r u guys concern about tire weight?
#21
JK-Forum Founder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
15 Posts
We are very much on the same page. I was just trying to point out the difference between the effect of rotating weight (be it much or little) on rolling steady compared to the effect of rotating weight on stopping and starting. Rotating mass is important; its good to understand where and how it makes a difference - and when it doesn't.
You are so right about looking at the Jeep as a complete system. Total weight, unsprung weight, rotating mass, tire size, spring rates, shocks, geometry, drive train strength - just to name a few. Most important thing is how it all works together (or not).
You are so right about looking at the Jeep as a complete system. Total weight, unsprung weight, rotating mass, tire size, spring rates, shocks, geometry, drive train strength - just to name a few. Most important thing is how it all works together (or not).
of course, you're talking to a guy who runs 40x15.50 toyo's mounted on 20" atx slab wheels that have a combined weight of 187 lbs a piece. of course, this is to say nothing about how heavy the dynatrac prorock 60s they're mounted to weighs and yes, my jeep is a daily driver.
#22
JK Enthusiast
I remember filling the tires of an old trail buggy about half way with water before going out with it when I was younger.
Sure like anything else weight matters. I dont personally think it makes enough difference for myself to choose a tire like the KM2s thou over something less likely to tear a sidewall. If you really are concerned about improving mpg and want to save a little weight use a narrower tire. Im personally a fan of narrower tires anyway, because of how weight is applied. Unless the only thing you do is run around in soft sand or super deep mud, most of the time I would say you would be better served with a narrower tire anyway.
The little weight you save on the tire plus a little less weight for the rim and there is your ten pounds you were looking for. Also less rolling resistance as mentioned above.
Sure like anything else weight matters. I dont personally think it makes enough difference for myself to choose a tire like the KM2s thou over something less likely to tear a sidewall. If you really are concerned about improving mpg and want to save a little weight use a narrower tire. Im personally a fan of narrower tires anyway, because of how weight is applied. Unless the only thing you do is run around in soft sand or super deep mud, most of the time I would say you would be better served with a narrower tire anyway.
The little weight you save on the tire plus a little less weight for the rim and there is your ten pounds you were looking for. Also less rolling resistance as mentioned above.
#23
JK-Forum Founder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
15 Posts
Sure like anything else weight matters. I dont personally think it makes enough difference for myself to choose a tire like the KM2s thou over something less likely to tear a sidewall. If you really are concerned about improving mpg and want to save a little weight use a narrower tire. Im personally a fan of narrower tires anyway, because of how weight is applied. Unless the only thing you do is run around in soft sand or super deep mud, most of the time I would say you would be better served with a narrower tire anyway.
#24
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sacramento, People's Republic of California
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you got balls Roll I would never and will not run 37's on my D30. I love being underneath my Jeep adding stuff at home, I DO NOT like being underneath my Jeep fixing something on the trail, lol!!!!
#25
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was simply giving an extreme example for the sake of getting my point across. 10 lbs per tire probably won't be a deal breaker on a JK. But if you're going to double the stock tire weight, I'm sure the Jeep and your pocket will feel it. So tire weight does matter.
#26
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
they also make them aerodynamic and yet, you just purposefully bought a vehicle with the aerodynamics of a brick. of course, if weight is so terrible, i guess you had better keep your factory plastic bumpers and side steps as anything that might actually protect your jeep will weigh too much.
#27
JK-Forum Founder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
15 Posts
I was simply giving an extreme example for the sake of getting my point across. 10 lbs per tire probably won't be a deal breaker on a JK. But if you're going to double the stock tire weight, I'm sure the Jeep and your pocket will feel it. So tire weight does matter.
#28
JK-Forum Founder
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Laguna Niguel, CA
Posts: 36,534
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
15 Posts
please, i never said that there was anything wrong with trying to achieve a bit better gas mileage, only that you're kidding yourself if you really think that 10 extra lbs per tire weight savings is really going make a difference. hell, you might as well not have any passengers ride along in your jeep as that would compromise your mpg as much as 2 gal or more per person. of course, you can believe whatever it is you want to believe especially if it helps you to sleep better at night.
Last edited by wayoflife; 07-05-2012 at 11:48 PM.
#29
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Huntersville, NC
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahhh the ole mass moment of inertia issue. In my world this really matters but on a 5 thousand lb jeep and extra 40 lbs of rotating mass should never be noticed. They might take a fraction more torque to turn over but once moving they tend to want to stay moving so what ever you lose which is an extremely tiny percentage is gained when you let off the gas and coast. Yes this might be seen more in stop and go driving but dropping mpgs shouldn't be the case. I drive a 6 speed so I have a little more control on my gearing but I didn't see a 2 mpg drop pulling my 8 ft trailer with 500 lbs of gear on it. I was still pulling 17 mpgs on 35's with stock Rubi 4.10's.
#30
Some one earlier in the thread was talking about unsprung weight. It reminded me in the late 70's when everything was stiff leaf suspension and the higher the better. The jeeps I was wheeling with(at that time I was wheeling Broncos) had some kind of fluid in their tires to keep the rubber on the rocks. Seemed to work good. No one cared about mileage back then like today. Sorry about the off topic thoughts .