New California tire criteria?

I love that all points are essentially the same, and no drawbacks listed at all:

"Benefits of Low Rolling Resistance Replacement Tires​

Low rolling resistance replacement tires for passenger vehicles and light trucks improve vehicle fuel economy leading to the following expected benefits:

  • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1 million metric tons per year
  • Offer an affordable way for individual Californians to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
  • Enhance efficiency of passenger vehicles and light trucks in line with the original tires sold with the vehicle
  • Reduce fuel costs to consumers driving combustion vehicles and zero-emission vehicles
  • Reduce tailpipe emissions contributing to ozone formation and unhealthy air"
 
California should save the world by lubricating their roads. The less rolling resistant roads can save mucho fuel. So, my recommendation for California is to recycle the ol' motor oil by continuously pouring it on all roads. Think off all the fuel saved by putting that oil on the pavement to reduce MPG wasting tire traction. Think of all the jobs created too..... CalDOT road quicklube applicators needed, with tanker and hazmat endorsements(obviously to keep it 'safe') when lubricating the roads. Roads and tires should get a teflon/moly/boron/tungsten/titanium/antimony friction modifier too. Can't have anyone with an unequitable unfair traction advantage anywhere.

I guess this is a solution to those instant torque electric cars that do 0-60 in ~3 seconds or less. Make them all use 5-stars and see what happens.

Should also make the 5-star tire a requirement for NASCAR, INDY, and NHRA... should be more competitive that way!
 
Did anyone else notice the mistake?

If they prohibit sale of tires with more than a 9.0 N/kN, they eliminate much more than just the 1 star tires. They also eliminate 2 star tires. It is understandable to try to deal with the worst tires, but that would be too big of a bite. I suspect whoever wrote that up meant more than 10.5 N/kN.

Same for what happens in 2028. The verbiage is correct, but I wonder if that's just a bargaining position so they could negotiate down to eliminating 2 star tires?

Could the first one also be a bargaining position? With the idea being to eliminate 1 start tires and the guy who wrote it gave away the tactic?
Yeah, I noticed it when I took the screenshots and posted it, hence the comment of going to neighboring states to smuggle "Illegal" tires.
 
What does this do to the enthusiast, that wants to put an aggressive set of tires on? As someone mentioned, a nice set of summer tires for a Mustang or Camaro or Porsche?
Probably would have no impact at all. Tires with less rolling resistance are reinforced to reduce flexing and deformation.

Engineering Explained has a good video which touches on this.
 
Last edited:
This is a big nothingburger.

https://www.tirereview.com/science-behind-rolling-resistance-passenger-tires/


"Tire hysteresis – or the amount of energy lost when the tire flexes when it meets the road – is the most important factor affecting rolling resistance. Other factors include air resistance, deformation and tire friction with the road, which can contribute up to 10% to overall rolling resistance of a tire. Figure 1 (above) illustrates the root causes of rolling resistance by percentage."
 
I can't get through to that forum, as I don't have a log in.

Officially rating a tire for rolling resistance, to a known standard, is still in its infancy. While I'd like that data to make an informed choice, I'd also like to have a choice.
That has never stopped California legislators or regulators.
 
Tha

Thats what they said about smog regulations and the implementation starting in the 70's. It didn't happen....
Kinda sorta. I'm for clean air. I'm for the most efficient clean burning IC engines possible. Yes regulations drove that

BUT - Some really weak, POS engines and years of struggles - with cars that were marginally better - eventually figured out more or less by the 1980's.
 
Kinda sorta. I'm for clean air. I'm for the most efficient clean burning IC engines possible. Yes regulations drove that

BUT - Some really weak, POS engines and years of struggles - with cars that were marginally better - eventually figured out more or less by the 1980's.
...and I could argue that we are long past the beginning of decreasing marginal returns for the cost and impact to the consumer, taxpayer, ratepayer.
 
Regulating emissions of particulates from tires and brake pads is next.

https://www.tiretechnologyinternati...clude-tire-and-brake-emissions-standards.html

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...e-particle-pollution-than-exhausts-tests-show

Almost 2,000 times more particle pollution is produced by tyre wear than is pumped out of the exhausts of modern cars, tests have shown.

The tyre particles pollute air, water and soil and contain a wide range of toxic organic compounds, including known carcinogens, the analysts say, suggesting tyre pollution could rapidly become a major issue for regulators.

The tests also revealed that tyres produce more than 1tn ultrafine particles for each kilometre driven, meaning particles smaller than 23 nanometres. These are also emitted from exhausts and are of special concern to health, as their size means they can enter organs via the bloodstream. Particles below 23nm are hard to measure and are not currently regulated in either the EU or US.

“Tyres are rapidly eclipsing the tailpipe as a major source of emissions from vehicles,” said Nick Molden, at Emissions Analytics, the leading independent emissions testing company that did the research. “Tailpipes are now so clean for pollutants that, if you were starting out afresh, you wouldn’t even bother regulating them.”
 
I can see it now. LV and Reno casinos could offer packages, that include a shuttle from and to the nearest DT. They would pick you up after dropping your car off for tires, take you to the casino to gamble, and then take you back to the tire shop to pick up your car when the "illegal" tires are installed.
And that is exactly what I would do.

Scott
 
Back
Top Bottom