Subj : snow.. To : Ky Moffet From : Barry Martin Date : Sun Dec 28 2025 08:41:00 Hi Ky! > > > No! Use low gear!! When I first moved to Iowa from New Hampshire id > > KM> My big truck has so much torque in first that it tries to move > > KM> the whole road. On ice I have to use 2nd. > > Probably right -- depends on the vehicle but want whatever does slow and > > steady. Peeling out on ice isn't a good thing! > KM> Peeling the pavement off the road is also frowned upon!! > But might get soften some of the potholes edges! KM> Or make 'em a whole lot bigger! Probably your answer is the more usual of the two. ,,,And I'm quite sure I'm not the only one to have thought of this, but why don't the road repair crews have a truck that heats up the asphalt (BTW, this isn't done in winter!) at the crack to re-unite/re-combine the break; use an asphalt filler as necessary. No holes for the water to get in to, no freeze and splaying. > KM> I did a winter in Boise (where the winter roads are an icy mess) > KM> in that truck with bald highway tires, and it was still pretty > KM> decent -- I slid around less than most. It's no good on > KM> washboards, tho, dirt or ice -- suspension is so stiff that it > KM> bounces sideways, plus those 10-ply tires are stiff as trees. > I'm thinking maybe the baldness of your tires gave more contact with the KM> Actually no, made it slicker. Advantage was mostly the dual rear KM> wheels (THERE is a big contact patch) and that the rear end is KM> heavy enough to balance the front. OK: I was half-considering the racing tires which are (some are?) essentially treadless. ...I'll admit to not watching all that much racing. Your greater contact area makes sense, which in the unknowing mind made the bare tires have more tire in contact with the ice. (Half-knowledge can be a dangerous thing! ) KM> And that it's got a really good 2nd gear for going slow. Slow is good! At least if something happens and traction is lost by going slow one would just tap the guard rail, tree, moose instead of body-slamming. > road, As for that stiffness, uncomfortable, but gets the job done! I > would suppose there is a reason for choosing the super-stuff suspension > and use of twn-ply tires. Off the list is cruising down to the > early-bird special! KM> Stiff so it can handle big loads. That was the whole point of KM> this truck, a heavy tow vehicle for when I moved. But I love KM> driving it too. I prefer everything on the stiff side, better KM> road feel, but it's not so good when the road is super rough. Years ago I was driving to visit a friend in Michigan. Somewhere there was a patch of highway which was slightly rough -- not to the degree of the corrugations warning of the side of the road but a low vibration. Something happen to my car?? (Slight panic but nothing getting worse.) ...Car slowly passed me (I had on my cruise control, by the consistency of the passing he must have also); we glanced at each other, I don;t recall the details but I motioned questioning a bumpy road and he motioned back yes. Whew! the road, not my car! KM> I put half a ton of feed in the back, or 4000 pounds of trailer KM> on the hitch, and it doesn't even NOTICE. Whereas I put 40 pounds of groceries in my back seat.... (It's a hatchback; I could put them in the 'trunk' but pretty much filled with the emergency toolbox and a cardboard box of winter stuff.) > KM> Now it has Cooper all-terrains and they are great. They were also > KM> the choice-of-one in Made in USA (Chinese tires crack) and a > KM> doable size on the dual rear wheels, so they don't 'kiss' when > KM> they flex. They are now 12 years old, about 30k miles, and still > KM> almost like new. > Good investment! KM> Yeah, especially at $1200 ($1800 in today's money) for the set of KM> six. They'd BETTER last!! $200 a tire isn't a horrible price, especially for truck tires, but when comes to replacing multiple that's straining the credit card a bit. KM> I have seen American-made tires (sujpercheap trailer tires at KM> that) still good at 50+ years old. Chinese tires are why now the KM> recommendation is replace 'em every five years. LIS in an earlier message I don't have too much of a choice in which tires I can buy (AFAIK two brands) but go for the better-to-best for items like batteries and windshield wipers. I don't want to listen to 'uhgh! uhgh!' while trying to start my car in cold weather. > KM> NO GRIP on wet pavement never mind snow. Never buy Chinese tires. > KM> They are junk.) > I'll try not to but IIRC the last two times I purchased tires (two > different shops) I had a choice of two because of the size: seems like > they're a 13 - 9 (??). I remember when I first got the car and people > commented on the small diameter wheels: "you can replace all for for > $100!". Because of the width closer to $100 each. KM> Small wheels wear out tires faster.... it's done to reduce KM> weight, same as the low profile tires. Not for the advantage of KM> the car or driver. A smaller diameter tires means it completes a rotation more often, so my 13" tires contact the road 1,000 times per mile whereas your bigger 20" tires make only 800 contacts. (Pulling numbers out of the air.) More contacts wear out the tire faster. I'm thinking there's another variable: I don't drive all that much, so I might go 50 miles a week whereas you do 500. My tires should effectively last longer but they don't because of even more other factors. KM> Same as all the "innovations" of the past KM> thirty years, really, because that's how they make CAFE standards KM> for fuel economy. When I traded in my first car back in ~1978 I immediately noticed how small the brake pedal was! Original car: seemed like 12" wide (wasn't, but by comparison); new car -- seemed like barely wider than the accelerator pedal! Same with the hood: old: sturdy and heavy. New: lightweight and flimsy. ...Know some of that is to make the car lighter for the fuel standards and some for the crumple zone stuff. > KM> Put your studded tires on ALL FOUR WHEELS, even on a > KM> 2-wheel-drive vehicle. Makes a world of difference. With four > KM> studdeds I could not skid the Olds on glare ice even if I worked > KM> at it. Could stop dead on wet ice almost as fast as on dry > KM> pavement. (And then I got 6-ply tires for it, and it no longer > KM> needed winter tires at all.) > Right: if rear-wheel drive then it seems to make sense to only have to > put them on the 'move it' wheels. Front wheels are doing the steering. KM> Rear wheels losing traction is usually more recoverable than KM> front wheels losing traction. Rear end follows the front end. (?) KM> However, the imbalance does you no KM> good either. All four wheels with traction is a very good KM> investment. More road contact, etc. KM> With the little truck, I visited the junkyard and came away with KM> four spare wheels for $100 (including two tires that will go on KM> the junk trailer) so I don't have to seasonally change tires, KM> just wheels. Which seems to make sense: balance the tire + rim once, swap as the whole unit, > ..Even with front wheel drive with the front wheels are doing the > steering and pulling still a good idea to have additional traction on > the rear wheels so they don't go flailing when cornering. Right: centrifugal force, Or as Dad taught me: if the car is going where you don't want it to you're going too fast. KM> With front wheel drive you are always towing, so if the rear KM> loses traction it wants to fishtail you into the ditch. Also why KM> with front wheel drive you never put a heavy load in the trunk KM> then expect to drive a straight line on a wet road. (Can you tell KM> how much I hate it??) So the groceries in my rear seats makes sense! Actually, yes: a heavy load at the rear will make the front end pull up, so less traction for steering. ¯ ® ¯ BarryMartin3@MyMetronet.NET ® ¯ ® .... Sometimes it takes me all day to get nothing done. --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47 þ wcECHO 4.2 ÷ ILink: The Safe BBS þ Bettendorf, IA þ RNET 2.10U: ILink: Techware BBS þ Hollywood, Ca þ www.techware2k.com --- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462 * Origin: ILink: CFBBS | cfbbs.no-ip.com (454:1/1) .