S.A.E. Bulletin Volume 10, No. 2 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1916 Excerpt: ... cost ranging between 8 and 15 per cent. (2) Saving in wheel cost. The reduced wheel cost is attributable to the narrower felloe stock and wheel rim required, together with whatever other saving may be made in connection with wheel design. The same reasoning also applies to metal wheels. (3) Saving in cost of handling and applying one tire instead of two. (4) Saving in wheel, tire and rim weight, resulting in possible greater operating economy and relieving unsprung weight. (5) Larger tire that will adapt itself better to uneven road surfaces, compensate for excessive road crown, carrying its burden as a unit rather than alternately on one narrow tread and then on the other. (6) Greater ease of fitting non-skid chains. (7) Better tracking with front wheels (an advantage when tracks must be broken). (8) Usually greater height of rubber tread, thus providing greater cushioning properties with consequently increased tire and vehicle life. (9) Decreased strain on axle and wheel bearings as a result of decreased leverage obtained by the narrower wheel tread. (10) Operating economies that will follow the use of large singles, if a deeper section than that commonly used be employed. The tire service in each case under observation has shown very material improvement. LIMITATIONS OP SINGLE TIRES The question will quite naturally arise, "If single tires in the sizes quoted possess advantages over dual tires composed of small units, why does not the same reasoning apply to single tires of sufficient width to replace the largest of dual tires?" Such practice may be possible, although developments to date have not been sufficiently conclusive in this respect to warrant the extension of the recommendation made beyond the ranges given. Perhaps it will be shown t...