Driving With Chains--Is It a Rough Ride?

[Ramblin Fever]

In Colorado, on our mountain passes, chains are required, no exceptionsfor semi's; during some storms, they are required for passenger vehicles as well.

Basically, you don't have them, you don't go....period. Not because your car can't drive the road, but because it's a requirement; most of these mountains are very steep and there's no lee-way for sliding around without killing someone.

 

[Bluestream]

Originally Posted By: weebl
I think you see them where there is real winter conditions, and real mountains. Seen them around lots in very bad, mountainous conditions. I have a set, but have never had to use them, the winter tires always did just fine with lots of room to spare.

Have you wanted the TV series "Ice Road Truckers"? In The Canadian segment none of the truckers use chains ,and you can't say those are not real winter conditions... On the American segment in Alaska, the trucks are using the chains on and off with conditions. One Canadian trucker (Hugh) was working in Alaska, and it showed him struggling to put chains on his tires, as he had never used them ever before.

 

[Seguino]

Ice Road Truckers is about as "real" as BJ and the Bear

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
I don't think chains have any place for road use on a modern vehicle.


I was considering buying a set last winter. My Nissan is horrible in the snow (2wd with an open diff).

I got stuck one time last winter and had to walk to a hotel and spend the night. I was at the bottom of a long hill and my truck couldn't make it up the hill. If I had chains I could have put them on, drove up the hill, removed the chains and been on my way.

 

[MNgopher]

Real winter conditions have little to do with whether chains are allowed or needed. In conjunction with steep grades and 'real winter conditions", they become indispensable.

Example, I live in Minnesota now, and used to live in Colorado. In Minnesota, tire chains are rarely seen. Between good snow removal and a lack of a lot of long steep grades, they just don't get used very much. The only place I've ever used them here is at our cabin - which is 30 miles of gravel road from the nearest town, with steep and icy hills. (Note that studded tires are illegal here as well).

In Colorado, where steep, long grades are common, chains are important to maintaining control of the vehicle. That being said, I never carried them in my vehicle, as my choice was to wait and go another time - I never was in a critical situation where I had to go.

In terms of ice road truckers, you may want to review the terrain being driven on - steep mountain passes in Alaska versus lots of lake and river driving in Canada - two different animals with different requirements.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
Even studded tires are about as annoying as one would imagine. Floaty on dry pavement, LOUD, bad on gas, and if you peel out you leave a permanent mark on asphalt.


Check the results section of the NAF 2011 winter tire test to see the numbers and rankings in each separate category:

NAF Winter Tire Test

Results From Each Test Discipline

Studded tires generally outperform studless winter tires on both dry and wet pavement.

Rolling resistance does not seem to be affected too much by studs. In the 2011 test, the studded Nokian Hakka7 scored second overall in the rolling resistance test, 1.4% worse than the HakkaR. But the Bridgestone, Yokohama, Continental and Pirelli studded tires had less rolling resistance than their studless equivalent, while Goodyear was the only manufacturer other than Nokian to have their studless tire outperform their studded tire in that category. The Michelin studded and studless tires were equal.

Studded tires are a little louder than a studless tire, though they've never bothered me. Nothing compared to a tire with abnormal wear.

I've never needed to use chains, so I can't comment on those. I'd carry a set if I lived in the mountains.

 

[Carbon]

It's been a while since I used chains. In weather that you would use chains, you would not think of it as a rough ride. When you go over a dry area, you would notice the noise. In snow or ice driving, the sound is music-- especially when you see other cars who are not doing so well.

 

[weebl]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
Originally Posted By: weebl
I think you see them where there is real winter conditions, and real mountains. Seen them around lots in very bad, mountainous conditions. I have a set, but have never had to use them, the winter tires always did just fine with lots of room to spare.

Have you wanted the TV series "Ice Road Truckers"? In The Canadian segment none of the truckers use chains ,and you can't say those are not real winter conditions... On the American segment in Alaska, the trucks are using the chains on and off with conditions. One Canadian trucker (Hugh) was working in Alaska, and it showed him struggling to put chains on his tires, as he had never used them ever before.


I've seen Ice Road Truckers. I don't notice that chains are on only in Alaska, but not anywhere in Canada. In fact, go take a look at the Alaska Highway on Google Maps with the "terrain" turned on. Through the Yukon and Alaska from Whitehorse to a ways north of Beaver Creek, it is mostly flat valley driving. To get to the Arctic Ocean northern shore or to go to Anchorage requires travelling through mountain passes. The correlation of where the chains come on and off are not with the country borders, but with where mountain passes are. Just so happens that likely most routes taken are not steep enough to require chains through the Canadian portion. A properly equipped vehicle with a well trained driver likely will not need chains until the very worst conditions are encountered. And driving the 401 from Waterloo to Mississauga in the snow hardly qualifies as being the very worst conditions.

Many BC highways have an all-winter requirement for all vehicles using the highway: carry chains, or be equipped with winter tires. RCMP have also been known to set up check points in severe weather (usually quite close to a complete highway shut down) to require chains actually installed on the drive wheels, or not be permitted past. There is no "mountain" in Ontario that would even come anywhere close to what is in BC or western Alberta (or along that entire western corridor from Alaska/Yukon to Mexico) that would have the same grades or elevations. Chains (and studs) are illegal in Ontario, not Canada.

 

[bepperb]

Chains aren't legal in WI. If you live in TX and think you need chains just understand there are [at the very least] 4 million people who manage 100 inches of snow a year without.

 

[MNgopher]

bepperb, I'd also point out that there are places where chains aren't just a good idea, they are the law. Like I said, I live in Minnesota now (and grew up here), but lived in Colorado for 5 years. I don't need chains here, but if I lived in the Colorado mountains with regular mountain pass driving, I'd carry them all winter.

Its easy to be smug and say we manage fine without studs or chains, but with different terrain, the ballgame changes. They are two different animals. I'd also point out that our expectations of snow removal are greatly different up here than out west. I grew up in a city of 30,000 people in MN, and our municpal snow removal fleet was more than double the size of the fleet in the City I lived in in Colorado, with three times as many people. Both got the same amount of snow on average.

 

[bepperb]

Originally Posted By: MNgopher
bepperb, I'd also point out that there are places where chains aren't just a good idea, they are the law. Like I said, I live in Minnesota now (and grew up here), but lived in Colorado for 5 years. I don't need chains here, but if I lived in the Colorado mountains with regular mountain pass driving, I'd carry them all winter.

Its easy to be smug and say we manage fine without studs or chains, but with different terrain, the ballgame changes.

They are two different animals.


I'm sure this is true, the point of my post is that Houston is probably a lot closer to WI than CO. I think there is a perception among people who seldom drive in snow that chains or cables are a normal thing. I have had people fly in for a class I teach that commented that the car they rented didn't have chains or cables... just a scraper. Well, really that's all anyone here has. If you have no snow driving experience all chains would get you is deeper into a ditch anyway.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Many thanks all for the information! We travel very frequently to Colorado and although we have not had to have chains as yet (either conditions were not bad enough or we had not gone into an area that required them), I was curious as to how they change the driving characteristics of a vehicle--particularly the ride.

The only real pass that we would cross is Raton and that one is either maintained enough not to need chains or it is closed (have never seen an in between traveling through there). I have crossed Vail pass in February, but it was also open without the need for chains.

One final question--I see some posts referring to chains and others to cables. Does one do a better job than the other or is it about the same?

Thanks again all!

 

[hsd]

Cable chains are used on newer cars that have minimal clearance between the tire and other suspension parts. Your owners manual will usually specify if your car is suitable for chains or not. If it says only S-type chains can be used then that means cable chains which have small wire cables covered by round sleeves going over the tire tread. They have less bite than full chains, but work well for most conditions.
The max speed limit for any type of tire chains is 30mph or less. That is set by the chain manufacturer to prevent vehicle damage.

 

[moto94536]

I used to chain up on my 2006 camry for 3 years of winter in lake tahoe/truckee area. You can say I am a pro. It only take minutes for me to put it on and off. I hate driving with chain because you can't drive over 45mph. If you drive fast, cable chain will not last long.

Driving with cable chain is safe.

 

[Ken2]

Chains are very important for traction when there is ice on the road. Nothing else equals the traction...nor the bother. Some states require chains on trucks in snowy mountains both on the drive wheels and on the last trailer axle for braking. Keeping the trailer behind the truck is a good thing. (And I've towed my travel trailer on icy mountain roads with chains on the braked trailer and on the truck with good, but slow, results.) Different states and different provinces have different laws. Washington requires all vehicles to carry chains in the mountains in winter. Sometimes approved traction tires are OK, otherwise chains must be used. Sometimes 4wd is OK with approved traction tires, otherwise chains are required. Sometimes chains are required for everybody. When traction tires are required for cars, chains are required for vehicles over 10,000# GVWR. Oregon is stricter than Washington. I like Wyoming's Basic Chain Law...if you slide off the road, you should'a used chains, and you deserve the citation you'll get. I've seen a time in the SF Bay area where the hail was so deep that only the CHP with their chains got through.

Never drive with chains over 25 to 30 mph. You'll shred the chains, and then the broken chains tear stuff apart on the car. Never drive far on snow-free pavement with chains. Always practice putting the chains on at home on a dry driveway in the daylight. When you need them will always be in the dark, in several inches of snow, in the cold and wind. Be sure you have a good flashlight, warm gloves, and dry tarp or something to lay on. Get the chains as tight as possible, move ahead a short ways and re-tighten.

Some 4wd owners prefer chains on the front. I don't. That would be OK in very slow driving, but up to speed centrifugal force pulls the chains away from the tire and they might hit something important--brakes or something. Also, I greatly prefer chains in the back for braking. Again, keeping the back end behind you is a good thing.

 

[Bluestream]

Originally Posted By: Seguino
Ice Road Truckers is about as "real" as BJ and the Bear


And why would you say that? All the show is about is a cameraman following a bunch of truckers and filming them...

 

[hemitom]

When i was i kid growing up we lived in a rural area, had lots of land. Anyway my grandfather parked his 69 chev wagon in the field behind the house. The old wagon ran well but was getting rotten. So it was a new toy for us to use. once the ground was frozen we would slap an old set of chains on it any go. IT was amazing what you go through, it would sit there and dig until it hit frozen ground and then go. You could slam it into a drift and be buried to the windshield and still reverse out. Thinking about it now what a blast it was tearing through the fields drift busting. (Know wonder the neighbours thought my brother and i were nuts) . And to answer your question were the chains rough or not, the way we drove it was rough enough to rattle your teeth loose.

 

[Seguino]

Originally Posted By: Bluestream
Originally Posted By: Seguino
Ice Road Truckers is about as "real" as BJ and the Bear


And why would you say that? All the show is about is a cameraman following a bunch of truckers and filming them...


I will give you three examples of why I would say that, but I could easily give a hundred.

1- Hugh heads over the ice of Lake Winnipeg as the announcer states he could go through the ice if he meets another truck. As if by Divine intervention, another truck appears!
Note the antenna for the VHF 2 way radio on the mirror of his truck.
"Real" truckers would be in contact with each other to prevent just such a situation.

2- Two drivers pick up loads that are seventeen feet six inches high and come to a sixteen foot ten inch overpass before they leave town. Do they stop? No! They just slow down and hope for the best.
"Real" truckers would have a route planned for a load that high. It would be specified on their legally required permit. If they somehow came across a low bridge they would make absolutely sure of clearance before proceeding.

3-Hugh heads up the icy road as the announcer states there will surely be a head on crash if an oncoming truck slides in the corner. Holy cow! an oncoming truck is sliding in the corner!
See reason one for comment.

Every potentially disastrous situation in this show is staged, because none of them would happen in real life, which would make for an awfully boring show.
This is why the film company was not allowed back to the NWT diamond mine ice roads after season one. They were playing up the danger of crashing through the ice when none existed.

Do I watch this show? Sure. But I also watch House MD and Bones, and I think of all three as entertaining fiction.

Remember, you asked.

 

[moto94536]

Here in nevada/north lake tahoe most cars/suv will need chains or 4wd or awd. If the road condition is bad, they will shut down the highway.

I have never seem to put chains on 4wd. ( if that is the case, the highway is closed ).

like I say cable chains/ chains are safe.. I see alot of stuck vehicles on the road ( most are 4wd/awd )...

 

[MNgopher]

Have to agree with Seguino. So much of what goes on during Ice Road Truckers is way overhyped drama where little or none exists.

As an example on #2, odds are the drivers, dispatchers, etc... all knew the load would clear just fine when driven properly. But it makes better TV to make it seem like a guessing game...

(For those who don't know,the clearance signs sometimes provide for some freeboard, and often the low clearance is at one side or the other, meaning a taller load can pass at the right location.)

So much of this is in the editing. I do believe Alex has even said if they really showed what was going on, it would be a pretty boring show.