Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:49
Lets forget about rolling resistance, wind resistance, greater rotational mass, and engine out of sweet spot (although they all play a roll in worsening fuel consumption).
Also, lets forget about acceleration and just look at what it takes to maintain a particular speed on level ground. Lets say arbitrarily, for simplicity sake, that it takes 100 lbs of force where each rear tyre meets the pavement (refer to diagram) to maintain a velocity of 100km/h on level ground. With a 30 inch diameter tyre:
D=15 in (or 1.25 ft)
So, T=(100 lb) X (1.25 ft)
T=125 lb/ft, or the amount of torque required at each rear wheel to maintain the vehicle at 100km/h on level ground.
Now, lets look at a 35 inch tire:
D=17.5 in (or 1.46 ft)
So, T=(100 lb) X (1.46 ft)
T=146 lb/ft, or the amount of torque required at each rear wheel to maintain the vehicle at 100km/h on level ground.
Now it is easy to see why our engines have to work harder, and thus burn more diesel, to maintain a particular speed.
Now tack on the rolling resistance, wind resistance, greater rotational mass, and engine out of sweet spot and it just worsens the picture. Yes, you do "cover more ground" for each revolution of a tyre, but ultimately you will see a sacrifice in economy because the engine has to work that much harder to get that one revolution.
Another factor is tyre pressure. A larger tyre has more pressure variation and larger rolling resistance with lower pressure.
Even if you have adjusted your speedometer to accomodate for larger tyres, you will still see a consistent drop in economy compared to smaller tyres.
I run 255/85/16 on my truck. As a poster already stated this is a good size, though selection is limited, because it is higher with more clearance but not as wide as 265. Nevertheless the additional height will cost economy. I have reprogrammed my speedo and sitting on 80km/h my engine revs at 1300 in 6th gear. This is not as it was intended because the transmission shifts to 5th with the slightest acceleration. Not so with the original tyres.. there the engine revs above 1400 and with careful acceleration the transmission stays in 6th.
The characteristic of the auto transmission changes completely and in my case larger tyres do void the warranty (mind you I do not get any warranty on a US truck anyway here)..
In order to really adjust for larger tires the shift characteristics of the tranny has to be adjusted. The learning program in my Allison does not compensate for that and even with a TechII I can not adjust the tranny only the ABS speed sensors, which is another factor to consider when running larger tyres.
I do not exactly know how much I lost in economy since I never really checked it on a complete
tank with same conditions. Too many variables ... power tune, towing, fuel quality ... etc..
I have a gutt feeling that I lost between 1 and 1.5 l/100km in economy, but thats just a feeling not a fact.. others have reported 2 - 3 mpg loss from 28" to 35" tyres on the same vehicle as I have.
You need to understand what you do to your vehicle when you mount larger tyres and understand why it is illegal to do so beyond the given limits in the ADR.
good luck
gmd
AnswerID:
258593
Follow Up By: Ingtar - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:16
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:16
Pretty picture. Nice to see some calculations too.
A couple of points I will disagree on though.
Larger tyres have LESS rolling resistance. Compare rolling a pencil over a notepad to a roll of stickytape over the same notepad.
Wind resistance as a percentage will not change significantly by lifting your vehicle 2". Before arguing this, remember that most of us with 4wds are driving bricks, not sleek race cars.
Increased rotational mass and pressure variations I agree with.
Now your calculations... you have increased the diameter by 16%. This is reflected in your increased torque calculations (16%) and also the travel speed (16%). So you are doing calculations for travelling at 116km/h, and if you compare fuel economy without changing tyre size between doing 100km/h and 116km/h you will notice an increase in fuel consumption (wind resistance etc..).
What it comes down to, for constant motion, is as you mentioned the engine 'sweet spot', being the engine running in its most efficient range at your given cruising speed. If, in this range, your engine can handle the bigger tyres then there should theoretically be no great change.
I believe where most people would experience an increase in fuel consumption would be stop/start traffic and lead foot syndrome. Trying to take off quickly with larger tyres WILL require more power and use more fuel.
FollowupID:
519954
Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:24
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:24
Hi Gmd
I'm with Ingtar on this , the larger tyre has inherently lower rolling resistance - for same air in each.
I'd probably explain this a little differently , however its definately the case.
Robin Miller
FollowupID:
519957
Follow Up By: _gmd_pps - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:39
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 13:39
your not serious with your pencil sticky tape example are you ? ..
have you missed your physics at school ???
weight/mass/downforce/rolling resistance ???
and I did not argue rolling resistance .. just read properly
pretty ueseless to argue with you ..
have fun
gmd
FollowupID:
519959
Follow Up By: Ingtar - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:35
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:35
hmm agro and defensive. Woohoo.
I had a look around my desk for common things that roll, that are different diameters. So yes, I was serious, and looking for some simple examples for people to see. If anyone else (Robin??) can explain it better/differently, feel free. And no, I have not missed my physics, which is why I mentioned it.
You said:
"Now tack on the rolling resistance"
So you did mention rolling resistance. Maybe you should re-read properly.
I wasn't arguing, just expressing a different point of view. Note that I didn't try to work out how much torque would be required to turn the wheels at different speed, as I didn't know how. Just pointed out some different ideas as they presented themselves to me.
So dry your eyes, Princess.
FollowupID:
519975
Follow Up By: Ingtar - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:42
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:42
Ooh and more of that remembering physics... assuming that the tyres don't weigh significantly more, and you are travelling at the same constant speed, the acceleration (deceleration?) force on the vehicle will be the same, the mass will be the same, F=ma, so it should require the same force thus the same energy so your fuel economy, again, should not change.
FollowupID:
519979
Follow Up By: _gmd_pps - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:47
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:47
neither agro nore defensive ... can't be bothered
your arguments are simply not worth any emotion or forther words on my side .. go and play with the stuff on your desk ..
have fun
gmd
FollowupID:
519982
Follow Up By: Steve Ellis - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:50
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 15:50
GDay JT. I have a 4.5 Patrol on Petrol / Gas and have just gone the other way I did have 275x16 and have gone to 265 x 16. I also changed from Offroad style tyres to Highway Tread. The fuel consumption has improved, it pulls a lot better esp when towing a large caravan and road noise has improved. I know that this way is not for everyone but it works for me. It will still go
places I want to go and I have not paid a premium price for tyres I dont need. The auto box is a lot happier as it does not need to pull uphill all the time and the overdrive works fine. I kept one of the big tyres as a spare and the cover for it wont fit! If you want improved fuel cost look at Gas or a smaller vehicle. The Patrols are thirsty no matter what you do.
FollowupID:
519983
Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 16:38
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 16:38
Hi Guys
I'll have a go at explaining why the rolling resistance drops which
gives better economy.
Some of the thinking above does not relate to car wheels it relates to solid wheels eg like those on a train.
Car wheels are a special case because they have a deformable outer casing (the tyre).
They tyre in contact with the road is flat and it curves away from the road to complete a circle.
The major part of rolling resistance is caused in, and by the bending action as it each part of the rotating tyre contacts the ground and changes direction from round to flat.
This action causes the heat and resistance.
From this you can derive two things.
A/ A tyre pumped up harder will have a smaller flat contact patch with the road and hence less of a bend angle.
B/ A larger tyre diameter with same air pressure must also have a smaller bend angle and hence less loss.
Both of the above are observable in actual use , and both will lower rolling resistance
Robin Miller
FollowupID:
519988
Follow Up By: Gerhardp1 - Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 23:24
Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 23:24
I put 245/75-16 LT tyres on the Jack last year, in place of the standard 245/70-16.
I wanted more
puncture resistance than the non-LTs offered.
The fuel consumption is higher, even though the Pirellis have a narrower tread width on the road than the standard size tyre. It's higher around town, and on the highway.
The auto shift points are noticeably affected, especially the torque convertor lock-up in 3rd and 4th. It takes much longer before lock, and unlocks again at the slightest engine load.
I wouldn't go oversize again, even the small amount in this case.
FollowupID:
520072