DRW VS SRW VS SBT
Just read yet another thread of SRW vs DRW got me thinking of a compromise getting more common on the bcubicig trucks. Single big tire. They look to be at least 50% more cubic capacity of a single.
A. Thought.
A. Thought.
Forum Discussion
36 Replies
blt2ski wrote:
It's actually worse than that.
The issue with these types of things also comes into the, "can I get them at the time of purchase"
Not sure what these would cost in a dual format, but looks like we are looking at 1500-2000 per side, per huntingdogs post. a decent single 10-11" x 22-24" diam tire will be in the 5-600 ea, along with two rims at probably 1/2 - 1/3 the cost of a single rim......So if one can get a super single at the get go, the cost is not as bad. But to retro, not sure this would make any sense.
Then as far as how well they work. I am sure the tires today are better than they were when initially introduced. Hence why when driving around the port of seattle and tacoma, I am seem more and more rigs with SS tires on the rear of the chassis along with trailers. Of course, there are still a few Ol'pharts with bias tires too............It will probably be more a matter of when tires like this will be prevalent to more available IMHO. Just as when I bought one of the first GM's with 8 lugs in 88. Could not find a 8 or 10 ply 265-75-16 tire. Lots of LR C tires. Nothing with mroe wt carrying capacity. Not try to find an LR C 265-75-16.....good luck!
Marty
There is the cost of the spare as well!
Then one would need to carry two spares, one for the front regular tire and a SS for the rear.
And there would be no more limping it in on one tire of a dual if a failure were to occur.
Did a little reading on some big rig forums.
Many say that the SS are not recommended on single axle setups,. only tandems. The reason is that a blowout on a single axle will just about always destroy the rim as well when it makes contact with the ground.
I will spend money if it will make my life better/easier
But I just don't see any benefit other than a lighter wallet.- The issue with these types of things also comes into the, "can I get them at the time of purchase"
Not sure what these would cost in a dual format, but looks like we are looking at 1500-2000 per side, per huntingdogs post. a decent single 10-11" x 22-24" diam tire will be in the 5-600 ea, along with two rims at probably 1/2 - 1/3 the cost of a single rim......So if one can get a super single at the get go, the cost is not as bad. But to retro, not sure this would make any sense.
Then as far as how well they work. I am sure the tires today are better than they were when initially introduced. Hence why when driving around the port of seattle and tacoma, I am seem more and more rigs with SS tires on the rear of the chassis along with trailers. Of course, there are still a few Ol'pharts with bias tires too............It will probably be more a matter of when tires like this will be prevalent to more available IMHO. Just as when I bought one of the first GM's with 8 lugs in 88. Could not find a 8 or 10 ply 265-75-16 tire. Lots of LR C tires. Nothing with mroe wt carrying capacity. Not try to find an LR C 265-75-16.....good luck!
Marty - If I "did the math" for all of the decisions I make in my life, I wouldn't own an RV...
- I think that this falls into the possible but not financially feasible for most of us.
I bet those tires are pretty costly, maybe more than the two tires each would take the place of....And I am sure that the rims are high dollar as well.
Then there would be the spare tire issue. That would be a real PITA
Lets just say that doing something that's gonna cost a LOT of money and not do anything for me but complicate my life....Is not on my bucket list.
On edit: I just did some price checking....Holy Batman.
Tires are about 1000.00 and rims start at about 550.00! And I think those were used. - I use 245/70R19.5 Rge G single tires single tire rated at 4540lbs each.
285/70R19.5 Rge H tires would give you 6395lbs each single if they fit. blt2ski wrote:
Most trucks do not carry a spare. BUT, a super single weighs less than duals, has better stopping, traction forward, mpg's etc. The ONLY reason for staying with duals is as noted, the human factor of the redundancy factor if a flat occurs.
Many class 8 trucks use a std sized tire in front, and singles in the rear.
Marty
HDT - Class 8 tractors.
Question the term - "many".
*Some* fleets have tried Super Singles, not been happy as they didn't live up to the supposed "benefits" - and gone back to "normal" tandems (8 rear wheels/tires) set up.
IMO - "Many" would be a stretch.
Discussion of Super Singles on a *Single* axle HDT (Class 8 tractor that has been "singled") - have been kicked around a bit on the Escapees HDT forum .....which would be the same for a dually pickup.
However, IIRC - there may have been a couple of posters that have tried that application.
Visit the HDT forum and use search for Super Singles.
The "Super Singles" on the tricked out pickup - are for show value rather than load hauling - like those for "tubbed" street applications on street rods, muscle cars, etc.
And - of course, two spares would be req'd.
If you have a dually pickup stick with "six".
You will be happier - except when it's new tire time, LOL..:W
.RoyJ wrote:
You sure about that?
The smallest super single is about 40" diameter. I doubt may stock height pickups can fit that in there!
Besides, why would anyone want to deal with the cost and weight associated with such an overkill tire?
This is pretty low :B
...and people spend money on all sorts of expensive things for their trucks, I know I do. More power to 'em, even if it's not something I'd do.
- With the super singles are you still required to have mud flaps? If not, there may be some aerodynamic savings there too.
Still pretty much a shoebox on wheels aerodynamically, but I guess every little bit helps... pronstar wrote:
Huntindog wrote:
Do they make those for pickup trucks?
Yup!
You can get them for lifted trucks, lowered trucks, or stock-height trucks.
You sure about that?
The smallest super single is about 40" diameter. I doubt may stock height pickups can fit that in there!
Besides, why would anyone want to deal with the cost and weight associated with such an overkill tire?
