I would like to respond to the two letters referring to the author’s belief in studded tires. The letter written by Dave McRae (Jan 1), has his personal belief in studs based on his experience with black ice and a slide through an intersection. In both instances his was the fault because he was not driving according to possible conditions at the time. The meteorological statements of his can be discounted, as he provided no objective references, which can be checked. The second letter by Paul Biskup (Jan 8), was so disjointed and rambling that one has a difficult time trying to figure out what the majority of the letter was about. One thing was clear however. He also likes studded tires.
Since neither author seems to be in possession of the facts about winter tires, let me enlighten them and others about this. According to a study done by the University of Alaska Engineering Department comparing studded tires with a modern snow tire, the studded tire has only a slight traction advantage in stopping when new, on polished ice at 32 degrees F. In all other parameters such as snow, packed or new, ice colder that 32 degrees F, and automobile maneuvers, the studded tire was not as effective as a standard approved snow tire. Further, after 1,000 miles of wear was placed on the two types of tire, the studded tire was poorer in every category. The test was run with front wheel drive, rear wheel drive and pickup. Last year Tire Rack, which is a respected tire seller and tester, ran a test on polished ice using three traction snow tires they sell against a studded tire they sell, and found the studded tire was dead last in their tests. Norway found that studded tires give drivers a false sense of confidence and those using them tend to drive more rapidly and therefore increase the risk of an accident.
Now look at the logic of using studs in various snow/ice conditions. Their values in newly fallen snow is zero, in slush zero, in packed snow the modern siped snow tire has many more gripping edges than a few short studs, and on rough ice that one will find on a road surface the siped tire is more grippy again. This brings us to black ice. By definition black ice is not thick. Say a millimeter at most. Since a stud is only 0.06 inch long or approximately 1.5 mm it stands to reason that when on black ice a stud is riding on the pavement beneath, and one is getting only the benefit of a stud on dry pavement. In contrast, the studless snow tire once again has hundreds of gripping edges to hold against. In fact most every tire manufacturer has realized that the modern snow tire is better and most put studs into a tire that is siped.
For most winter days in which there is any road condition that might bring on ice, the de-icer trucks and the sanding trucks are out in full force thus negating the need for any perceived need for studded tires.
Belief based on personal experience is fine when applied to religion, but to deny objective evidence is not logical. Studded tire value is one of those myths, which does not stand up to objective testing.
My personal bias against studs is threefold. First is the destruction they cause to the road. One can see in the bottom of the ruts, the longitudinal cracks which develop. Those cracks let water into the road surface, which causes the pavement to fracture. The next complaint is that the ruts make it dangerous because the car is deflected or trapped when encountering a rut. The third thing is the hydroplaning one encounters when the rut fills with water.
For a few days in the year in which snow tires are needed in Central Oregon, we are creating road safety issues by the use of studs. The safety issues are there whenever the pavement is dry, which is the majority of the year.
The University of Alaska report can be found at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/winter/studtire.htm It is 60 pages long and has many bar graphs and tables giving the information discovered. Tire Rack is www.tirerack.com
B. Graham, Sisters
This article appears in Feb 12-18, 2009.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Thank you Mr. Graham!!! The deniers, of course, foremost because of the verbosity and scientific accuracy of you observations will, as with all other things that have to do with thinking, never-the-less continue to simply ignore reality – the definition of “ignorance” – and your words fall again, sadly, upon deaf ears.
Of late Ten Bears has been collecting new idioms, such as “lawns are for people too stupid to grow food”, “four wheel drive is for people too stupid to go slow”, and “tire studs are for people to stupid to understand where their highway taxdollars are going”.
There was a time when tire-studs were manditory in Oregon winter months – the first to my memory of a local business sucking government cock…
After speaking with Paul Biskup, I’m linking his letter. Mr. Biskup states for the record that he is not a studded tire supporter and questions Mr. Graham’s interpretation of his (Jan 8)letter.
I think Mr Graham drew an accurate conclusion from Mr Biskup’s letter. The following quotes seem to clearly indicate a positive opinion of studded tires:
“If someone chooses to use studded snow tires and it helps them to not run me over, I thank them.”
“If someone chooses to spend the equivalent of their insurance deductible on good snow tires that also have studs before they have to spend it on your repair or hospital bill, you should be grateful.”
Thanks Mr Graham for a clear, concise and well written letter. Perhaps more people will soon realize that the security they feel with studded tires is not because of the studs – it’s because they’re good snow tires. Getting rid of the studs just makes them even better.
My intent was to defend people that are may still be using studded tires as they may have been the best option when they purchased them in their attempt to be responsible drivers. The word “someone” is the subject of the sentences. Studded tires are the direct object. I am talking about humans, not tires.
I personally have no plans to buy studded tires in the future as I know the rubber and tread pattern are far more important in a “good” snow tire. Bruce Miller seemed to be underplaying the importance of good tires in his article. He also oversimplified the science of meteorology. I have never seen lake effect snow in Central Oregon for instance. I was careful to never actually say I like studded tires because I don’t like them. I hate the noise and the fact that they are fragile and often times used in horrible snow tires that make people overconfident.
What I am saying is that people that have studded tires don’t really bother me like they bother Mr. Miller. My letter was aimed at Mr. Millers persistent ragging on people that he has lived with for 23 years.
Mr. Graham even claims he could not make sense of my letter because he in fact couldn’t. After stating that he couldn’t understand me, the very next sentence he says I made something very clear however; because he chose to make incorrect assumptions. He seems to have chosen to rip into me anyway instead of getting help from a reading specialist at his local middle school.
If someone chooses a career as a criminal defense attorney are they saying they like criminals? If the Source claims to be “pro choice” does that mean they “like” abortion? Next time I write a letter I will stay below 4th grade level as to not provoke any thought from readers.
I do not choose to get into the debate over tires because Mr. B. Graham of Sisters is correct that I do not have the scientific evidence to back anything in that debate. The science I am claiming to understand in my letter is weather and the earths surface in our region. I will continue to defend the naive lowlife simpletons that Bruce Miller feels he may sometimes be surrounded by. What “I” think is what “I” think and not what Mr. B. Graham says I think. I am sorry for possibly exceeding Mr. B. Grahams and maybe a few others comprehension levels.
To start with, I’d like to point out that I agree with both authors on this subject: Mr. Biskup in that; it’s noble in the first place to even try to use winter traction tires (studded or not) for the sake of the driver’s safety, AND the public arround him. And Mr. Graham in that studs don’t work as well as studless winter traction tires, but also cause more damage than they are worth.
To get to the meat: Mr. Graham mentions that he has three reasons for disliking studs. One, that studs cause ruts, two, that ruts cause road deterioration, and three, that ruts hold water and create dangerous hydroplane lanes. These are all factual results of studded tire wear and tear on the roads, but they all stem from ruts. In effect Mr Graham has one complaint: ruts.
I would like to add two more negative issues toward the use of studded tires:
1: Rubber recycling. Studded tires do not get the same lifetime mileage as studless tires. This is for two reasons: A: They sit unused through the hottest part of the year, which dries them out. Tires “like” use because it keeps the rubber flexible and elastic, making them more resilient. Dried-out tires, however, become brittle. This leaves them suceptible to simple punctures that cannot be repaired, including being pierced by the tire’s own studs. It is not uncommon at all to only get 15000 lifetime miles on studded tires, not half the life of regular tires. Further, studded tires shed their studs which regularly pierce other vehicle’s tires. B: Noise. You know when October rolls around in Bend! Traffic goes from growling engines and light tire noise, to a constant rattle that sounds like everyone in town just got married and are dragging an 18 pack of PBR cans behind their cars! One of the beauties of winter is the stillness that snow brings. That is, until the traffic begins. I dare say Diesel trucks are quieter.
Now, there is a flaw in my argument in that not everyone drives on their studless winter tires all year, they can dry out too. BUT: they do not have built-in suicide devices. Good All-Season tires that are traction rated for snow are becoming more available, and are a great option for all cars, except maybe high-end sports cars that never see precipitation. I drive an SUV, and run traction-rated tires year-round. It doesn’t wear them down any faster than regular tires.
So, to the studded faithful, remember this: It has been scientifically and economically proven that studded tires cost us all more than they are worth. They are about as useful as an anchor on your car.
Here’s an idea: Pull the studs out of your tires and put them on your belt or purse. They’ll be more fashionable AND you’ll still have a decent set of winter tires to drive on!