all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 7 points 2 months ago (1 child)

1B/39M works out to $25 per person per year. That seems negligible at best.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The problem with efficient tires is that they are often a very stiff ride and have poor grip. They are usually designed to coast well, and that makes them harder. It’s a trade off. It also doesn’t help that the current fad is tires with narrower sidewalls.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    It's a fad because buyers insist on larger rims. All that does is increase the chance of breaking a rim on a pothole and a harsher ride. I started buying EV tires because they are quieter and save fuel.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    How about we add a tax to tires that scales exponentially with their width? Wide sports car tires and bro-dozer pickup trucks with flashy rims will be motivated to use a setup with less drag/friction for the sake of performance/vanity.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 6 comments in c/california@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    LRR tires are a mixed bag. They've given me better fuel efficiency but haven't latest nearly as long. I just traded fuel costs for tire costs. And I don't necessarily mean per set either. If the tires wear out 25% faster then I can't imagine it being better. It may actually be worse, and not just monetarily. Brake and tire dust are pretty bad pollutants as well. At least to those living near busy roads.

    I'm all for better and more efficient tires, but unless you're getting better fuel efficiency for the same durability, I don't see how this is any better.

    And to their point of increased tire costs, being forced to make a shit ton more will certainly being the price down some. Right now there just isn't a huge demand so regular tires outsell them by a wide margin.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I just traded fuel costs for tire costs.

    I know the article is centered on cost but I wonder in the long run which is better environmentally.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Exclusions to the new rules found here

    Competition tires designed for motorsports

    Winter-type snow tires

    All-season winter performance tires

    Used and retreaded tires

    Deep tread tires

    Tires designed for ATVs and other off-road vehicles

    Large off-road tires for use up to 99 mph

    Motorcycle tires

    Temporary-use spare tires

    Small tires with ≤13-inch nominal rim diameter

    Limited production tires (<15,000 per year)

    Tires sold for use on an emergency vehicle

    High load index tires (122 or greater)

    Tires not capable of sustaining speeds over 50 mph

    Space saver tires

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 5 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    [–] 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    The rule also comes with exemptions including snow tires and those used in competition. All-weather tires are also excluded, but the state will track them, as that growing segment may be regulated in the future.

    Wait, so winters and all-weathers are excluded.....so this is only for summer tires? At least thats what it seems for their total projected roll out through 2033.

    I can't remember the last time I bought summer tires...

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Summer tires are popular choices for people who buy sports cars, nice summer tires make a pretty substantial difference.

    IMO legislating that cars must have worse traction on the road is...a choice. I can't help but feel like this is missing the forest for the trees.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Summer tires are as important as winter tires. They work best at higher temps for braking and wear. Most people in CA use all seasons so this law won't change anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 4 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 14 points 2 months ago

    Can I get my $1B in advance?

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The rule is “designed to ensure that replacement tires sold in the state are at least as energy efficient, on average, as tires sold in the state as original equipment.” It would also establish a labeling system that gives tires a “leaf” rating

    Efficiency in terms of rolling resistance. Apparently the stock tires are designed to maximize efficiency to get a better sticker MPG, but after that you're on your own.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Which is shitty because manufacturers have resorted to putting some of the worst tires on their vehicles to comply with fleet MPG standards. You should be able to buy better tires if you want even if that means trading 1-2MPG for traction in the rain or snow.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Hope the California tire companies don't try to recoup that billy

  • source
  • 1 comment in c/automotive@discuss.tchncs.de view that post
    [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    It won’t ever be enforced

  • source