El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1920-06-12
Solid Tires
CM7yHeaUy
Excess Loads

The third instalment Of the ABB
stract OF the paper on Relation OF
Solid and Pneumatic Tires to Motor
Truck Efficiency" prepared and
read by S. V. Norton, OF the Good
rich Tire and Rubber company at
the recent meeting Of the Society
OF Automotive Engineers, follows:
..rhe amount Of work a truck can
perform and hence the saving OF
profit il viii show, depends Largely
upon the amount II can carry, or IN
other words. its pay load There IS
a well nigh universal tendency 70
overload trucks beyond their rated
capacity and Il IS not uncommon 20
find trucks carrying twice tnelr
rated caDacftv When II comes 70
standing up under this usage, there
seems TO be no doubt that solid tires
will not only carry heavier over
loads. but will last longer In sucn
service. This seems TO me the most
important and least UNDERSTOOD
/ factor in the entire list Apparent
! savings may be offset or over
balanced by the additional trips tnaI
| become necessary when an oVerloao
cannot be carried.
Closely allied TO the cost OF over
loading pneumatic tires Is that OF
under inEstlcn. The constant ana
extreme flexing caused by OVERLOAD
I Ing has a tendency to weaken the
side vail making II much more Akely
Z TO fail in servlce- While solid tires
are not iuvulnerable, they can stand
/ more abuse and are less expensive 20
maintain in working condition
Danger CT Ruining Tires-
/ In addition TO the likelihood OF in
I curing expense from overlooking ana
under Initiation. there IS the danger
: OF running pneumatic tires from run
ming them after being punctured OF
| blown out It IS not uncommon Tor
| practically new tires TO be ruined aeSl. y
3 drivers who do not stop their trucks
as soon as they begin TO suspect tire
I'm attempting to collect data as
/ 10 mileage in pneumaticss found
many varying claims, ranging from
| 200 miles under adverse conditions,
I 10 $4,000 miles on lighter trucks
over good roads with proper car E.
| With rare exceptions the mileage de-
! livered by solid tires is considerably
greater than that from pneumatics
! IN the same class OF service
ssWhen the earning capacity Of the
/ truck concerned is Judged BY the
number Of trips per day, the adVaIl-
I tage seems to lie with pneumatic
! equipment provided the runs are long
enough and not restricted oy sgch
] factors as traffic congestion anu oe-
I LAYS at terminals.
There are certain conditions
I under which trucks on pneumatlcs
can make trips when those on soll9s
can not be operated Hence, their
/ greater. It has been noted that
trucks on pneumatcs not only
I negotiate the unpaved roadway s
more easily. but do less damage than
] those on solids, and hence are looked
upon with more favor BY the farmers
]
when we come to consider the
! relative effects OF solids and pneu-
mates on the cost Of operation ana
/ upkeep we find a wide variety OF
| opinions, but very 1eW eonciusloll7
/ based on accurate cost records
Let US examine briefly the items
I which should be included IN such
| costs, and see how they are at1ecLed
by solid and pneumatic tires me
| following items are usually not az
fected by tire equipment interest on
! investment insurance. taxes ana
/ license; garage: supervision; wages
I Of driver and wages OF helper
THE following, however, may vary
/ according to the type OF tires used;
] depreciation, gasoline. oil, tires, re-
No Dependable Figures
Taking them up IN the order
I given. there are, so far as I know, no
dependable figures covering oeprecta-
I ton on which 20 make comparisons,
/ as no trucks have been run long
Z enough on pneumatics to determine
I their effect on the ultimate life OF
/ the truck
"As TO the relative consumption Of
/ gasoline and oil. very few reliable
/ figures are available, but the best
/ informed operators are inclined q
| feel there is little II any saving in
/ these items. particularly on short
hauls. On long hauls. however, thl
| advantage seems TO lie in favor OF
! pneumatics-
when It comes to tires there IS
no question The cost OF pneumatics
| average two 10 three times that OF
solids. This IS due, TO the higher
initial cost OF the equipment and the
spare tires. their greater suscepta-
bility TO abuse and accident. and
their lower average mileage
so far as the cost Of repairs e
the truck is concerned, comparative
data Of a reliable nature cannot b
/ obtained. The evidence indicates
however. that, except for the engine
the cost OF repairs viii be considera'
bic less on pneumatics than OF
solids. due to the reduced vibration
And II the engine Is not run at eL
] raezfva1v high Eunnd or continually