when the frick are we getting airless tires? they've been promoting this shit for the last 20 years.

when the frick are we getting airless tires? they've been promoting this shit for the last 20 years.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They get full up with mud and junk and come apart
    If you're worried about flats have some moose installed

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      that's a 4x4 cope. I drive on pavement, my cars never get muddy. if the reason is they get muddy, then they can come with a disclaimer that say they are for on-road use only.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Does it not rain or snow where you live? Even road debris gets into the fins and shreds the joinings

        There's literally no reason they can't have a sidewall unless you're trying to show them off

        No that causes them to break down faster because the rubber rubs against itself on the inside and makes this powdery gunk it's like half sand, half glue

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          At rest the sidewall doesn't need to be in contact with the fins if there's an air gap and when compressed against the ground the sidewall can flex outward and further away from the edge of the fins.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >if there's an air gap
            Good job moron, now your airless tires have air in them.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          why not inflate them with air so that won’t happen?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Genius

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        if you drive on pavement how the frick are you getting flat tires?
        i got flat tire once in 10 years of driving

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There's literally no reason they can't have a sidewall unless you're trying to show them off

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    At this point I'm sure any design that lasts as long as traditional tires would immediately be bought and buried.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not true.
      Tire manufactures could easily make these kinds of tires once the design is perfected.
      While it's a new technology, it's not disruptive and companies can easily pivot to make a profit, unlike big oil buying out 'water-powdered engines' .

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      wait until you find out there's 6000 patents that have been suppressed because it would negatively impact the economy. thank you 1941 invention act.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They'll become market viable when we suddenly want tires that ride very hard and are cacophonous at highway sppeds

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Never, they fricking suck.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >rides like a roadbike

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    these are less durable than bias plys on an interstate, leave em to industrial equipment

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Did you mean to say radials? Most tires are less durable than bias plies.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    tire industry collusion, lobbying, patent wiener-blocking, the usual stuff... probably

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's wrong with tires that hold air? I've had great luck. I wouldn't want to pay more for airless tires. So maybe that's why they haven't caught on? They're just pointless?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what's wrong with the thing I've used my entire life? I've had great luck not having any alternatives. Why would I want to pay less for a new technology? Maybe that's why they haven't caught on? Because muh comfy explodable tires?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What the frick kind of world is this rebuttal from? Why do you have such fanatical faith in a product that's failed to launch for decades?
        Everyone who owns a car drives on air-filled tires. You've been surrounded by them every single day of your life since you were born. Why are you pretending that they're archaic and scary now?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >potential for revolutionary technology should be ignored and dismissed in favor of what I'm used too and what is "standard"

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's the wrong form factor and design.
    The I Robot tires got memoryholed, for unknown reasons

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ponder the orb.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Unknown reasons
      More like the automotive industry wasn't about to unanimously invest R&D into reconfiguring how drivetrains work for every car everwhere with the sole purpose of giving women on their phones ninja-like abilities to 4-wheel-steering sideswipe the shit out of you on the interstate.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This needs room temperature superconductors to be feasible.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The I Robot tires got memoryholed, for unknown reasons

      Because they're very stupid
      >2 feet wide
      >80 lbs
      >4" contact patch
      >can't optimize tread pattern to do crazy futuristic stuff like direct water or snow away like say every normal tire

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That just looks more expensive to replace when the tread wears down. Would only have a practical application in not going flat if you want bulletproof or spike proof tires.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So the points I've seen for why they aren't used.
    >they're loud
    >they don't absorb shock as well as tires with air
    >they can't disperse heat
    >the ribs produce heat every time they're compressed
    >they're heavy
    >more expensive than air tires
    >if you made airless tires, they'd just be made to emulate regular tires so what's the point

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'm sure they'd fill up with mud and cause an imbalance.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >>if you made airless tires, they'd just be made to emulate regular tires so what's the point

      the main point is military and police applications. Being able to drive a vehicle that can't get it's tires shot out or damaged by rough driving is a massive benefit in some situations, even if comfort and affordability take a hit. Right now even the most heavily armored cars are vulnerable to tire punctures. If you can make airless tires, they then become like tanks in that they can't be rendered inoperable simply by random sharp objects

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're great for low speed high weight applications like forklifts, skidsteers, etc. but for a road vehicle they're a terrible idea due to the poor ride quality and added unsprung weight, especially considering the one thing they have over standard tires (coping with punctures) is already handled with run-flat tires.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Even run flat tires suck ass for ride quality

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And how to replace a cracked rim in this at all , repair any small crack / bend ?

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Can you do a burnout with that shit?

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're only been shown to be useful on industrial equipment. Low speed, low temperature change stuff like that.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this is one of those situations where the old way is actually more high-tech and better

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're heavy.

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >difficult to install
    >bad NVH
    >expensive
    >heavy
    >wouldn't last any longer than a conventional tire
    >wouldn't improve fuel economy over a conventional tire
    The only benefit is that they don't go flat. That's not worth all of the sacrifices. That's why you DO see them in use, but not on cars.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They suck at high speeds, you can buy them for slow vehicles.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think they'd be good for airport or distribution center vehicles. Slow moving, zero maintenance & last forever.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not use this

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Do you want to listen to thousands of roaring treads all day?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Are you offering? because yes.

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reinventing the wagon wheel. We've gone full circle.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As soon as they stop being absolutely moronic for 99% of all use cases compared to traditional pneumatic tires

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      but anon, what if you could have a tire that's infinitely harder and more expensive to make than a pneumatic tire but also worse in every way?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I would put it on forklifts and other warehouse equipment.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That might make sense, not much lateral movement, puncture resistance

          But then the air spring effect of a pneumatic tire means the weight of the load gets at least partially redistributed along the entire inner surface area of the tire, and you'd lose that

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For what purpose?
    Air is free anon (except for weimerica)

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    never.
    they're too stiff to ever be truly viable.
    ever tried to take a sharp turn on a big wheel as a kid?
    it's like that, but at 70 mph, with a half-ton to full ton car.
    you will not survive.
    literally the only reason you can take turns in a car comfortably is because the softness of the tire (relative to the pavement) allows for it to grip.
    airless tires are just hard plastic.
    literally the only place they work is on the moon and mars due to lower gravity and slower speeds.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *