it.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#156

Post by angiolillo »

Too bad they didn't just require manufacturers to publish a rolling resistance efficiency score for tires, like the EU does, rather than a mandate with so many unintended consequences and loopholes. (That would be especially effective at influencing consumer behavior if paired with higher carbon fees.)

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#157

Post by asa400 »

kube-system wrote: post #123
paddy_m wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car manufacturers watch the cost of every piece of the bill of materials. Cars compete on price, and the assortment of pieces which add perceived value to consumers. Outside of performance and very highend luxury cars, tires are an afterthought to the average car buyer.

Yes, which is why most optimize tires primarily for price, fuel economy, and NVH, because those are the things which a consumer notices the most when buying a vehicle: "what's the price, what's the EPA estimate, and did I like the test drive?" Some manufacturers even source tires that have lower tread depths than typical replacement tires, in order to decrease noise and increase MPG at the direct detriment to tread l…

Toyota is infamous for offering special, nerfed versions of well-known tires on their new vehicles. You buy a Tacoma, you don’t get the Wildpeak AT4W, which is a very good all terrain tire. Instead, you get the Wildpeak AT4WA, which is a nerfed version with reduced tread depth that is quieter and more efficient than the real AT4W but less capable and wears out faster.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#158

Post by c0decracker »

leobg wrote: post #139
jwr wrote: post #63

The EU has been using a single mandatory tire-label system that has an "efficiency" category, among others, so that you can see the tradeoffs, since 2021. But of course, the EU is over-regulated, let's laugh at the EU :-)

IIf you’re over-regulated, you’re bound to get something right every once in a while. To over-regulate and get 100 % of regulations wrong would require someone in the system to be able to tell good from bad, aka competence. :)

I think with regulations "right" is highly subjective and also time dependent. "Right" today is wrong tomorrow. "Right" for one group is wrong for another today and it might switch up tomorrow.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#159

Post by fearmerchant »

hadlock wrote: post #154
Aurornis wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Michelin CrossClimate2 tires are arguably the best traction tires, In their class, but not in general. They are all-season tires. They don't perform as well as winter tires in the winter, and they don't perform as well as summer tires in the summer. They're also a terribly mushy tire. They feel like you're floating around on the road and wallowing through the turns. This doesn't matter in the slightest to someo…

>They don't perform as well as winter tires in the winter, and A lot of people don't live in climates where winter tires are even sold; particularly California, Texas, Florida, three of the most populous states. Many people in those states aren't even aware "winter tires" are even a product category. That's like complaining the Walmart in Anchorage, Alaska doesn't carry SPF 50 sunscreen.

You're gonna want SPF 50 in Alaska too.

Re: California's new tire efficiency rules could save drivers $1B a year

#160

Post by spockz »

Aurornis wrote: post #150
legitster wrote: post #71

There are basically three major trade-off when it comes to tire compounds: rolling resistance, traction, and tire wear. You can pick 2 of the 3. When you shop for tires, manufacturers will try to make this eminently clear in the marketing - you pay a premium for tires that maximize on one or two of these features. The changes that California is proposing basically means you are going to have to choose between tractio…

It's even worse than that. Rain performance and rolling resistance are conflicting goals. A good rain tire will need more voids to channel the water, but adding a lot of voids increases rolling resistance. California is a large market. Tire manufacturers probably won't make many California-specific tires. They're going to try to adjust their tires to meet the California guidelines. The most populous areas of Californ…

This is what I always thought. But I have Pirelli Cinturato SF3 tires now. All season. Excellent stiffness and feel. Great handling in the wet. Virtually silent up to 80-90km/h and as efficient as the Michelin summer tires and more efficient than the continental winter tires I had.

So apparently, design and compound can cater for a lot.

Unfortunately, snow performance on my front drive car is worse than my XC90 has in AWD mode with summer tires. (

Post reply on HN