|
|
| We are running two semis, is there a general advantage to super singles? Is there any advantage in a muddy field? Should they be on the tractor, on the trailer, or both?
Thanks
John EIA |
|
| |
|
Wheatley, Arkansas | The main advantage should come in improved fuel mileage and weight reduction, not that big of a deal if you're running farm trucks.
I doubt SS's would be much if any better in muddy conditions, but I've not experienced it.
A few disadvantages are, single recap ability, OOS if you have a flat, no limping in with it, difficulty of repairing a flat, new experience if you have a blowout on the tractor end of it. |
|
| |
|
algona iowa | Only advantage i have really seen is weight. Duals will support you in the mud better than singles how ever if it is a little wet you will drag less mud out on road. We have used super singles on side dumps for years. The biggest challange is if you have a flat you are done.Hope this helps you. |
|
| |
|
Sunburst Montana | We have a 48ft Wilson with a triple axle and super singles and we like them mainly because there are half as many tires to maintain. We carry a bottle jack in the truck so when we get a flat, we can jack the axle up, chain it, and then limp to the nearest tire shop. |
|
| |
|
Kansas | Try that trick on a drive axle and see how far you get though. Won't work.
Like Les said, for otr, lots of positive reports and first hand use I have heard of gained mpg. For a farm truck just a few miles to the bin site or elevator and back. I'm not going to advocate thier use.
Changeover from duals to singles is pricey also. |
|
| |
|
MO | I was test driving a customers truck after a repair. They had super singles on both the truck and the hopper bottom. It had started raining very hard . It was comparable to driving on ice. |
|
| |
|
Nth New South Wales Australia | Not a good tyre in soft going,I can guarrantee that a trailer on super singles will sink before duals,been there tested the theory.They do however track really well and are a stable plaform on the main road as the suspension is a little wider allowing more roll stability. |
|
| |
|
| I talked to a driver that had SS on his flatbed (hauling hay), but he didn't have them on his tractor. I asked how he liked the SS. He said he loved them on his trailer (which he bought new), and had 90,000 miles on his first set of tires, and he said he'd put on another 10k before he would buy new ones. He said SS were slightly cheaper & weighed less when he spec'd the trailer. He said they were fine for farm conditions & he'd buy SS for a trailer again. |
|
| |
|
Nwmo | We've had super singles on trailers for about 10 years now and we put them on the trucks last year. We have run both tall and wide base singles. Only had one blow or ever go flat and it was last year after hitting a seam in the bridge it blew out, the tire was getting a little old but it was a virgin tire. Tore up the trailer pretty bad but I was able to take it down an off ramp and get it changed on the side of the road. They do sink worse in soft conditions, we haven't found any wide base with an aggressive tread, so far they are horrible in slimy conditions. We have tall singles like on the front of dump trucks running as drivers on a Columbia and they do fine in slimy or wet conditions, however they are pretty aggressive tread. The weight savings was our main goal plus its a lot easier to check tire pressure.
I have never personally seen or experienced any degraded performance in rain over duals.
Devin |
|
| |
|
south central IOWA | I would like to know what the weight difference is between SS and aluminum wheels. Been told 80lbs. difference between steel and aluminum. IMO you're going to have to drive a lot of miles with exactly your max gross weight to pay for them, then drive that much more to make it worth it. |
|
| |
|
NE SD | Was loaded at time, chained er up drove 1mi. to tire shop didn't ruin rims either |
|
| |
|
Kansas | How would you of ruined the rims chaining it up?
I guess you could lock your differentials but you drove 1 mile. In alot of cases, you'll drive 30 before you hit a tire shop. I'm thinking that wouldn't exactly be to good on things loaded down with 50,000 lbs of product. |
|
| |
|
NE SD | Well it doesn't work great, rims were about 2" off ground, Yes very lucky on where it happened |
|
| |
|
nebraska | I know they get stuck and sink in the snow and mud easier. Some of the gluten trucks have them here and from experiance you pull alot of them back out of the yard if they get off the concrete. I think the snow and mud gets to pushing in fron of them as in a tandem the mud has a place to go between the tires I personelly would not have them on a farm truck if you were running down the highway all time I might think about it. |
|
| |
|
Iowa | I have had them on two trucks. the first truck had low pro 22.5s and when i put them on I lost 280lbs. The secound truck had 24.5 talls and i lost 420lbs. If you haul an extra 420 lbs every load over 2 years time they will pay for some of the tire expence. and yes they r bad in the snow and ice so i have a set of chins to get out of the farm yards when i get stuck
|
|
| |
|
NW Ohio,near Findlay | In construction work, dump trucks, super singles sink , and get stuck, where a standard dual wheel trucks will back right in, same weight. They will pack ground on end rows more too. Like others have said, don't drag out mud on road if that is a problem. Not many on privite owned trucks anymore, too expensive to buy, and fix on road, can't limp home. |
|
| |
|
s nd | I have them on a forty foot spread air hauling beets out of the field. They said duals would slide going down the field, so put them on right away. My neighbor cannot figure out how my t-800 pulls over eighty thousand out of the mud with little getting stuck. Deep ruts for sure if it's soft. Screwed when a tire blows, though. |
|
| |
|
Emporia, ks | I have a good set of 455/55-22.5's w/aluminum wheels on my hopper that I'd trade for a good set of tall 11R24.5's w/aluminum wheels |
|
| |
|
Wheatley, Arkansas | Well that should answer the original posters question. |
|
| |
|
SD, IA, MN, bro in AR | We run about a half dozen trucks year round. For runnin' grain trailers nothin beats super singles. Less tires, less chains, less weight. Just maintain them. We have also logged several hundred miles where 2+ mpg was saved. |
|
| |
|
Wheatley, Arkansas | I'd be inclined to believe .2-.4, but +2 kinda gets out there. Documenting a 33% increase (6 MPG to 8 MPG) due solely to tires is unbelievable. I guess several hundred miles vs 125,000 miles could make a more dramatic swing in MPG.
From a news article:Interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center show gas mileage increased nearly 3% with use of wider single tires on tractor-trailers. Bill Knee, who headed the study, said the change also allows widening of the trailer frame by six inches, providing a much more stable configuration.
We noticed that there was about a 2.9% fuel saving in using the new generation single wide tires over the standard dual tires. These trucks do 125,000 miles per year on the average. They currently get five miles per gallon. You can see there is a considerable amount of savings dollar-wise that can be realized through tires like this.
—Bill Knee
With those figures, a 3% improvement in fuel economy would reduce fuel consumption by about 728 gallons per year per truck.
|
|
| |
|
Wheatley, Arkansas | I'd be inclined to believe .2-.4, but +2 kinda gets out there. Documenting a 33% increase (6 MPG to 8 MPG) due solely to tires is unbelievable. I guess several hundred miles vs 125,000 miles could make a more dramatic swing in MPG.
From a news article:Interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center show gas mileage increased nearly 3% with use of wider single tires on tractor-trailers. Bill Knee, who headed the study, said the change also allows widening of the trailer frame by six inches, providing a much more stable configuration.
We noticed that there was about a 2.9% fuel saving in using the new generation single wide tires over the standard dual tires. These trucks do 125,000 miles per year on the average. They currently get five miles per gallon. You can see there is a considerable amount of savings dollar-wise that can be realized through tires like this.
—Bill Knee
With those figures, a 3% improvement in fuel economy would reduce fuel consumption by about 728 gallons per year per truck.
|
|
| |
|
south central IOWA | Les, I know you didn't do the study but what are your thoughts on the 3% fuel savings? I check my mileage every time I fill up and it's about a 5% swing in either direction. I find it hard to believe a person can pinpoint a 3% fuel savings just by having SS. And by the way the guy talks their money would be better invested in trucks that get better than 5mpg. Shoot, mine will get 5.7-6.3 |
|
| |
Super singles vs duals
