Good figuring Mario. Now we have to compare the cost and tread life of the “low resistance” tires with the standard tires.
From you calculations, the low resistance tires per set of 4 would have to cost no more than $215 extra to break even, that’s $53.75 per tire installed! We are assuming they last as long as the standard tire.
I easily get 60,000 miles out of a set of Michelin X, which have excellent tread life and slightly better than average fuel economy. That’s the main reason I ignore fuel economy and concentrate on tread life.
"Funny, dag.
I’ve never experienced an “unforeseen” puddle.
I’m always looking ahead for such things.
Is middle 50s not the speed necessary to ride over water before sinking enough to keep good contact? "
I guess you miss the point. There is no definitive speed that hydroplaning will or will not occur. People ride in cars routinely in rain where it’s experienced by one or more wheels, all or in part by one or more “grooves” of the tire for that matter, but it’s never noticed because there is not sufficient traction demand on the tire at that time.
You may have less traction in wet at ANY speed because of this condition as the tread only partially fills with water even though true hydroplaning does not occur.
A one inch tread deep tread does not require much of a “puddle” to have traction issue, all dependent upon speed and water depth.
That you can see that far ahead and mentally calculate tread/water displacement over time to determine, even at your 55 mph you are now traveling on the interstate and still avoid a puddle while everyone else is still bearing down upon you at 70 mph…is in deed impressive. My hat is off to you as it’s a skill devoid of even professional race drivers who have races discontinued in the rain due to tire condition compromise.
You have a career awaiting you !
Doc:
Good point.
I assumed both kinds of tires would provide equal tread life.
If the low resistance tires gave less tread life, you would need to factor that in.