Menu
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Reply to thread
Click here to become an Official Member of BMW Club Malaysia
Download Form
Home
Forums
The BMW Range
3 Series
E46
Diff between M-Sport and Non M-Sport
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="E46Fanatic" data-source="post: 337534" data-attributes="member: 81"><p>You are right! Here's what I dug up as well.</p><p></p><p>Another OEM provided the following new-tire rolling resistance</p><p>ranges for similar tire categories, which were derived by using the SAE</p><p>J2452 test procedure and reported by using the Standard Mean Equivalent</p><p>Rolling Force conditions described in the Appendix:</p><p>• All-season, 0.005 to 0.0062;</p><p>• Touring, 0.0058 to 0.0075;</p><p>• Performance, 0.0065 to 0.0083; and</p><p>• High performance, 0.009.</p><p></p><p>Statistical analyses of sampled replacement tires suggest that most</p><p>tires having high (AAA) UTQG wet traction grades are rated for high</p><p>speeds and that few such tires attain low levels of rolling resistance.</p><p>These results may reflect the technical difficulty of designing tires that</p><p>can achieve high levels of wet traction and low rolling resistance.</p><p></p><p>The results indicate that increasing rim diameter by 1 inch, or</p><p>about 6.3 percent for the average tire in the data set, reduces RRC by</p><p>5 to 8 percent. Compared with tires with lower speed ratings (S, T),</p><p>tires with the highest speed ratings (W, Y, Z) have 10 to 22 percent</p><p>higher RRCs, while tires with middle speed ratings (H, V) have 1 to</p><p>9 percent higher RRCs.</p><p>Tires with thicker tread tend to have higher RRCs. Tread depth is</p><p>measured and reported in increments of 1/32 inch, and an increase of</p><p>one unit, or 1/32 inch, leads to a 2.5 to 6 percent increase in RRC,</p><p></p><p>Also found out that RFT's typically can contribute up to 20% more rolling resistance co-efficient (RRC) due to the added weight. Interesting..</p><p></p><p>The full bedroom 178 page reading article can be found here: <a href="http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr286.pdf" target="_blank">http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr286.pdf</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="E46Fanatic, post: 337534, member: 81"] You are right! Here's what I dug up as well. Another OEM provided the following new-tire rolling resistance ranges for similar tire categories, which were derived by using the SAE J2452 test procedure and reported by using the Standard Mean Equivalent Rolling Force conditions described in the Appendix: • All-season, 0.005 to 0.0062; • Touring, 0.0058 to 0.0075; • Performance, 0.0065 to 0.0083; and • High performance, 0.009. Statistical analyses of sampled replacement tires suggest that most tires having high (AAA) UTQG wet traction grades are rated for high speeds and that few such tires attain low levels of rolling resistance. These results may reflect the technical difficulty of designing tires that can achieve high levels of wet traction and low rolling resistance. The results indicate that increasing rim diameter by 1 inch, or about 6.3 percent for the average tire in the data set, reduces RRC by 5 to 8 percent. Compared with tires with lower speed ratings (S, T), tires with the highest speed ratings (W, Y, Z) have 10 to 22 percent higher RRCs, while tires with middle speed ratings (H, V) have 1 to 9 percent higher RRCs. Tires with thicker tread tend to have higher RRCs. Tread depth is measured and reported in increments of 1/32 inch, and an increase of one unit, or 1/32 inch, leads to a 2.5 to 6 percent increase in RRC, Also found out that RFT's typically can contribute up to 20% more rolling resistance co-efficient (RRC) due to the added weight. Interesting.. The full bedroom 178 page reading article can be found here: [URL="http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr286.pdf"]http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr286.pdf[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The BMW Range
3 Series
E46
Diff between M-Sport and Non M-Sport
Top
Bottom
