Are our performance street tires berked?

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a30057/will-the-government-decide-to-limit-the-grip-of-future-tires/ I don't recall this being discussed here, despite the July article date. Sounds like it's not a big deal for Z rated tires. But I don't want to be driving on wheels made out of cheese and wood... My Honda Fit came with "Eco" tires. Narrow, and made of wood. Terrible in dry, unsafe in rain, terrifying in snow or even cold weather. Switched to REAL all seasons with a wider track, lost 2mpg for average (37mpg down to 35mpg), for what I consider to be a safer, more fun, and CHEAPER tire.

As long as they keep thier hands off the Z and higher rated tires we'll be OK.

With reduced grip.. Maybe Nascar won't need restrictor plates anymore

Loke all eco adoptions, there will be a period of adjustment. Water based paint is a good example. We're moving away from petroleum in a lot of applications and have come out the other side ahead. Soon all the oil we put in our engines will be true synthetics.

Meh, they'll make it economic, and manufacturers will uneco it. Just look at 4 bangers. 300hp all day, compared to the 88 or so that my 89 Escort was offered with new.

In reply to mndsm:

And yet they are cleaner than an '89 Escort and get as good or better economy despite being mounted in much larger cars.

markwemple wrote: Loke all eco adoptions, there will be a period of adjustment. Water based paint is a good example. We're moving away from petroleum in a lot of applications and have come out the other side ahead. Soon all the oil we put in our engines will be true synthetics.

That's the key here. The suggestion isn't to outright ban grippy tires its to spur innovation towards more ecofriendly options. Realistically this is only going to affect new car sales anyway because it ties directly to CAFE, provided I'm interpreting that meandering mess of an article correctly. There's also the fact that manufacturers cannot legally reduce wet grip in pursuit of reduced dry rolling resistance, again according to the article, so there's going to be a limit at some point.

Z rated tires are exempt so its not like it matters too much to the aftermarket or your average consumer anyway.

As long as they don't tighten up more than the EU stuff has at this point, I'm not too concerned. The V rated summers on my Jeep get an "E" rating for fuel efficiency on the EU label, so they'd be above the threshold by a decent margin.

If I get pushed into having to run massive wheels to get Z rated rubber for stickiness or lose the ability to get sticky rubber entirely, I won't be a happy camper... I've had a few moments where being on less sticky tires would have made the difference between avoiding an accident and being in one.

Knurled wrote: In reply to mndsm: And yet they are cleaner than an '89 Escort and get as good or better economy despite being mounted in much larger cars.

Exactly.

ohh... road and track clickbait.

I can't believe Obama did this.....

This poor girl was with Trump and ...

come on..

rslifkin wrote: As long as they don't tighten up more than the EU stuff has at this point, I'm not too concerned.

In terms of what?

For most things, the US regulations are tighter than EU's. The only ones I can think of that are not are particulates (which is odd) and CO2 (where the EU is trying to meet Kyoto, and doing a bad job of it). US safety rules are almost irrelevant thanks to the IIHS pushing far beyond NHTSA.

In reply to alfadriver:

The article mentions tires in the EU already having to go through rolling resistance testing and that they have to score at least a "G" on the scale to be sold. If the max rolling resistance allowed for the US market is similar to what the EU is already using, it shouldn't really present a concern (as the types of tires that will need to fall outside the spec are mentioned as exempt anyway).

If they start to tighten up significantly more than the EU has, then we might start to see a gap between LRR Prius tires and Z rated super-sticky tires with not much in between.

Ok, I see. I don't read C&D, so didn't read the article.

There is a big spread in rolling resistance for our tires- one of the larger gaps being truck vs. passenger car tires.

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: ohh... road and track clickbait. I can't believe Obama did this..... This poor girl was with Trump and ... come on..

It was click bait, but I followed it there from a real article. The lies are always found between two truths.

Ive only every had much experience with 1 eco tire. It was the bstone ecopia, on an avalon. Made a few MPG difference and they were quiet, comfortable, drove good enough in snow, and had plenty of grip for me to poke around town. Years ago I even got to experience them on a 3 series on a auto X, and they have plenty of grip for DD use.

Any non sporting DD car I own will get tires like these.

Any sports car or sporty DD I own will get a very aggressive performance tire.

Although I am ideologically against the gubment getting involved with E36 M3 like this, practically it doesnt bother me because I have no use for them poser halfway tires, and im all for eco tires.

Whatever,

Unintended consequences: I have gummy tires on my commuter-car Volvo. No more hydroplaning, don't even have to watch throttle application in the rain, the car just goes and stops and turns.

If I couldn't run these, I'd get an AWD car, which would probably get worse fuel economy...