drewactual
Adventurer
man, some subjects are complicated enough without trying to make them more... :wings:
volume of air is the important aspect, expressed in pressure and contingent on cubic space available loaded and unloaded, which wouldn't follow near as linear a scale as pressure when discussing expectations of use.
there is less flex in an E rated tire... assuming 10 ply's, which I figured to leave it at, but which was rightfully pointed out above me that 'some materials are better than others'- which at one point was expressed on a sidewall as 4+4 as opposed to 8, making both D ply... 4+4 would be the use of nylon in tires about the time that nylon started being used in tires, considered twice as strong as cotton, making one ply of nylon the same considered strength as two cotton... now they just say D ply, regardless of the layer being Nylon, cotton, or Kevlar and by the letter of the expectation they don't even have to be 8 plies at all- just the equiv of eight plies in strength compared to cotton... go freakin' figure.... and we're just discussing tread area, anyway... that's all.
sidewall construction, and modern adhering/bonding the materials can be silly thin and having as little as two layers on a D or E rated tire. Everybody pays attention to the plies and assume all else equal, when it ain't so... plies DO allow for greater volume of air to be restricted to the loaded carcass and retention of shape- which is why PSI can be expected to increase following the ply rating... but it has little to do with the load index, which is where the true consideration of a tire and it's weight restrictions should be considered... There are no I or K 'rated' tires because the letter can be too easily confused with other meanings folks attribute to those letters, but there are certainly F, G, H, J, L, M, N rated tires, up to 24 plies on the N... can you imagine how heavy that would be? (trick question, what if it were a over the road highway tire made that way to a-hold high pressure to lower rolling resistance, and b- have underlying surfaces to affix a retread on? it may not be heavy at all)...
there are supposed to be standards within tire makers, but few follow the guide... how many 35" tires are actually 35"? very few... how many 37" are actually 35.5"? a bunch... what rim size ratio is used to determine tread footprint? 1:1, 1.3:1? (on an aside, you should never have 1/4 ratio deviation either direction)... what can't be used as marketing fluff are the bead diameter and the load index... dang near all else is 'ball park"... load rangeis more often used to express PSi expectations more than actual load rating... the load range is subject to temperature of the tire- the load index is NOT. The bead diameter is of extreme value to the rim it's being mounted to, the outside diameter/circumference isn't regulated but to 'ball park'....
it's times like these I say "go with what you KNOW"... what do you know? Inside/bead diameter and load index... look for a tire based on expected use and whatever criteria you want AFTER those two have been satisfied.
volume of air is the important aspect, expressed in pressure and contingent on cubic space available loaded and unloaded, which wouldn't follow near as linear a scale as pressure when discussing expectations of use.
there is less flex in an E rated tire... assuming 10 ply's, which I figured to leave it at, but which was rightfully pointed out above me that 'some materials are better than others'- which at one point was expressed on a sidewall as 4+4 as opposed to 8, making both D ply... 4+4 would be the use of nylon in tires about the time that nylon started being used in tires, considered twice as strong as cotton, making one ply of nylon the same considered strength as two cotton... now they just say D ply, regardless of the layer being Nylon, cotton, or Kevlar and by the letter of the expectation they don't even have to be 8 plies at all- just the equiv of eight plies in strength compared to cotton... go freakin' figure.... and we're just discussing tread area, anyway... that's all.
sidewall construction, and modern adhering/bonding the materials can be silly thin and having as little as two layers on a D or E rated tire. Everybody pays attention to the plies and assume all else equal, when it ain't so... plies DO allow for greater volume of air to be restricted to the loaded carcass and retention of shape- which is why PSI can be expected to increase following the ply rating... but it has little to do with the load index, which is where the true consideration of a tire and it's weight restrictions should be considered... There are no I or K 'rated' tires because the letter can be too easily confused with other meanings folks attribute to those letters, but there are certainly F, G, H, J, L, M, N rated tires, up to 24 plies on the N... can you imagine how heavy that would be? (trick question, what if it were a over the road highway tire made that way to a-hold high pressure to lower rolling resistance, and b- have underlying surfaces to affix a retread on? it may not be heavy at all)...
there are supposed to be standards within tire makers, but few follow the guide... how many 35" tires are actually 35"? very few... how many 37" are actually 35.5"? a bunch... what rim size ratio is used to determine tread footprint? 1:1, 1.3:1? (on an aside, you should never have 1/4 ratio deviation either direction)... what can't be used as marketing fluff are the bead diameter and the load index... dang near all else is 'ball park"... load rangeis more often used to express PSi expectations more than actual load rating... the load range is subject to temperature of the tire- the load index is NOT. The bead diameter is of extreme value to the rim it's being mounted to, the outside diameter/circumference isn't regulated but to 'ball park'....
it's times like these I say "go with what you KNOW"... what do you know? Inside/bead diameter and load index... look for a tire based on expected use and whatever criteria you want AFTER those two have been satisfied.
