California Regulators Consider Creating a Rating System for Fuel-Efficient Tires
By Scott Doggett June 15, 2009
An agency is looking into rating the rolling resistance of passenger and light-truck tires available for sale in California so that the state's motorists would know the fuel efficiency of tires when in the market for them.
A draft proposal of the California Energy Commission's Fuel Efficient Tire program was presented June 10 at a workshop attended by tire-manufacturer representatives.
The CEC proposed a rating system for passenger and light-truck tires in which all tires of the same size and load index be ranked against each other from lowest to highest rolling resistance force (or RRF), whereby those tires with the lowest RRF would be the most efficent.
The CEC proposal suggets that the 15 percent of tires with the best RRF be designated a "fuel-efficient tire." Manufacturers would need to test all of their consumer tires using the identical ISO 28580 test protocol, the CEC proposed.
The commission wants the rating system to be consumer friendly and easy to use, but it stressed that complete tire data should also be available for anyone interested in in-depth research.
A rolling-resistance-rating system will foster market competition, the CEC concluded, resulting in more fuel-efficient tires being available for purchase.
A spokesman for the Rubber Manufactuers Association, representing eight tire manufacturers, reported that the tire companies feel the new testing needed to rate the tires will incur more than $20 million in industry costs and require the hiring of additional staff for testing as well as data managment.
Naturally, the RMA wants a "self-certification" system in place wherein the companies would watch what each other does and challenge ratings they feel are incorrect.
And borrowing from a play book useed by automakers as related to tailpipe emission, the RMA spokesman pointed out that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is developing a federal-level tire rolling resistance regulation, thus, he said, the "California-only rule may not be prudent."
LEAVE A COMMENT
Click here to comment on this entry.This is dumb. The average Joe or Jane may not understand that low rolling resistance tires often have less grip than "normal" tires. I shudder to think that the use of tires with less grip (worse handling...longer stopping distances) is being *encouraged* these days. Don't we want the vehicles we drive and are surrounded by these days to be safer, not more dangerous? :rolleyes:
California Energy Commission, you F41L! :thumbsdown: I am not proud to be a resident of the Republic of California because of this (and crazy Laker/Dodger/Raider fans who trash their own city as a means of celebration).
This is ridiculous! I know that every little bit counts, but as far as I know, low-rolling resistance tires save about 1 mpg; maybe, maybe 2 mpg at the most. For that savings, it's not worth the sacrifice in handling/grip/safety they introduce! If I owned a hybrid, the first thing I'd change
are the stupid tires!
California should focus on more important things, really. This is silly.
CEC and CARB don't have anything else to do except come up with more regulations - it's their reason for being. They won the big CAFE battle, so it's now they think they can do anything. Witness the "cool paint" fiasco and now this. These bureaucrats have nothing else to do and taxpayer money to waste...
At least they're still leaving the choice up to consumers. If I want to buy low rolling resistance tires, I can, but if I want to be sticky racing slicks, I also can.
There's nothing dumb, silly or ridiculous about it.
It's a good idea. There's nothing forcing you to buy the extreme high mileage tires (and few people will). I've seen tests that show even within very simular tires, there can be significant differences in rolling resistance.
It won't be the only factor in buying a tire but it is a factor and I think everyone should have the chance to see how a tire is rated. The amount of rolling resistance affects all types of tires, why not choose the better one?
This isn't a government conspiracy, it's just more information and you can never have too much information when making a decision.
Are there good studies showing the impact that low RRF tires have on fuel economy? If the impact is sizeable, I would consider that information for my next tire. It wouldn't be my biggest consideration, and if it merely turns out that braking and cornering suffer proportionately, that forget it.
Best of my recollection, no more than a 10% improvement in fuel economy from LRR tires, at least the ones we have now.
Best of my recollection, no more than a 10% improvement in fuel economy from LRR tires, at least the ones we have now.
ADD A COMMENT