Slashdot Mirror


Goodyear's 'On TheGo' Self Inflating Tire

SternisheFan writes with a bit of maintenance saving tech for drivers. From the article: "When was the last time you checked your tire pressure? If you're scratching your head, you might want to put a set of Goodyear's new self-inflating tires on your ride. The company's Air Maintenance Technology was rolled out of the lab this week for debut at a car show in Germany. Commercial truckers will be the first to put the rubber to test, but a consumer version is in the works. A regulator in the tire senses when tire-inflation pressure drops below a pre-set point and opens to allow air flow into the pumping tube. As the tire rolls, deformation flattens the tube, pushing air through the tire to the inlet valve and then into the tire cavity. All this technology, in Goodyear's words, eliminates the need for 'external inflation pressure intervention.'"

207 comments

  1. Sounds different from the bike one. by pecosdave · · Score: 4, Informative

    The bike on inflates itself simply by rolling. I would love to have these, but they're not exactly mass production yet and I've got a lot of goofy tire sizes on my bikes.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

      I am - quite literally - out the door in 5 min., to add air in the passenger-side front tyre. :-)

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This was introduced at some auto & tire trade shows several years ago, it looks like Goodyear may have licensed the technology (or figured out a way around the patents??). The pumping element is in the tire sidewall, near the rim. This is the first place that I saw the idea:
          http://www.selfinflatingtire.com/ Press releases on this site go back to 2009.

    3. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This one inflates by rolling.
      Why do you think it's different?

    4. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by SJHillman · · Score: 0

      I just added air to all of my tires about two hours ago. Pressure drops by about 1 PSI per 10 degrees Fahrenheit temperature change and it was 50 degrees cooler last night than it was three weeks ago.

    5. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by iCEBaLM · · Score: 1

      It looks to be exactly the same principle, with the exception of the "pumping tube" on the bike one being on the outside circumference of the tire, and on the inside circumference on the car one.

    6. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by gagol · · Score: 1

      Do you know of it's the valve doing the work alone or do you need brand new tyres to get it to work?

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    7. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Fishead · · Score: 4, Funny

      I just paid $80 to change a rim on my truck because it was rusty and leaking. ($40 for the rim from a junk yard, $40 to mount and balance). 35 years old, 25% failure rate. Not too bad.

      My truck is old-school. New, problematic, overly complicated technology is unwelcome. This new technology sounds new, overly complicated, and problematic.

      I just wish there was an AM station to listen to on the way to work...

    8. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Bevis,

      He said "pumping tube"...

      Heh.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    9. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      The tubes/tires do the work. The "valve" on the bike version at least simply sets the pressure. I'm pretty sure an older version of the bike one I saw the pressure was determined by the tube itself, the "valves" built into the tube itself stopped flapping open after a certain pressure.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    10. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "tyre"... you brytysh bastard!

    11. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wish there was an AM station to listen to on the way to work...

      If your truck is a 1973-1980 Chevy, the two screws that hold the ashtray hinge under the dash are the same distance apart as the holes on a piece of Meccano. I found a small AM/FM cassette deck at a second hand store for $5 and mounted it using Meccano. Then I installed a toggle switch to switch power and speakers between the 8-track in the dash and the cassette deck under the dash.

      In the same vein, when I bought my 2006 Sierra, I ordered the absolute most base model I could. Manual locks, crank windows, V6 5-speed, 2WD w/posi, no air, no cruise, etc. In six years and 80,000 miles, NOTHING has gone wrong with it. There's nothing TO go wrong with it.

    12. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      Yeah.

      I got a single digit, for you!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    13. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by ChoGGi · · Score: 1

      Beavis...

    14. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Genda · · Score: 2

      Or you could get a Toyota Avalon, and do standard maintenance... 220,000 miles and nothing has ever gone wrong. I've got all those things you don't have and it still works like a champ. Could the real problem be American planned obsolescence? Just a thought.

    15. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by bxbaser · · Score: 1

      and the great part is once that small center rib wears out it will be just like a regular tire.
      i wonder how long that raised pump tube will last.

    16. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      I've wondered that myself. The stuff I read on the bike version implies porous layers, I've wondered how long before they get clogged or water in them.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    17. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or you could get a Toyota Avalon, and do standard maintenance... 220,000 miles and nothing has ever gone wrong. I've got all those things you don't have and it still works like a champ. Could the real problem be American planned obsolescence? Just a thought.

      The problem with that is a well maintained Toyota Avalon is still a Toyota Avalon. BTW, Toyota doesn't have to plan obsolescence, the Japanese government has legislated it for them. It gets expensive to keep old cars in Japan.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    18. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      This was introduced at some auto & tire trade shows several years ago...

      No it wasn't.

      It was introduced in 1993.

      It was in the movie "Demolition Man" during the big car chase scene with the Olds 442 pursuing the future-current car. :D

      Simon Phoenix (Wesley Snipes) is driving one of the "modern" cars of the period when John Spartan (Sylvester Stallone) shoots Phoenix' tire. Phoenix voice-commands the car to "Auto-Inflate" which it does, frustrating Spartan.

      Couldn't find a good video clip with a brief search that wasn't a music mash-up over most or all of the dialog.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    19. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Garble+Snarky · · Score: 1

      That's an argument FOR Japanese cars - the manufacturers have no reason to build obsolescence into their cars.

    20. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet you didn't know that GM coind the term 'Planned obsolescence'

    21. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by FishTankX · · Score: 2

      No, they have an absurd system where the car needs to pass an inspection every 2 years, variable cost depending on the vehicle ($600 for 'light cars' (660cc cars), $1200 for normal cars, more for trucks etc..) and basically check all of the high wear parts on the car, and throw in compulsory auto insurance. What this tends to do, when the car starts to wear heavily, is to make repeatedly paying the shaken more expensive than buying a new car (3 year exemption) or a used car that hasn't degraded as far.

      What ends up happening is that it ends up getting sold to a car export company, which will offer to take this newly worthless car off their hands (can't drive if the car inspection certificate is expired) and prepare it for export to various left driving countries for a handsome profit (A car that's worth $0 in Japan due to Shaken might be worth $4000 and have another 100,000+ miles in it in another country. Japanese cars tend to get low mileage because the average Japanese person I believe only drives a few thousand miles per year due to the compactness of their cities. Thus, after 10 to 15 it might have only gone 90,000 miles and after of wearing the car still has a ton of life left in it.)

      What this also insures is that there is never an unsafe or rust bucket type car on the road. Cars in Japan tend to be aesthetically perfect.

    22. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

      No, they have an absurd system where the car needs to pass an inspection every 2 years, variable cost depending on the vehicle ($600 for 'light cars' (660cc cars), $1200 for normal cars, more for trucks etc..) and basically check all of the high wear parts on the car, and throw in compulsory auto insurance. What this tends to do, when the car starts to wear heavily, is to make repeatedly paying the shaken more expensive than buying a new car (3 year exemption) or a used car that hasn't degraded as far.

      The Japanese aren't the only ones who have regular safety and emissions testing on older cars... and who said anything about buying old cars? Buy new Japanese cars... My parents have owned 5 Subarus since 1984, and between them have put on more than 2 million KM's without a single major repair. I think that speaks quite highly for their reliability. And since the OP was talking about Toyota trucks specifically, you'd do well to watch this series of videos from Series 3 of BBC's Top Gear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnWKz7Cthkk

    23. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Blymie · · Score: 1

      As soon as you start driving, your tires warm up..

    24. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by kraut · · Score: 2

      No, they have an absurd system where the car needs to pass an inspection every 2 year

      Outrageous. In Europe, cars get inspected every year (with a two year exemption for new cars) [YMMW, haven't checked all countries, etc pp., E&OE]

      throw in compulsory auto insurance

      compulsory insurance? The devils!

      What this also insures is that there is never an unsafe or rust bucket type car on the road.

      And that's a bad thing why?

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    25. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall Bond doing it first though it is a feature on the HMMV IIRC.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    26. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      At the same time, the shaken system is absolutely horrible for the environment, causing a huge number of old cars to be scrapped or shipped halfway around the world, and new vehicles to be built and sold for no reason at all.

      My Peugeot is 12 years old, absolutely ancient by Japanese standards. Everything works perfectly, it has no rust at all, has only ever needed basic maintenance and it's cosmetically fine inside and out. Still rides comfortably and tackles corners with confidence, just like the day rolled out of the factory. I will admit that I need to change a non-maintenance part soon, the speedo sometimes drops to zero while I'm driving. It's a ~$50 part and takes about an hour to replace.

      By keeping my car on the road instead of replacing it, I may be using a bit more gas than if I drove a new car, but I'm free of car loans and the environment is free of the enormous amount of pollution created by the production of a new car. I fully expect it to last another 10 years and 200K km easily with basic maintenance.

      The shaken system is institutional planned obsolescence and a terrible idea. Why bother making cars that can last 20 years when most of your customers buy a new car every 3 years anyway? You see it in every single Japanese car with a couple of years on them. The paint is thin and vulnerable to chipping, the panel joins rust and parts are ridiculously expensive.

      I've always been told that French cars were crap, but let me tell you that my 12 year old Peugeot is miles and miles ahead of anything Japanese I've ever driven.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    27. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by dj245 · · Score: 1

      I believe some of the fees and/or taxes on cars in Japan go UP as a car ages.
      For the inspections, it isn't just a simple safety inspection. From the stories I have heard from my wife (who lived in Japan for 25 years), if the mechanic recommends something, you need to fix it. Even if it is something trivial. This tends to be in the thousands of dollars and gets higher as the vehicle ages. These are not quick safety inspections where they test the brakes, the steering, and the lights. They go over everything and their idea of "worn out" would make you laugh.

      It also may depend on the local laws. Some cities are stricter than others.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    28. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by FishTankX · · Score: 1

      How much does that inspection cost? In Japan, it's about 1000 euro before parts.

      My friend had a car who's suspension snapped in half 6 months AFTER passing the inspection, so it isn't foolproof either. Here's roughly what you're paying 1000 euro for, according to Wikipedia

      An exterior inspection to ensure the vehicle meets Japanese exterior regulations and does not have illegal exterior modifications such as extreme[vague] body kits.
      A wheel alignment inspection to ensure the vehicle has its wheels in-line and can turn correctly.
      A speedometer inspection to ensure the vehicle's speedometer is accurate.
      A headlamp inspection to ensure that the vehicle's headlights are correctly placed and aligned.
      A brake inspection to ensure the brakes work correctly.
      An exhaust gas/muffler inspection which includes testing carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions along with exhaust noise levels.
      An undercarriage inspection which includes looking at suspension parts.

    29. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by FishTankX · · Score: 1

      Oh, and to add to this.. in case you point to mandatory insurance as a reason for the high premium, the mandatory insurance only covers bodily injury to the other driver. Max payout is roughly $400,000 in case of death, $500,000 for injuries requiring constant care, and for injuries it's a sliding scale.

      According to the wikipedia article on vehicle inspection in europe, european vehicle inspections tend to run about 100 euro or thereabouts. So even in countries which require insurance every year (not all of them, many of them require insurance every other year) you're still paying 5x as much in Japan .

    30. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am - quite literally - out the door in 5 min., to add air in the passenger-side front tire. :-)

      ftfy

    31. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by ryanmc1 · · Score: 0

      Costco uses CO2 when it fills my tires, which does not change with temperature. So I have not had to fill my tires for a long time.

    32. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Yetihehe · · Score: 1

      In Poland similar inspection (without wheel alignment) costs about 24 euro. It's required every year.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    33. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by opentunings · · Score: 1

      Actually it's nitrogen, not CO2, according to their website. I'll let the OP update w/r/t whether CO2's thermal characteristics are similar to nitrogen's. Or perhaps CO2 was just a brain cramp.

    34. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by Bigby · · Score: 1

      In many US States, they are inspected every year too. Each State has their own standards for their inspection. PA were pretty strict.

    35. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by TheLink · · Score: 1

      What I wonder is how the system stops water from being pumped into the tyre in very wet weather (heavy rain).

      In wet and somewhat cool weather presumably the tyres might more likely be less inflated and thus more likely to do the self-inflating thing.

      --
    36. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by samoanbiscuit · · Score: 1

      I still don't understand why a single thing you said is a bad thing.

    37. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      And it takes a lot longer for the air in them to warm up than it does for the tire itself to.

      Anecdote: My recommended tire pressure is 32psi. I had a trip of about 150 miles at 80mph (NYS Thruway). When I left, all four tires were about 28psi. When I got to my destination and went to inflate them as soon as I arrived, none of them had made it up to 32psi.

    38. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      That's an argument FOR Japanese cars - the manufacturers have no reason to build obsolescence into their cars.

      Exactly,

      I like Japanese cars, just not commuter crapboxes. Give me a Honda Integra or Nissan 370 over a Chevy/Holden or Ford.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    39. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      No, they have an absurd system where the car needs to pass an inspection every 2 year

      Outrageous. In Europe, cars get inspected every year (with a two year exemption for new cars) [YMMW, haven't checked all countries, etc pp., E&OE]

      throw in compulsory auto insurance

      compulsory insurance? The devils!

      What this also insures is that there is never an unsafe or rust bucket type car on the road.

      And that's a bad thing why?

      Its very different in Japan, there are a lot of taxes on cars, a lot more than in the UK. You can buy a 500 Pound beater as long as its still registered you can drive it. Insurance costs a bit in the UK for younger drivers. You cant buy a mid 2000's car in Japan and have a reasonable expectation to be able to use it on a daily basis.

      Comparing the situation in Japan to the situation in Europe, I don't think you actually understand how bad the situation is in Japan, the system is designed to discourage people from owning cars.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    40. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by FishTankX · · Score: 1

      Let me set my thoughts out straight for you, so this makes sense in the context of the word 'Absurd' I put in the begining of my post.

      The Shaken exam system, in addition to guaranteeing road safety and the like, is structured in a way that makes it increasingly cost prohibitive to drive you car past 10 years, regardless of the road-worthiness of the vehicles. As other posts in the conversation have said, it is EXPENSIVE as heck.

      Used parts are scarce and almost never used, as they are usually used to fix up cars going out for export. New parts are freakishly expensive. My friend has his Shaken due up, and he got an estimate for $2500 to replace the suspensions in his car, as they had gotten squeaky. As another poster has mentioned, they'll ask you to replace a part because it's 'too old', not because it's dangerous or unsafe. And by law, you're obliged to replace it or you won't be able to drive your car. You can take it to another shop, but once Shaken is past due, you cannot drive your motor vehicle, you have to tow it. And estimates cost a butt ton too.

      After 10 years of age the car is Shaken'd EVERY year.

      Would you be pleased if every 2 years you're mechanic got to take a look at your car, test to see if everything works, then REQUIRE you to replace every single part (with new parts) he happens to think it be wise to replace? You've heard lots of stories about shady mechanics saying that a part needs to be replaced, when it infact is in perfect working order, right?

      What this all boils down to, is that the Shaken system ends up making cars economically disastrous to own after 10 years or so, which in Japan equates to probably about 70,000 miles. I'm from America, and i'm not sure where you're from, but could you imagine if the government in your country happened to make he car exam so strict, and so costly that eventually after driving a measily 10 years in your car, it was cheaper to buy a new car and pay the car payments, then it was to continue to pay the shaken and keep your car on the road? If that were to happen to America, probably at least 1/4 of the cars on American roads would disappear over night. Japan is a country of new cars, and it's also a country where car ownership is much lower than other areas of the world BECAUSE it's so expensive to drive. Many younger people would prefer to bicycle or bus rather than own a car, and pocket the probably $3000-4000/yr cost of running a car.

      Good? Maybe. Would you want to be subject to the same system? That's for you to decide. I'd be curious to hear.

    41. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by samoanbiscuit · · Score: 1

      Well yes actually. Ensuring everybody is driving cars in tip top condition sounds amazing. I understand that cars have a special cultural significance in the USA, but in other parts of the world, they're just machines you use to transport you from place to place. My own country in the Pacific has horrible road and car safety standards, and they're getting stricter, much to the horror of all the drivers of junkers around here. In a country like Japan with one of the best public transportation systems in the world, I don't think rates of car ownership mean the same thing as they do in the US. Just curious, are mechanics in Japan as (un)trustworthy as mechanics everywhere else?

    42. Re:Sounds different from the bike one. by FishTankX · · Score: 1

      I can only give annecdotes from my friends, as I fall under one of those people who'd "rather avoid the costs of car ownership" as for me, not having a license, the price for me of license acquisition, car purchase, and settling shaken and such would probably reach $8,000.

      From what i've heard, having a mechanic that will purposefully attempt to force you into a repair that they see as unnecessary is pretty rare. Strictly from anecdotes from the friend's i've had who were car owners, local mechanics seem pretty honest.

  2. Until of course the valve sticks open... by Nexion · · Score: 1

    aaaaand POP! ;)

    1. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by thereitis · · Score: 1

      Or, what if the tire is totally flat when you get to your car? Surely you wouldn't drive your car to pump it up, thus damaging the rim (and possibly the tire, too).

    2. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by Guppy · · Score: 1

      Until of course the valve sticks open...

      I was thinking that too. If I were engineering this thing, I'd put a rupture disk in the pumping tube (set to vent through a pinhole orifice), which would open at a pressure just below the failure point of the pneumatic tube.

    3. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by Blymie · · Score: 1

      I live in an area with very poor roads.

      I must have driven at least 1000 km on flats in my life, with nary a damaged rim to show for it.

      Heck, a year ago, I drove for 2 days on a flat, until the entire tire ripped away and tore apart.

      The rubber of the flat itself seems to protect the rim just fine, as long as you avoid deep potholes and such. So, yeah, when the rubber disintigrated, I put oon the spare.

      Other than that... may as well drive to the garage on the flat. Heck, I've driven to the garage.. slowly, and even had them plug the tire. The garage was 15 km away...

    4. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I think you meant "thus damaging the tire (and possibly the rim, too)."

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Great way to damage the inside of the tire and the sidewall. Sure, it worked. However, you're much more likely to have a 'catastrophic' blowout. Eg, you're on the highway at 80mph and "POP!"

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:Until of course the valve sticks open... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Some people take their risks by speeding, some prefer poor maintanence...

  3. New Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So how long before this technology is implemented to other 'inflatable' ummm... technologies?

    I'm sure that this has many 'practical' implications for the 'companions' of the slashdot readership?

    1. Re:New Technology by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Nice picture

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

  4. I would be happy just having ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... the pressure of all tires displayed in the instrument panel. I don't mind re-inflating periodically.

    Also, I would be able to see over time whether any tire leaked air.

    1. Re:I would be happy just having ... by JDeane · · Score: 3, Informative

      Some cars do display the PSI of the tires via TPMS, it could be combined with this system to let you know "Tire Failure is Eminent" of course this would require some sort of software and memory to keep track of normal air pressure loss. Probably be limited to the more expensive cars.

    2. Re:I would be happy just having ... by smi.james.th · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Tire Failure is Imminent"

      FTFY. Eminent tyre failure isn't really what we want here ;-)

      --
      One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...
    3. Re:I would be happy just having ... by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Ditto for brake lights burning out, slow fluid leaks, and things like fuel pumps no longer performing to spec.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  5. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    did you factor in this vs the fuel economy of an inferior donut tire, plus the fuel wasted by towing cars that don't have spares, or the fuel wasted by driving to the tire store? (Though honestly, getting them online will have you spending less and getting a better quality tire, then wal-mart will put them on for about $13/tire.)

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  6. World's Wildest Coming Attractions: by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Deploying spike strips won't undermine the gent in the wife beater quite as dramatically...

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:World's Wildest Coming Attractions: by petermgreen · · Score: 2

      I doubt this will help against spike strips. It sounds more designed for gradual re-inflation.

      IIRC they make run on flat tyres designed for use where the ability to escape quickly in the event of a deliberately punctured tyre is needed.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:World's Wildest Coming Attractions: by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Run Flat tires won't help against a spike strip... they're designed to be rigid and maintain their shape for a short distance, usually less than 50 miles, when punctured, say with a nail or bolt picked up on the road.

      Spike strips are designed to shred a tire. There isn't a lot you can do to maintain tire shape when your tread isn't there any more.

    3. Re:World's Wildest Coming Attractions: by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      IIRC they make run on flat tyres designed for use where the ability to escape quickly in the event of a deliberately punctured tyre is needed.

      Nope. They make run flat tires specifically to limp to the next service station for replacement or repair. You're not to go over 55 on a "flat" run-flat.

      There are compounds which can be placed in the tire which will seal some pretty serious holes, but unless your vehicle has a tire inflation system it won't do you any good. The canonical example is the humvee. The tires are filled with grey goo that can seal bullet holes. The vehicle has a central compressor and a system for independently controlling each tire's pressure. You can (well, could) actually get the same (or a similar) system on the civilian H1, and you can buy the same goo that the military puts into their tires.

      Running over a spike strip can cause it to lift and get caught up in the undercarriage, so there's probably nothing you can do to a tire that could make the vehicle as a whole impervious to spike strip damage. There are some tire alternatives in the works though, and perhaps one of them could be designed to armor itself.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by PortHaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you're missing the point. This is EXACTLY what we need with gas at $4/gallon.

    When your tire pressure is low, you get less MPG. So this tire, when the pressure gets low will open a valve to "reinflate" your tire to specified pressure. Ensuring proper ride, handling and better gas mileage.

    It's not going to inflate constantly, rather just when the tire drops below a set level. Kind of like a thermostat. but for pressure. A barometricstat.

  8. Price is key... by flatbedexpress · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Currently, I pay around $400-$600 per truck tire in my fleet and this is using my national fleet account from Bridgestone. I would hate to see what the price of this tire is going to be. The current prices are already hard to swallow when I have 80 Heavy-Haul trucks and over 200 trailers. That is a lot of tires!

    1. Re:Price is key... by PortHaven · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ask yourself, would you pay $50/tire more, if you got 2-4mpg more in your vehicle?

      $4,000 = 20,000 miles at 20mpg @$4/gallon (approx estimates)

      $3,636 = 20,000 miles at 22mpg @$4/gallon

      That's nearly $400 savings in 20,000 miles. So if they can do that for under $100/tire, you're about break even. Even 1mpg more would be about $200 (which would cover $50/tire). If your fleet averaged more than 20,000 miles per year. You might even end up saving $$$ in your annual budget.

    2. Re:Price is key... by flatbedexpress · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just so you know, we don't see 20mpg in the trucking industry. We get on average 4-7mpg depending on how much of the EPA garbage you have in the engine.

    3. Re:Price is key... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tractor sized gets 6-8 mpg.

    4. Re:Price is key... by funwithBSD · · Score: 2

      According to the literature, at 20% under-inflated, you lose 15% mpg. That would be significant for you.

      OTH, your vehicles probably get checked far more often than a typical vehicle and don't run that far under pressure for very long. After all, most people aren't forced to stop their private cars to check weight limits and undergo random inspections from safety officers and undergo audits of their maintenance records.

      So for you, probably the savings would come from labor: not having to check the pressure on/inflate the tires of an 18 wheeler so the truck has more time on the road, and also less wear and replacement of failed tires from under-inflation.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    5. Re:Price is key... by ZombieEngineer · · Score: 1

      This will probably come down to whether this feature can squeeze another retread out of the tire casing - that is where the savings are going to be.

      The 1% extra saving in fuel will be lost in the noise (that is - too difficult to measure).

      I was reading a DOT report on "Commercial Medium Tire Debris Study" (DOT HS 811 060) and an inference that approximately 50% of tire failures are due to belt separation and that 50% of the probable cause is due to under inflation (both refer to "all tire failures").

      Quoting the report:
      This scenario is confirmed by Kreeb et al. (2003) who noted “The act of tire pressure maintenance is labor- and time-intensive. An 18-wheeled vehicle can take from 20 to 30 minutes to check all of the tires and inflate perhaps 2 or 3 tires that may be low on air. To complete this task once each week on every tractor and trailer becomes a challenge for many fleet operators. As a result, tires are often improperly inflated.”

      ZombieEngineer

    6. Re:Price is key... by Alex+Pennace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was reading a DOT report on "Commercial Medium Tire Debris Study" (DOT HS 811 060) and an inference that approximately 50% of tire failures are due to belt separation and that 50% of the probable cause is due to under inflation (both refer to "all tire failures").

      And not enough of the cost of tread separation is borne by users of retreads. Aside from the all too common problem of tire guts strewn along the shoulder of the highway, there is the very real danger of a retread causing damage to a vehicle or possibly an accident with injuries. Last year, I had the pleasure of driving along Rt 128 here in Bostonland at night. An 18 wheeler decided to cast off one of its tires; I managed to avoid all but one of the pieces. My reward is a large dent in my once pristine car, and no clue who is responsible beyond the fact that it is 17 wheeler now.

      I'm not saying retreads are always bad, nor am I suggesting we should soak truckers because they are evil. But the way retreads are currently used have significant externalities for other road users. The very same road users who would have bought an item that the truck was carrying if they didn't have to fix their car.

    7. Re:Price is key... by stox · · Score: 2

      Apparently, so is checking the lug nuts. I've actually seen a wheel fall off a semi on I-55, southwest of Chicago. One of the scarier experiences of my driving career, as the wheel sailed across the lane in front of me, into a divider, and back across the highway again.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    8. Re:Price is key... by adolf · · Score: 1

      So it helps even more than the previous poster predicted. Bargain!

      And you get bonus points for reducing tire failure due to under-inflation. As you say, the rubber is expensive enough as it is...nevermind downtime, rig damage, mechanics, and replacement tires.

      And while it's certainly a good idea to check pressures regularly (whatever that means), at least there's a good chance that a driver won't have to drag an air hose around with him as he does so -- a pressure gauge should be sufficient, if all is going according to plan. And this will certainly save time for the driver, though perhaps not directly save you any money (depending on how your drivers are paid).

      I don't see myself ever wanting this, or anything else strange (including run-flats) on my sport sedan, but it sounds interesting for the light truck I use for work (where I do care a lot more about efficiency and reliability than I do about ride quality or handling).

      And if I owned/operated a heavy truck I think I'd be all about it...as long as the system is reliable (time will tell, but someone will be guinea pigging these).

    9. Re:Price is key... by ZombieEngineer · · Score: 1

      You are not alone in that view...

      Link to referenced study report:
      http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/Crash%20Avoidance/2008/811060.pdf

      Page 41:
      In 1999, the Commonwealth of Virginia tasked the Virginia Department of State Police to study the need for State standards for recapped vehicle tires. The occurrence of tire debris along Virginia’s highways gave rise to the perception that retread truck tires were to blame. The study would determine whether there was any substance to the perception.

      Page 43:
      The primary conclusion from the Virginia study “revealed that the quality of materials and methods of producing retreaded tires are not major factors in the problem of tire debris along the highways” (Commonwealth of Virginia, 2000). The primary study objective was not proved through the evidence collected and analyzed. Of the tire debris items analyzed, only one case was directly linked to manufacturing error in the retread process.

      Another interesting bit of information can be found on page 48, that a survey of unservicable tires that 31% were original with the remainder being retreads (mostly one or two retreads).

      The perverse bit is the more times a tire can be retreaded the more likely the road debris is going to be from a retread tire however the overall amount of road debris should drop.

    10. Re:Price is key... by Relayman · · Score: 1

      You can install an external pressurization system for a one-time capital cost and use the same tires you buy now. Do a Google search on TIREMAAX.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    11. Re:Price is key... by flatbedexpress · · Score: 1

      Yep, the other system for semis is Meritor. One system puts air in the axle and that is where the tires get their air. The other sends the airlines all the way to the tires through the axle.

    12. Re:Price is key... by flatbedexpress · · Score: 1

      My company used to NEVER use retreads. But, as the prices severly increased we had to make some tough decisions. Their is one thing, it is against the law for trucks to use retreads on steer axles.

    13. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 0

      You were driving close enough to be unable to avoid road hazards. Therefore, your fault.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    14. Re:Price is key... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Dunno how it is in the USA, but 'round here when you overtake a truck you are by definition to close to it to prevent hitting debris from an exploding tire. The lane is only [guess] 3 meters wide (9 feet)[/guess].
      Does that mean you can't overtake trucks?

      Then again back when I had a car a couple of dents more wouldn't have mattered.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    15. Re:Price is key... by Alex+Pennace · · Score: 1

      You were driving close enough to be unable to avoid road hazards. Therefore, your fault.

      Someone has already responded to you (and someone else gave you a downmod). I'm going to rebut your argument further to show readers that yes, tire debris from trucks are a negative externality and not something truckers have the right to be doing.

      I wasn't driving fast or carelessly. In fact I was driving at 55 MPH, the speed limit through that stretch -- and routinely exceeded by many. I was in the right lane when this all went down with the truck passing, and while my weaving was mostly effective there is only so much one can do. Perhaps it is my fault that I wasn't driving a car more nimble than a Prius, or my fault I wasn't doing 30 MPH instead, or my fault that I was on Rt 128, but in our system of responsibility none of those things matter.

      Further, that doesn't change the fundamental relationship between motorists on the highway: We are expected not to spew heavy pieces of rubber all over the road for people to hit. Some trucker, somewhere, got the benefit of not having to pay for proper tire upkeep. The cost of this benefit was shifted to other motorists. This isn't some imaginary externality, it is a very real cost shifting.

      As an aside, someday I hope to rig up a dashcam. Driving in the Boston area is always "interesting" and I'd like to record choice moments of other motorists for posterity. Such a scheme would also help rebut some of these nonsense arguments (and in this case, maybe help identify the nitwit trucker responsible).

    16. Re:Price is key... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Some trucker, somewhere, got the benefit of not having to pay for proper tire upkeep.

      or some corporation, who doesn't give a shit about you.

      Either way, you write down their license numbers and you call your insurance company. You might or might not get anything.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Price is key... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      I figured that....but I used simple figures that were fairly optimistic in my opinion. Just to show that the added tire cost is likely negated by the benefits in fuel economy. I didn't even get into the reduced cost of replacing blowouts due to under-inflated tires.

      Or that diesel is as of late over $4/gallon... :-(

    18. Re:Price is key... by Raenex · · Score: 1

      In fact I was driving at 55 MPH, the speed limit through that stretch -- and routinely exceeded by many. [..] I was on Rt 128

      Almost nobody does the speed limit around Boston, unless traffic is slow due to congestion. Driving 55 is actually more dangerous when the flow of traffic is well above that.

      Such a scheme would also help rebut some of these nonsense arguments (and in this case, maybe help identify the nitwit trucker responsible).

      The scariest truck incident I witnessed is when a trailer blindly switched a lane to the left with a car next to him. Luckily the guy he almost hit was able to maneuver out of the way. I should have made an effort to get his license plate and report him, but you know how it is, too busy to get involved.

    19. Re:Price is key... by scary_jeff · · Score: 1

      Who said he was going in the same direction as the truck?

    20. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Probably an unsafe assumption on my part, but I see that his reply eight hours prior to you posting this seems to confirm that he was indeed following.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    21. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      You certainly go out of your way to avoid taking responsibility. I'm also particularly fond of your rant about fat cat truckers getting rich off of your inability to drive. Spend a month OTR and maybe you'll understand.

      Speaking as a former driver's ed instructor as well as a former truck driver, the fact that you hit an avoidable object is de facto proof that you were not driving carefully. The speed limit is the fastest legal limit under any and all conditions. It is not necessarily the fastest safe speed. Nor does it immunize you against blame for your action or lack thereof.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    22. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      IIRC, most roads in the US are a little wider than 9 feet, but not so much as to make a difference regarding the argument I believe you are attempting to make.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    23. Re:Price is key... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      When you see a "gator" (tire strip left by a failure) on the road, it's not necessarily a retread failure.

      Underinflation can and does cause casing separation failure "original treaded" truck and car tires, which can leave "gators" often attributed to retread separation.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    24. Re:Price is key... by Alex+Pennace · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I am not clearly conveying my thoughts, let me try again:

      1. I was driving in the right lane, truck passing me on my left.
      2. Truck tire blows out and drops debris in the lane right in front of me.
      3. As the only thing I was doing was driving along on the highway and allowing a truck to pass me, I maintain I'm not at fault for being unable to avoid all the crap thrust upon the road.
      4. I never ranted about "fat cat truckers." In fact, I specifically said in a previous post "nor am I suggesting we should soak truckers because they are evil." In a following post I touched upon trucking's role in the economy by pointing out how the wares carried on said truck would be that much less in demand if people had to keep paying for avoidable car repairs.

      I thought I gave the sense with my measured, reasoned comments that I am willing to share the road while expecting other road users to be responsible (and likewise I will reciprocate in responsibility). I'm sorry if that wasn't more clear. Additionally I am well aware of the current state of the trucking industry. It is rough and I sympathize. Still doesn't excuse putting an unsafe rig on the road.

    25. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I think you were a tiny bit unclear in your first post, but in rereading, you did clear things up. I'm actually willing to cut you some slack if the events happened as you suggest. (And I'm not singling you out in particular, just saying we are all not the best witnesses.) So for arguments sake, I'll give you your interpretation of events. I initially thought you were in a following situation, not one where you were being passed. Mea culpa.

      I do have to stick by not so much what you said regarding truckers as some subtext that I (perhaps inadvertently and due to a thin skin on the subject) picked up.

      Generally, it's not a 'trucker' who puts an unsafe rig on the road, rather it's pressure for trucking companies. FWIW, despite the huge amount in taxes paid for a typical truck, I don't think it's enough. The wear and tear on the road surface is immeasurably higher for a truck vs a passenger car or motorcycle. Different economies and fuel tax rates don't even begin to cover it.

      I would also take exception with your admonishment of a truck being 'unsafe'. That's an imprecise term. Everything is unsafe to some degree. The question is what level of unsafety is acceptable? For most loads and weights, losing a single trailer tire out of eight is not a big deal. The load can be limped to the side of the road or some repair facility without causing much more strain on components. What IS gone is any safety margin. Yes, this ignores the problems caused by the remnants of that blown tire, but I want to look at the bigger picture (mostly because I jumped to a conclusion originally, and I'm trying to run away from it). The truck driver certainly doesn't want to do something to put his life or livelihood in danger. He doesn't get paid enough to do that. Even most trucking companies don't want to do that. Their trucks/drivers don't make money for them unless they are moving. Being investigated by NHTSA and DOT hurts that. But just like there are plenty of banks who will shit things up out of short term greed, there's plenty of trucking companies out there doing the same thing.

      So what's the answer? I dunno. Despite the lousy pay and working conditions, US business interests have decided that things are not bad enough. They have, for years, been trying to insource as much trucking as possible from Mexico.

      Having seen it from other drivers, students, and parents, most people do not take responsibility for their driving. I see and hear excuses constantly. Everyone thinks he is an above average driver. Math tells us this isn't likely. Rather than asking questions of your anecdote, I jumped to the quick, easy conclusion that fits with my experiences. For that, I apologize.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    26. Re:Price is key... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      gmhowell says, "Despite the lousy pay and working conditions, US business interests have decided that things are not bad enough. They have, for years, been trying to insource as much trucking as possible from Mexico."

      With a clear degradation in the quality of drivers. Used to be truckers were overall the safest and most courteous drivers around. Now, especially notable along the border states, I see perhaps half driving like it's their first trip in a big rig. And those are also the ones who don't do the little courtesies like blink their lights to tell you you're clear when passing, etc.

      When I was a kid, learning to be a long-haul truck driver was an apprenticed job. Does that even happen anymore, or is it all those "trucker schools"??

      [Now get off my lawn!]

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    27. Re:Price is key... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the truck was loaded with car parts... Those crafty truckers are always thinking two steps ahead!

    28. Re:Price is key... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Per mile driven, they're still the safest on the road.

      Between deregulation in the early 80's onward combined with the death of the Teamsters, no more apprenticeships.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  9. Apple sueing Goodyear by PortHaven · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apple has filed a lawsuit against Goodyear tire saying their new auto-inflating tire violates their patents. They have "an app for that", and therefore, Goodyear's later tire is cleary a copy of one of their several millions apps. Apple is not sure which one, but they know since there is an "app for everything", Goodyear must be in violation.

    They are asking $3.9 billion in damages and a halt on all sales of Goodyear tires. As they've pointed out tires are a clear infringement of their trade dress. Their buttons on their iPhones and iPads are round. And Goodyear tires are round. So that's $1 for every tire Goodyear has sold.

    1. Re:Apple sueing Goodyear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suing the wrong company??

      This was introduced at some auto & tire trade shows several years ago, it looks like Goodyear may have licensed the technology (or figured out a way around the patents??). The pumping element is in the tire sidewall, near the rim. This is the first place that I saw the idea:
              http://www.selfinflatingtire.com/ [selfinflatingtire.com] Press releases on this site go back to 2009.

    2. Re:Apple sueing Goodyear by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      Apple is on very solid grounds on this law suite. In fact all tires are really rounded rectangles, just very very well rounded. So Goodyear is going to lose. Also checking the inflation of a bicycle type by pinching it with two finger, that is also out. Covered by the multi touch patent.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:Apple sueing Goodyear by PortHaven · · Score: 1

      Darn, back to the one finger press down bicycle tire test. And I was so enjoying the multi-touch test.

      Heck, does Apple's multitouch patent cover the bedroom as well. My wife will be sorely disappointed if it does.

    4. Re:Apple sueing Goodyear by XiaoMing · · Score: 1

      Apple has filed a lawsuit against Goodyear tire saying their new auto-inflating tire violates their patents. They have "an app for that", and therefore, Goodyear's later tire is cleary a copy of one of their several millions apps. Apple is not sure which one, but they know since there is an "app for everything", Goodyear must be in violation.

      They are asking $3.9 billion in damages and a halt on all sales of Goodyear tires. As they've pointed out tires are a clear infringement of their trade dress. Their buttons on their iPhones and iPads are round. And Goodyear tires are round. So that's $1 for every tire Goodyear has sold.

      In a related note, the judge also ruled that tires in general were too similar to "rectangles" with extremely "rounded corners", which Apple also holds the patent to, and has ruled in favor of Apple in a reverse class action suit against all tire manufacturers.

  10. Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How about tires that don't need air?

    1. Re:Self-foaming tires. by gagol · · Score: 1

      +5 insightful

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    2. Re:Self-foaming tires. by MachDelta · · Score: 1

      Michelin tried that, it didn't work out too well for most applications.

    3. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      +5 insightful

      Bad idea. Foam filled and other "airless tires" all have very high rolling resistance (takes more energy to roll than an air filled tire). Their only applications are where the cost of a flat is very high (or very inconvenient) -- for example military vehicles or wheel chairs.

    4. Re:Self-foaming tires. by funwithBSD · · Score: 4, Informative

      -5 idiotic to GP post.

      Solid tires suck, there is a reason we use pneumatic tires. Foam filled ones ride harshly and weigh more than air filled ones. There are foam filled tires out there, generally used where ride quality is not a concern.

      At least, I presume he means that because he says "Don't need air"

      Tires with a self sealing foam system still need air. Tires get low because the bead and valve aren't prefect, not because there are holes.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    5. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      -5 you're a fucking moron.

    6. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever drive a forklift?

    7. Re:Self-foaming tires. by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Tires get low because the bead and valve aren't prefect

      Valves aren't perfect. And neither is your spelling, it seems.

    8. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I"m pretty sure the GP is correct, the bead and valve are not prefect.

    9. Re:Self-foaming tires. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Foam filled ones ride harshly and weigh more than air filled ones.

      Tires weigh 20+lb each, a couple pounds of foam doesn't matter too much, the big problem is that the foam consumes kinetic energy and turns it into heat which is then dissipated through the tire and you don't get it back, whereas you get more of the energy back from the air. If this problem could be solved, foam would still be a good idea, because blowouts and punctures still suck.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Self-foaming tires. by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      My spelling is perfect, if I wanted the word prefect.

      Butt hay, knowbody is prefect.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    11. Re:Self-foaming tires. by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Looking at the companies that sell the foam, a 16 inch tire would be around 15lbs, that is a significant weight.

      We did solid tires in the past, before Mr. Dunlop developed the pneumatic tire and changed everything.

      Do we have better materials now? Probably, but as you say, the heat generation would probably kill your tire first.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    12. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Tires get low because the bead and valve aren't prefect, not because there are holes.

      Having just fixed a tire with a slow leak because of a screw embedded in it, that isn't always true.

    13. Re:Self-foaming tires. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having used foam-filled tires a a lot when building battlebots, I can say firmly that a foam-filled car tire capable of supporting said car would weigh a lot more than a few pounds more than a regular tire. I'd guess probably at least 50% more, which being sprung weight and drivetrain weight, would have a pretty severe impact on the performance of the car.

    14. Re:Self-foaming tires. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If I were designing a foam-filled car tire, the foam would only provide run-flat capability, and it would still be inflated... and thus, it would still benefit from the technology discussed in the fine article. Then you could use a much less dense foam.

      The less performant a vehicle is, the less impact adding unsprung mass has on its performance, so perhaps part of the solution is to finally get rid of fast cars, and give us little bitty slow ones that get loaded on trains for long trips, or something like. Then we can use foamed tires AND hub motors :p

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Those tires need windows you can open to let the air in.

  12. ah.. by Adam+Appel · · Score: 1

    About 5 years until they hit the market?

    --
    They come in the dark, only in the darkest.
  13. Overrated. by pla · · Score: 1

    A regulator in the tire senses when tire-inflation pressure drops below a pre-set point

    Aside from the "self-inflating" part, all new cars sold in the US have a built-in tire pressure sensor.

    Sounds great, right? The car lets you know when you need to add air, so you always have safe, optimal-fuel-efficiency tires. Right?

    Except... If you live anywhere North of, say, Miami, these goddamned useless sensor will tell you to add air all fucking winter long.

    I see these tires, if they work at all (and gimmicky crap like this has a long history of failing at the drop of a hat), lasting exactly one season... On the coldest night of the year when you drive home late, they'll "fix" your low pressure. Then six months later, after a long tire-warming road trip 400 miles from home, the massively over-spec pressure will blow out your bulb seals. Time for new tires, thank you for buying Goodyear!

    1. Re:Overrated. by pokoteng · · Score: 1

      And this regulator can't have itself vary depending on temperature?

      --
      the game
    2. Re:Overrated. by OhPlz · · Score: 2

      Why does your TPMS go off all winter long? It will go off when the air temperature drops. Adjust the tire pressure and you should be good until spring. I've had this feature since '06 and that's always how it has worked out.

      The only thing that bugs me is that even on cars with touch screens, they cheap out and don't tell you which tires are at fault.

    3. Re:Overrated. by mspohr · · Score: 1

      You may have a problem with your TPMS but mine works great.
      I live in the North and it gets cold in the winter and hot in the summer. Never had a false alarm from my TPMS.
      I did have one low pressure alert and guess what?? ... the tire had low pressure! Put a few pounds in it and good to go.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:Overrated. by pcgc1xn · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because I would much rather be driving around all winter with under inflated tyres, so I can increase my chances of a blowout when it is -10F.
      If you are having to add air to your tyres all winter there is something wrong.
      Oh, and if you are that worried about a blowout due to overinflation, you could, you know, reduce the pressure.

    5. Re:Overrated. by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      It should inflate your tires if they are low-pressure because they are cold. However, it should also decrease pressure once they heat up enough to go above the max. An overpressure valve would help. This can be in one and the same ride, because tires heat up when you drive.
      That leaves the "it's gimmicky so it'll fail catastrophically" however.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  14. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can I regulate this? My car uses fairly higher pressure than the average.

    Bu the way, my tire pressure remains fairly constant over the seasons, I only need to check it twice a years, why should I buy an heavyer, softier tire? There is no economy in that.

  15. Dating tip #45: by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    'external inflation pressure intervention.'

    Do not ask your girlfriend for this, ever.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  16. Police Tires, no? by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 1

    Once upon a time there was young, generally decent chap who'd previously had some unpleasant experiences with the police. He wasn't particularly inclined toward evil deeds, but he was young, played video games and listened to punk rock. One night en passant a police vehicle, he got a wild idea. This chap, who typically carried a general purpose tool, aka a pocket knife, imagined inserting it into one or more of the tires attached to the police vehicle. The notion was appealing enough that he decided to test it. After a cursory glance in 360 degrees, he furtively approached the police vehicle, hesitating only for a moment before the tip of his blade met the nylon tire. He had been expecting all sorts of loud bangs and at the very least a distinct hissing sound. When nothing but the stiff resistance of the well-built tire was observed, he might have stayed to ponder, but instead retreated half-pleased at his own failure. The tire was unaffected, but he was not -- for despite the generally shoddy nature of the seemingly superfluous societal components that menaced about him, he realized that some were intelligently designed. Tires that could not be popped; it made sense, so much unlike so many other aspects of the strange and arbitrary adult world that imposed itself onto him daily.

    The years passed and he gave up punk rock for newer things like dubstep and IDM. He remembered all his bad encounters, which were now a medley of too many individuals to have any single one stand out. He no longer suffered such futile impulses, re-focusing his efforts in more positive directions, like beer and bash-scripting and nature. But still to this day, every time he sees a screw or nail laying on the asphalt imperiling the tires of all but a special few, he wonders why; why can we not all have tires that yield not to trivial roadside rubbish?

    --
    Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
    1. Re:Police Tires, no? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

      why can we not all have tires that yield not to trivial roadside rubbish?

      We can. We just choose not to pay for them

      The police, on the other hand, (a) don't have to pay for them--your tax dollars at work--and (b) have an arguably worthwhile need to not have to worry about flat tires.

      Just out of curiosity, what do people around here think of "run flat" tires? A new car I'm considering getting comes with them standard and I'm curious...

    2. Re:Police Tires, no? by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just out of curiosity, what do people around here think of "run flat" tires? A new car I'm considering getting comes with them standard and I'm curious...

      That depends. If you buy a car to get from point A to point B, they aren't that bad. Factor in that replacements are more expensive, wear out quicker, and mechanics often charge more to mount/balance them, versus the extremely occasional flat tire.

      However, if you are any sort of auto enthusiast, run-flat tires are the work of the devil. Very small selection, all with bad handling and poor traction. Many people are not buying BMWs any more simply because they all come with run-flats, and the extra added expense of buying four real tires for a brand new old car is just silly.

    3. Re:Police Tires, no? by mspohr · · Score: 2

      Had a friend who has a BMW with run flat tires. He got a flat and decided to just run flat. Worked for a few miles then everything came apart. Required a tow truck and much time and expense to put everything back together again. I don't think these tires are very good.
      (I'm sure there is a joke in here about iPhone users and BMW drivers but I can't think of it now... perhaps someone more brilliant will come up with it.)

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:Police Tires, no? by pcgc1xn · · Score: 1

      He must have got unlucky, or perhaps they tyre sustained damage which caused the loss of inflation.
      I was suspicious until I drove in a BMW "thrash/test our car day". On one of the cars, they removed the valve. No air pressure, nada. (ok physics nazis, atmospheric). We then proceeded to do 0-60-0s and a slalom on the way back. When you were really nailing it through the slalom, you could tell the car was a little looser than it should be, but better than an average car with inflated tyres. But the experience of being able to do a slalom course with a flat tyre was amazing.

      When we had finished our runs, we looked at the tyre and it has a bit of scuffing on the sidewall. And that was it. Several hours of people abusing it, and it was still driveable.

    5. Re:Police Tires, no? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Very small selection, all with bad handling and poor traction

      I'm afraid you're talking out your ass: run-flat tires have generally poor ride quality due to their reinforced sidewalls... but those very same sidewalls provide increased resistance to lateral tire deformation, which provides... improved handling, at least on smooth surfaces. Mind you, the increased weight for a run-flat doesn't do anything to help unsprung weight or rotational mass, however, so it could be argued that (all other things being equal) a lighter tire will likely offer better handling on rougher surfaces and slightly reduced performance accelerating and decelerating.

      As for your claim of "poor traction," that's entirely relative to the type of surface a given tire is designed for (after all, we don't expect a high-performance warm-weather tire to offer enhanced performance in deep mud). I therefore can only assume you were referring to "grip." Do you see that little number labeled "UTGQ" on the side of [just about any] passenger car tire? The lower that number, the higher the grip of the tire (race tires usually have a UTGQ of zero). Why don't you check out the UTGQ numbers on some run-flats and see if they truly offer the "poor traction" that you claim they do?

    6. Re:Police Tires, no? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      and slightly reduced performance accelerating and decelerating.

      This should have read "slightly improved acceleration and deceleration."

    7. Re:Police Tires, no? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Run-flat tires are designed to be operated over short distances at speeds not exceeding 55 mph. They provide limp-home capability, not run forever without air capability. I imagine you have cottoned to this already.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Police Tires, no? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid you're talking out your ass: run-flat tires have generally poor ride quality due to their reinforced sidewalls... but those very same sidewalls provide increased resistance to lateral tire deformation, which provides... improved handling, at least on smooth surfaces.

      Did you seriously just write that? The only one here spewing from the wrong orifice is you. Handling has to deal with how tossable the car is, not whatever you think it's about. This is directly related to traction and run-flats have less of it. It does have something to do with sidewall stiffness, however having a very rigid sidewall means that the sidewall compresses less during hard cornering, meaning that when camber shifts off the baseline (0) the tire is less likely to conform to the road, meaning less traction.

      Having a short and/or hard sidewall means that the tire is more predictable and does less of the work of smoothing out the ride, but it also means that the suspension has to do more work. Vibrations filtered by the tire in a high/soft sidewall system have to be filtered by the bushings where there is a low profile tire, or a tire with many sidewall plys. Excessive vibration make the car less controllable, so that can actually decrease handling. The suspension of a car is a system which includes the tires. The sidewall alone does not determine the quality of handling, and many vehicles with tall sidewalls have excellent handling, with the shape of the tire being an intentional part of the system.

      As for your claim of "poor traction," that's entirely relative to the type of surface a given tire is designed for (after all, we don't expect a high-performance warm-weather tire to offer enhanced performance in deep mud).

      You are astoundingly pedantic, but that's not very interesting. We're talking about traction in typical driving conditions, and run-flats have less of it than normal tires, again specifically due to the rigidity of the tire, not the compound.

      Why don't you check out the UTGQ numbers on some run-flats and see if they truly offer the "poor traction" that you claim they do?

      Because a laboratory test that tests one material against another tells you dick about how the tire will behave in real-world conditions. And it is a fact that the run-flats on BMWs are much maligned, and you can trivially find online numerous examples of PVC containers with shrader valves being used to store the TPMS sensors in BMWs so that normal tires can be used on the vehicle. And the stock tires are hated for what? Poor handling, lack of traction. People don't buy sports cars so they can watch the yaw and traction control activate all day. They ALSO decrease the ride quality, because the tire is so firm, and you feel more bumps.

      I've thought about going run-flat on my mercedes, but I live in hill country and don't want to destroy the handling OR the ride quality. Run-flat is a nice safety feature, but it will impede my ability to run the pothole slalom, and it costs a lot of money, too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Police Tires, no? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Did you seriously just write that?

      Waste words much? :)

      The only one here spewing from the wrong orifice is you.

      I'm all ears; let's see what you've got.

      Handling has to deal with how tossable the car is...

      It is definitely a major factor and for some, the only factor (such as for those whose ideal ride is a Miata).

      ...not whatever you think it's about.

      So, being someone who prefers the handling offered by a heavier car with far greater amounts of lateral grip over that of a lighter, arguably more "tossable" machine... I'm just wrong (according to you, anyway).

      Excessive vibration make the car less controllable, so that can actually decrease handling

      Hence my use of the words "at least on smooth surfaces."

      The suspension of a car is a system which includes the tires.

      In practice, yes but ideally, no: tires are supposed to provide maximum grip and minimum rolling resistance while actually allowing the shock absorbers/vibration dampeners to do their job. Yes, there's a trade-off between sidewall stiffness and the ability to deform laterally (thereby conforming to the road surface) but again, that has a lot to do with the suspension; properly-fitted anti-sway bars will greatly offset the need for the tire to deform laterally to maintain a proper contact patch.

      You are astoundingly pedantic

      If I'd gone off beating a non-existent horse by focusing on his use of the word "traction," you might have a claim there. However, I did nothing of the sort: I pointed out the difference between "traction" and "grip," presumed that he in fact meant the latter concept... and proceeded accordingly.

      Because a laboratory test that tests one material against another tells you dick about how the tire will behave in real-world conditions.

      As an aside, I find it hard to read a sentence that begins with "Because" and still take the writer seriously, but I'll give it my best shot. ;) Obviously the tire grip quotient (and corresponding rate of tire wear) is a laboratory-derived figure that doesn't necessarily portray the actual grip of a given tire in a variety of real-world situations. However, your implication that comparing grip is therefore pointless couldn't be farther from the truth: a tire (run-flat or otherwise) with a UTGQ of 160 is going to have far better "grip" (what the parent poster referred to as "traction") in most real-world conditions than another tire with a UTGQ of 300.

      I never said run-flats don't have their disadvantages (I seem to recall actually mentioning those very same downsides, before you paraphrased them back at me as if I'd never mentioned them in the first place). I would certainly never fit run-flats to a "good car for tossers" (sic) such as a lightweight and underpowered Miata. However, fitted to the right vehicle (which in my case was a 3700lb, ~400hp all-wheel drive station wagon with a race suspension), the insane amount of sheer grip afforded by my Bridgestone Potenza RE050 run-flats regularly allowed me to pass far lighter, far more "tossable" cars on the inside lane. And results in this arena very much speak for themselves.

      This 3-part documentary should go a long way towards dispelling the myth that "tossability" directly translates to increased handling performance:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2kPs3C1NC0

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuxwR5i6Vlo

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_NNdtDDxVw

    10. Re:Police Tires, no? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. More surface area means more traction. You have more tire on the ground.

  17. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by mlts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where this technology is needed is RV and trailer tires. If a car tire blows, usually one has a time where it runs flat. A travel trailer or a fifth wheel, you don't feel the blown tire until it has blown off the rim and caused significant amounts of damage to the rig. Having something like this wouldn't just save 1-2 MPG, it might save a $50,000 trailer or more if it keeps a tire on the rim.

  18. Neat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neat idea, as long as they factor in some kind of fail safe against the system over-inflating and exploding the tire. That would be very bad and probably result in severe damage to the car, and perhaps death to the occupants & others in their way.

    1. Re:Neat by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      No, sorry to be a wet blanket but it wouldn't. Many, moons ago I had a job as a petrol pump jockey, in the 70's people served you at petrol stations, they filled up your tank, cleaned your widscreen, checked your oil, tyres, wiper water, and brake fluid (the aim of this "free service" was to sell tyres, engine oil, wiper blades, etc). I was standing behind the counter watching a guy who had spent ages trying to inflate his own tyre (he was not a paying customer), I was just about to walk over an offer him help when BOOM the tyre exploded with a puff of dust while he was knelt down in front of it. I figure he cannot have put more that 100psi in it since that's was the compressor's output. The guy was unhurt but very pale and shaken, he also had a light coating of tyre dust, no visable damage to the car other than the now totally deflated tyre. Apon hearing the explosion the boss strolled out of the workshop and called out to the guy across the courtyard - "I have new one of those in stock".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    2. Re:Neat by vrt3 · · Score: 1

      But imagine what happens if this explosion happens while driving at highway speeds.

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    3. Re:Neat by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      But if a tire explodes when doing 120 km/h (75 mph) the handling of the car changes dramatically. I'd assume the car would be at a great risk to crash, causing aforementioned damage to the car and the occupants.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  19. Redundant by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

    All cars in the USA already come with an electronic system telling the driver if a tire is underinflated.

    Yes, this relies on the driver actually doing something about it - but just how idiot proof do we really need to make cars?

    1. Re:Redundant by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Typically most drivers don't re-inflate the tires themselves. This is usually done when getting the next oil change or taking a trip to the dealership. But yes, it does require those pesky warning lights to grab their attention and remind them.

      Where this technology really has a benefit would be for 18 wheelers like the article states. Living in Houston, I constantly see blown tire tread all curled on the highways. It's a port city, so the level of 18 wheeler traffic is to be expected. But the problem is when tire pressure is low. This generates a lot of heat (in an already hot and humid city) and shortens the life of the tire. Eventually it breaks down and disintegrates all over the public road ways causing a life hazard for other motorists. Tire tread is a lot of mass to be hitting at 65 to 70 MPH. If it doesn't cause you to wreck, at the very least it will cause major cosmetic damage to the front bumper's plastics.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Redundant by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I constantly see blown tire tread all curled on the highways.

      Now, I have seen a tire on a semi blow out, but how much of what you're seeing is blowout (has sidewall attached) and how much of it is just failed retread? Retreads should be illegal, except maybe on long hauls where they're statistically less likely to kill someone. They're horribly fucking hazardous.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Redundant by Urza9814 · · Score: 1

      Typically most drivers don't re-inflate the tires themselves. This is usually done when getting the next oil change or taking a trip to the dealership. But yes, it does require those pesky warning lights to grab their attention and remind them.

      Really? I reinflate my tires a couple times a year (when the temperature drops -- so usually once around October, once around December, and sometimes once in spring/summer) and there's _always_ a line at the air pump. Hell I've gone at midnight and still had to wait!

    4. Re:Redundant by couchslug · · Score: 1

      I'm a mechanic and welder, and help out truck mech buds now and then:

      Many truckers don't give a fuck about anything but getting whatever junk trailer is inflicted on them by the fleet owner to the destination without getting busted.

      Poor truck and trailer fleet maintenance is common.

      The only answer is imposed discipline, meaning more DOT inspections and fines.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  20. Performance in wet weather? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not trolling here, but how does it pump only air and not water? I've driven in some wet parts of the country, and many more that were snowy and slushy. There's a lot of dust and moisture down there on the road at times.

  21. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can I regulate this?

    You can't. The government regulates everything.

  22. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

    I have to say this one is an actual invention, very clever. First invention I've come across in several years.

  23. Water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How does this system not slowly pump more and more water into you tires on rainy days?

  24. patently plausible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might send a similar script to TheOnion; it's so bizarrely close to possible, they'd probably use it. In fact, the same sense I got while reading this comment, is the same I get when reading genuine iNews.
    ..Or were you being serious? I just can't tell anymore ;P

  25. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

    TFA says $627 lost per year for a trucker due to a 1% loss of efficiency from underinflated tires, but that's only 153 gallons worth at the stated $4.10/gal for US diesel; what is that, about 5 fillups for a big rig? So it sounds like a minor win for truckers; a noble idea all the same. I wonder what the collective fuel savings would be if everyone used these. I used to think congestion must waste some staggering amount of oil, before finding some figures that suggested congestion leads to loss of ca. 280k barrels of oil consumed as gasoline in the US per day - which sounds like a lot, until you realize we plow through about 9 million barrels of gasoline daily.

  26. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see how his would help with blowouts other than perhaps by reducing tire wear a bit by maintaining ideal pressure. No amount of "trickle-charging" is going to compensate for the fact that there is a gaping hole preventing the tire from holding air. And the usage scenario for trailers and RVs is generally sit around for months on end and then get driven around for a short while - unless the charge rate is pretty fast you'd still want to top off your tires before you hit the road, though I suppose it would be handy for those absent-minded individuals that forget to do so until they've been on the road for a hundred miles or so.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  27. Contrary to popular misconception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Tire pressure should be set by the specific application. In a passenger car that generally has a weight that varies only a small amount over its service life, this tire could save a little time, but since it will almost certainly cost more, I don't much see the point. Car tires don't generally leak that much, and thanks to TPMS, (such as the one in my Chevy Impala with which I can see the pressure in each tire displayed on my dashboard) I can check without having to take the valve stem caps off. When it gets a little low, I top off the tires. However, the pressure that should be in each tire corresponds to the characteristics of the tire, AND THE LOAD ON THE TIRE. If you drive on tires with pressure that is too low, you get degraded performance, a spongier ride, increased likelihood of rim damage due to road irregularities, debris, etc., as well as excessive wear to the left and right edges of the tires. If the pressure is too high, depending on HOW MUCH they're too high by, you run risks ranging from degraded performance, increased chance of a blow-out, and the associated loss of control and crash that often occurs with this sort of thing at high speed, especially dangerous if two or more fail simultaneously. As a minimum, you can expect better fuel economy from your over-inflated tires, but decreased tire life span, as you'll see excessive wear in the center of the tread area, which also means greater odds of a flat from puncture than you'd have running over the same thing with a tire having the proper pressure.

    As for load, you must understand that the pressure inside the tire is equivalent to the distribution of weight over the entire area of the contact patch, the area of the tires' tread that touches the surface on which you're driving (the road, usually, though occasionally the sidewalk for more adventurous types). So if your tires are inflated to 50 p.s.i., and they're supposed to be at 25, the area in contact with the road should be about half of what it should be. Some people mistakenly believe their tires should be inflated to the MAXIMUM TIRE PRESSURE marking on the sidewall of the tire, and that's simply NOT TRUE under most circumstances. That's a specification that indicates the greatest internal/external pressure differential the tire can safely and reliably handle, under the normal stresses a tire is exposed to, when used in an application for which it was designed, and still give service life as specified and maybe also warranted by the manufacturer.

    So if a tire mounted to a passenger car that weighs 3000 pounds, and has a recommended tire pressure of 30 p.s.i. front and rear, is designed to have a contact patch that is 75 square inches, and you are routinely carrying 1000 pounds (between you, the driver, and all the cargo, and let's say the weight is more or less evenly distributed throughout the car,) the load on each tire is 4/3 what the specified pressure was intended for. You should therefore increase the COLD pressure for each tire, (measured and filled when the car has NOT just been driven, as per the manual of every car and truck I'VE ever owned...) by the same amount, so each tire should be at about 40 p.s.i., which BTW, if you carefully note the shape of the tire when the car is empty, the size of the contact patch, you should find it is the same when the pressure is bumped up to 40, with the extra weight added.

    Failure to adjust will result in tires that are overinflated or underinflated, depending on when you failed to adjust. Obviously, if you're carrying 3000 pounds in a car that weighs 3000 pounds, you'll probably void the warranty on car and tires, may damage both, and since the tires are probably not designed to handle TWICE THE RECOMMENDED PRESSURE for that car, you run the risk of catastrophic tire failure.

    On SUV's and pickup trucks, esp. heavy duty ones, you'll note that in point of fact, the tires that come on them usually have a substantial overhead, can be aired up to much higher pressure than the recommended. This is because such vehicles

    1. Re:Contrary to popular misconception by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      The pressure in the tire depends on load because the more weight on the tire, the more it deforms. If the tire is regulating the pressure based on the deformation of the tire it could set the pressure correctly regardless of car weight, number of passengers ,what seats they're sitting in. temperature, amount of luggage in the boot, amount of fuel in the tank...

    2. Re:Contrary to popular misconception by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The pressure in the tire depends on load because the more weight on the tire, the more it deforms

      It doesn't change much at all. The tire changes its shape but the volume doesn't change much. When you add a load, the tire settles, the contact patch grows, the sidewall bulges proportionally to maintain the volume, and as the contact patch has grown there's more square inches for the pressure per square inch to act upon. If you add a thousand pounds to a truck you don't see the tire pressure increase by the amount you'd expect if you did the math, because a tire is structural, it's not just a bag.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Contrary to popular misconception by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Exactly... the tire changes shape, ie: it deforms. Exactly that I said.

    4. Re:Contrary to popular misconception by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Exactly... the tire changes shape, ie: it deforms. Exactly that I said.

      Very good. The point is, it deforms in a way that permits the internal pressure to remain more consistent than you'd think. If it didn't, it wouldn't work going down the road either.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  28. Water, Snow, Thorns... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does it do under these conditions?

  29. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many tires have to be replaced due to slow leaks? Often they can be fixed but a system like this could determine when it is economically feasible to fix a slow leak (since energy is required to maintain inflation and it is required to replace an otherwise servicable tire).

    Hell, my biggest worry might be tires getting run to the point catastrophic failure.

  30. What if... by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Funny

    What if I drive backwards? Does it deflate the tire?

    1. Re:What if... by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Most tires are necessarily reversed when rotated. So no. I'm sure it works independently of direction.

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    2. Re:What if... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Not only you would deflate the tire, if you listen to country music, the girlfriend will come back, the ranch will unburn from ashes, and the gas tank of the truck will fill itself and your wallet will get back the cash too. This thing is amazing when run backwards.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  31. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by plover · · Score: 2

    I know a guy who runs a fleet of 500 trucks. If he could save $627 annually per truck that would mean a third of a million dollars back in his pocket every year. Another benefit is if his 500 drivers are each spending 5 minutes a day checking tire pressure, he could possibly reduce that to once per week if he rolled with these tires, saving another $200,000 annually on simple maintenance. (I don't know how anything about how often his drivers check tire pressure manually, or if they have remote sensors, so that could be completely imaginary savings.)

    Under-inflated tires fail more often than properly maintained tires, which means less down-time dealing with flats. That doesn't sound like a big deal, but when you realize that tires last only about 80,000 miles each and you have 18 on a rig, that could be a tire failure every 13 days. If all your tires are under-inflated, they would all last about 9% less, which would be a failure every 12 days. Most failed tires are caught by inspection, where the driver is already in a truck stop and repairs are less costly than side of the road service, and some tire failures are drivable to the next truck stop, where the driver will burn some downtime while he's getting it fixed, but not every failure is so convenient. Roadside service will take a couple of hours out of your schedule while you wait for the local guy to come out and fix it. Plus, tires are not cheap (the smaller trailer tires can cost around $500 each for new, (less for retreads,) and steer tires are significantly higher) and if a blowout damages something else, it's even more money. You want to get every mile you can out of those tires.

    And what happens if you're running a hot shot, with a significant penalty for failing to deliver on time? One late load can cost a large amount in direct losses, (think six figures) plus the potential loss of business if the big-spending customer never hires that sloppy trucking firm again.

    Every little improvement is significant to someone when multiplied by fleet sizes.

    --
    John
  32. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Circlotron · · Score: 1

    Amen to that. On my last car I pumped up the right rear tyre every week for 18 months till it wore out. Life would be greatly simplified for terminally tight-assed people like me.

  33. When was the last time you inflated your tires? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the last time the check tire light came on. Some gas stations will let you pump air for free if you ask nicely.

  34. tires warm up when driving by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    You may not notice, but if you drive on a dry road in winter, your tires will warm up. This means that in winter, you will often have cold tires that are under inflated when you step into your car after a cold night, but will warm up and be on pressure after 10-20 minutes of driving. I don't see how a TPMS is going to deal with that in any other way than indicate the tires are under inflated until they heat up, because they technically are. The TPMS has no way to see how long, fast or sporty you are going to drive and even if it does, it still should warn you since cold, under inflated tires will give you less grip than you may expect.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:tires warm up when driving by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I don't see how a TPMS is going to deal with that in any other way than indicate the tires are under inflated until they heat up, because they technically are.

      The TPMS deals with that the same way that is always dealt with: Tire pressures are specified cold. Some performance vehicles may give you a hot tire pressure so that you're not taking air out of your tires when they're hot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:tires warm up when driving by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Trouble is what they define as "cold". 100F degrees one place and season, 70F degrees another place and one season, -40F degrees still another place and another season. That's a lot of pressure difference. Yet drive down a dry road at -40F for a while and your tires will get warm enough to melt ice next time you park.

      So, which "cold" standard are we talking about??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  35. hardly ever by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    Run flat tires will pop and hiss if you stick a sharp object through the side plies or if you really feel like you have to prove something, the thread, but will not flatten so much that they can't be driven to the next service point. Tires that are "bullet proof" essentially aren't, but have an inner ring of special reinforced plastic constructed when the tire is half on the rim. Those still pop from the bullets, but hardly drop to the ground at all, giving you even more time/speed to get away from danger and to the next tire replacement location.

    Putting a knife in an inflated car tire requires a lot more force than most people think. I think it's a lot more probable that the young punk trying to do this tried to stick a wide blade into a regular tire and found out that you need to use an ice pick or similar object to actually have enough strength in your arm to penetrate it.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  36. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

    Not to mention the fuel wasted by having underinflated tires....

    Also, most of the *good* tires, the tire shop will install and balance them as part of the MSRP. My car has Michelin X-ICE i2 in the winter, and Bridgestone Potenza tires in the summer, and I don't think I've ever needed to pay for a wheel balance on that car.

  37. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

    given that different cars have different manufacturer-specified inflation levels, it's a fairly safe bet that when a consumer version of this hits the market, it'll be programmable in some way.

  38. old technology! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    about 25 years ago when the Berlin Wall came down, my buddy bought a 6x6 offroad truck from the Soviet Red Army
    which had self inflating tyres
    probably a much less sophisticated system, probably fully mechanical, but it was right there!

  39. OMG let's hope Apple doesn't find out and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sue them in court for infringing on one of their mobile device patents.
    Tires and trucks are mobile "devices" after all.....

  40. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
    1) Heh, yes.

    2) Same tire online sent to your house, then you drive and get it balanced, will tend to save you a pretty penny.

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  41. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

    Not really... :) When you factor in the cost of shipping... different economies and such, though, could be different in your neck of the woods. Here in Canada, not so much. Plus, when I bought the winter tires, there was a manufacturer rebate on, and I got enough cash back from Michelin to cover the cost of the rims for the winter tires. If I'd bought them online, I wouldn't have qualified for that. :)

    I expect the winter tires to last at least another 3, maybe 4 years before I have to buy new ones, and the summer tires I'll probably be replacing at the end of next season (so the start of the following season to take advantage of summer sales)... if I remember, I'll check online at that time. But I'm also probably going to go with Pirellis instead of the Bridgestones at that point, and I'm not sure you can even get those online. A quick search online for the Pirellis I like right now, however, I stand to save about $6/tire over the price that I was quoted by my tire shop, and the tire shop price included installation and balance.

  42. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

    ... and I see they want $385/tire for the Bridgestones I have right now.... I have no idea how much they cost Subaru when I bought the car, but considering that they were included in the purchase price of the car, I doubt it was anywhere near that much....

  43. It sounds like a peristaltic pump. by gblackwo · · Score: 1

    But I didn't RTFA.

  44. Huh? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    I don't see how his would help with blowouts...

    The side wall on under-inflated tires is flexed more per revolution by orders of magnatude than at proper inflation. It is akin to bending a paper clip.

    1. Re:Huh? by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Yes, but as I stated given the usage patterns of RVs/trailers the charging rate would have to be very high or you'd be back home again before you were up to anything like proper pressure. This tech has great potential in vehicles that see a lot of time on the road, but that only describes a tiny percentage of RVs and trailers. So for that application the question would be just how fast can this thing pump.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  45. Related conundrum by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Hundreds of millions of tires go from fresh, deep tread with the tiny mold fingers to terrifyingly bald and that volume difference goes... where? Click n' Clack never could come up with an answer; maybe someone here knows.

    1. Re:Related conundrum by Slugster · · Score: 1

      Hundreds of millions of tires go from fresh, deep tread with the tiny mold fingers to terrifyingly bald and that volume difference goes... where? ...

      I have no cite--but have read that much of it ends up as tire dust, which (now in most US cities) is the main ingredient of smog.

      The article claimed that this was the problem with trying to increase air quality by enforcing lower standards of tailpipe emissions--the two main factors left are tire dust, and diesel-engined vehicles. Tire dust isn't being addressed at all, and diesel-engined vehicles aren't held to the same emissions standards as gasoline-powered vehicles.

      ...So all that raising EPA emissions on gasoline vehicles is doing is making people buy new cars for no real benefit--other than stimulating a dying economy a bit longer. (along with airbags [$2500+ per car], and ethanol-cut fuel [10% of the fuel you buy now is nothing])

    2. Re:Related conundrum by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Click n' Clack never could come up with an answer; maybe someone here knows.

      Your feet don't turn black when you walk on the streets barefoot just because of the oil. Tires wear away into dust, and parts of them also gets left in the pavement, dries out, and turns to dust.

      We breathe that shit. This is just another reason plants are so goddamned important. They trap dust. Cities without a lot of plant mass (water helps too) are far beyond unhealthy and disgusting.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Related conundrum by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I recall reading somewhere that using old ground up tires instead of gravel in the asphalt (which itself dusts up with use) was supposed to cut down tire wear thus reduce both tire dust and asphalt dust. Anyone know offhand how well such road surfaces last, and whether they're less slippery when wet?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  46. Future NTSB Recall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How long can it be before we see an NTSB recall of exploding tires?

  47. Look at the bigger picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a great discussion of this in The Wide Lens.

    In a nutshell, Michelin developed technology similar to this in the 1990's and partnered with Goodyear to bring it to market. It was pretty cool, but the problem was they couldn't get tire installers to pay for the expensive equipment and employee certification required to implement the technology. Fine for commercial or military fleets, but the overall ecosystem didn't work for consumers. What ended up happening was that when you got a flat you ended up having to replace all 4 tires and only at the dealer. Lawsuits ensued.

    Hopefully they have resolved the ecosystem issues.

  48. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to say this one is an actual invention, very clever. First invention I've come across in several years.

    This was introduced at some auto & tire trade shows several years ago, it looks like Goodyear may have licensed the technology (or figured out a way around the patents??). The pumping element is in the tire sidewall, near the rim. This is the first place that I saw the idea:
            http://www.selfinflatingtire.com/ Press releases on this site go back to 2009.

  49. More technology to steal jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This tech steals jobs from hard working people. Goodyear obviously wants to devastate the tire service industry. We need to ban this technology in the interest of economics. You should NEVER let progress get in the way of profitability.

  50. Plenty of drawbacks for non commercial by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    Typically the only time people really look at their tires is to see if they need air. This is when many people take a look and decide, hey time to rotate, or gee, my alignment is way off, or holy cow, my tires are dangerously over worn in general and it's time for some new. In the long run I see this as potentially detrimental for some people.

  51. Central tire inflation system? by Zinho · · Score: 1

    I thought most big rigs were already running a central tire inflation system; wouldn't a self-inflating tire be redundant for your fleet?

    --
    "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
  52. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by BetterSense · · Score: 2

    Under-inflation is a major cause of blowouts.

  53. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Not sure where the softer tire comes from. I have a vehicle, first gen Prius that requires higher load rated tires. But if your air pressure is not kept up properly, the tire's load bearing ability drops.

    Btw, the do you do your own oil changes? Cause if not, then you're probably having your tires filled up more often than you realize. Or, you might actually NOT be doing as good of a job monitoring pressure as you think. You may be within tolerances, but not optimized.

  54. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    I agree, this is an invention and patentable. Though I am sure many have had this concept before, as is the case with many inventions. This is at least something new. And even that, is evolutionary, as all the items needed to do it, one way pressure valves, monitors, tires, etc are pre-existent.

  55. Not just pressure by jalvarez13 · · Score: 1

    I guess it must be some sort of "air mass" control system. Let me explain:

    Considering that low pressure will make the tire wall bend more, the natural irregularities of the road and the suspension system will make it bounce significantly more. The problem for the tire is that the temperature of the air inside rises (I remember how hot the air came out of the pump after inflating bike tires...), and so does the pressure. So if you check the pressure while on the road, it may appear as if it has too much pressure. A common mistake is to let some air out until the pressure reaches the recommended setting, which is really for "rested" tires. This action makes the problem worse and it may become a vicious circle if the driver checks that same tire repeatedly... it is not uncommon to get a tire blown up like this.

    Therefore, the only robust option is to measure pressure and temperature and obtain the amount of air that is inside. If it's lower than the recommended setting, then it should allow air to get in.

    PS: It may be more convenient though to just set a "hot" referential pressure and let the system work only by pressure after some time on the road. If the technology Goodyear developed works on the road and only uses pressure, this might be the way it works, but TFA does not go into details over this.

    PS2: I'm not a native english speaker, please excuse my spelling/grammar mistakes.

  56. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Duhavid · · Score: 1

    With a bit of thought, I would expect the the pumping could be made to happen just when the side walls are sagging a bit due to lower air pressure, and not operating when they are upright, due to correct air pressure.

    --
    emt 377 emt 4
  57. not really a new idea by amoeba1911 · · Score: 1

    but a different way of doing the same thing as this: http://www.google.com/patents?id=_I4WAAAAEBAJ

  58. No Bueller... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    No Bueller! That doesn't work for odometers or tires.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  59. Not real country song in reverse unless.... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Not real country song in reverse unless....it also unruns over the dog, and the train unhits mama!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:Not real country song in reverse unless.... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      And you get out of prison and sober up!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  60. patent system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw tires like these from some european company at a car show in the early 90's... only not only did it auto-inflate for low-pressure, it had walls and pockets and stuff to make blowouts impossible, and cost as much as regular tire. They said same thing "for truckers at first"... they didn't sell to consumers at the time. I bet the reason we don't see it everywhere is probably the broken patent system. We'll probably never see it. Like the best battery technologies, lighting, hemp materials science...all stifled to protect a shitty greedy businesses profits from a better product

  61. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Softer because it will run at a lesser pressure.

    Also because I'm used to bridgestone potenza re050a (the car is really sensitive to tyre quality and way better with extra load sidewalls)

  62. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Jyms · · Score: 1

    What seems like a sudden blow out normally starts as a much slower leak. For example, a little stone gets stuck in the tread of a tyre. Eventually it works its way through the tread, causing a slow leak. Driving on the under inflated tyre causes it to flex excessively and heat up. Eventually, it fails. To the inexperienced driver this feels like a sudden blow out. Same thing with nails, glass, etc.

    Obviously if you kiss a brick or a large stone with the side wall of your tyre and it rips a fist size hole in your side wall, this system will not help. However, if your pick up a nail or something, this might be able to keep your tyre pressure high enough so that you don't get a sudden failure. If you are lucky you will make it to your destination and wake up to a flat tyre the next morning.

    With trucks, you have (multiple) double axles. This means that if one of your tyres deflate, you often don't notice it until the tyre completely fails and rips to shreds. I suspect this will save the trucking industry millions in lost tyres, never mind fuel.

  63. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Immerman · · Score: 1

    Yes, no argument on the potential value to the trucking industry, no doubt that's why they appear to be targeting them first. Similarly for personal vehicles that see regular usage, though far fewer private individuals are accustomed to looking at amortized costs rather than sticker price.

    It's only on RV and personal trailers, which have a very atypical usage pattern, that I question the usefulness. Perhaps I'm wrong and they could self-inflate fast enough to be useful there as well, but it's far from a foregone conclusion - a few dozen cubic inches per mile would be plenty to keep a healthy tire topped off, but by the time it inflated your RV tire that's been sitting unmoving for six months most of the damage would already have been done.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  64. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Reziac · · Score: 1

    Yikes. I paid about $330 for a pair of Bridgestone truck tires at Costco last fall. (Which is $50 more than a set of four of the same tire cost me 5 years ago!)

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  65. Re:At the cost of fuel economy by Reziac · · Score: 1

    Because if a tire runs hot for some reason and over-inflates, a standard valve stem is liable to blow out, and then the tire goes flat and shreds. No hole in the tire itself required to initiate this.

    I experienced that while towing a 24' trailer with a dually pickup -- we figure this is what happened: trailer brake started dragging, made the hub hot, this increased tire pressure, which blew out the valve stem, which resulted in a flat tire that beat itself to shreds within a quarter of a mile.

    And in that heavy truck, I couldn't feel a thing wrong up front, wouldn't have known there was a problem except I'd heard something go BANG and thought I must have lost something off the truck, so I stopped next place the shoulder was wide enough (high-traffic road) and got out to look. Trailer tire was already confetti, tho amazingly the rim had never touched the pavement.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  66. external inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All this technology, in Goodyear's words, eliminates the need for 'external inflation pressure intervention.'"

    So.... what do you do when you walk up to your car and the tire is flat?