T TheTanSedan Joined Oct 15, 2002 Messages 1,908 Location Fort Worth, TX Oct 13, 2006 #1 Transportation Research Board #286 http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr286.pdf
C CapriRacer Joined Feb 22, 2003 Messages 4,484 Location Somewhere in the US Oct 15, 2006 #2 I find it interesting that the report says that if RR were reduced 10%, then the average consumer would save $12 to $24 per year based on $2.00 per gallon fuel. Hardly seems worth the effort.
I find it interesting that the report says that if RR were reduced 10%, then the average consumer would save $12 to $24 per year based on $2.00 per gallon fuel. Hardly seems worth the effort.
G Gurkha Joined May 30, 2004 Messages 848 Location India Oct 15, 2006 #3 Would rather have traction at the cost of $12-24 as well as tire life than reduced RR.
eljefino Joined Jun 15, 2003 Messages 40,484 Location ME Oct 16, 2006 #4 Interesting tire construction data in there, that more than just fuel economy freaks might be interested in. A good read. FYI, the best tire on wet concrete stops as well as the worst one on wet asphalt. Concrete= slick stuff.
Interesting tire construction data in there, that more than just fuel economy freaks might be interested in. A good read. FYI, the best tire on wet concrete stops as well as the worst one on wet asphalt. Concrete= slick stuff.
T totttalled Joined Oct 21, 2003 Messages 213 Location Central California Oct 17, 2006 #5 Quote: Would rather have traction at the cost of $12-24 as well as tire life than reduced RR. Click to expand... +1
Quote: Would rather have traction at the cost of $12-24 as well as tire life than reduced RR. Click to expand... +1