Camber Tire
Aug 4, 2010, 07:59 AM
#1
Camber Tire
I looked and didn't see anything so hopefully these haven't already been discussed. If so, then please feel free to delete my thread.
Has anyone heard or read about these?
http://www.cambertire.com/
Here's a video for you to watch.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/..._tires/1236995
How do you guys feel about the idea of these?
Has anyone heard or read about these?
http://www.cambertire.com/
Here's a video for you to watch.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/..._tires/1236995
How do you guys feel about the idea of these?
Aug 4, 2010, 09:24 AM
#2
Ah, no. Snake oil. They claim toe-in is required on all cars. Its not. Rolling resistance is much more than camber. And technically, if there is more contact, there is more resistance.
And camber is needed for turns.
Ill write more on this later. Busy now.
And camber is needed for turns.
Ill write more on this later. Busy now.
Last edited by Smike; Aug 4, 2010 at 09:38 AM.
Aug 6, 2010, 07:29 AM
#3
Interesting idea, not sure that it really works in practice though. Neglecting the effects of camber change in the suspension, if you have zero camber and you enter a turn your sidewalls will flex and the inside part of your contact patch leaves the ground. When your tires are cambered at rest the outer part of your contact patch is off the ground but now when you turn and the sidewalls flex the full contact patch is on the ground and you get your maximum grip.
I don't see how these tires are any different than running zero camber if the tread is cambered 2 degrees and so is the suspension.
I don't see how these tires are any different than running zero camber if the tread is cambered 2 degrees and so is the suspension.
Aug 6, 2010, 10:15 AM
#4
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: OH
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not this thing again.
As Smike said, it's snake oil. They aren't really accounting for the effects of suspension geometry. Once you start loading up the car in a turn and the front suspension begins to lose camber (which, on a MacStrut car like an Evo, is a rapid rate), you're going to take load off of the very inside of the tire and probably lift that part of the contact patch off the ground, reducing grip. With a conventional tire and the same camber settings, you would indeed have less contact patch without the load in a straight line, but it would be closer to square once the suspension is loaded and begins to camber out.
In other words, the camber in the tire carcass only really works when there's little to no change in the suspension geometry. Which is impossible on just about anything besides a kart or a full-on race car with little geometry change. I can see the benefits in a straight line, but they pretty much disappear once you start trying to corner. In fact, they could've cambered the carcass towards the outside (instead of the inside) and had the same results.
FWIW, I think Automobile did a test with these, and on an Evo X, the 140-treadwear street version was slower/less sticky than the factory Advans. Don't have those results in front of me so I'm going from memory.
As Smike said, it's snake oil. They aren't really accounting for the effects of suspension geometry. Once you start loading up the car in a turn and the front suspension begins to lose camber (which, on a MacStrut car like an Evo, is a rapid rate), you're going to take load off of the very inside of the tire and probably lift that part of the contact patch off the ground, reducing grip. With a conventional tire and the same camber settings, you would indeed have less contact patch without the load in a straight line, but it would be closer to square once the suspension is loaded and begins to camber out.
In other words, the camber in the tire carcass only really works when there's little to no change in the suspension geometry. Which is impossible on just about anything besides a kart or a full-on race car with little geometry change. I can see the benefits in a straight line, but they pretty much disappear once you start trying to corner. In fact, they could've cambered the carcass towards the outside (instead of the inside) and had the same results.
FWIW, I think Automobile did a test with these, and on an Evo X, the 140-treadwear street version was slower/less sticky than the factory Advans. Don't have those results in front of me so I'm going from memory.
Aug 9, 2010, 11:34 PM
#5
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Des Moines, WA
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah saw that on jay leno's car show. at first i was like hey that's not bad... but got thinking about it and ultimately it negates the reason for having cam in the first place i.e zero cam like sscottttt mentioned - great idea for those that don't do much with there cars but drive in a straight line
Trending Topics
Aug 14, 2010, 07:50 PM
#10
Newbie
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take a look at this article:
http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...res/index.html
Seems like there might be a little more to it than snake oil, but I don't understand physics well enough. Automobile seems convinced...
http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...res/index.html
Seems like there might be a little more to it than snake oil, but I don't understand physics well enough. Automobile seems convinced...
Aug 15, 2010, 05:57 AM
#11
Not, its snake oil. I would like to see true wear on the outside shoulders of the tread when used in anything that turns.
Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load.
And this statement is bogus:
With compounds, tire carcass construction, belt angles, sidewall gauge/inserts -- a lot can be changed in a tire. (and more)
I have heard of no notable SCCA/NASA or other driver/team using this.
And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?
Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load.
And this statement is bogus:
Tire engineers would kill for any one-percent gain.
I have heard of no notable SCCA/NASA or other driver/team using this.
And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?
Jul 7, 2011, 03:42 PM
#12
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: toronto
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I have heard of no notable SCCA/NASA or other driver/team using this."
wow...
maybe because it is a new idea...
"And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?"
from cambertire.com:
We have tested Goodyear Racing Camber Tires (borrowed our technology for their largest OEM customer's racing teams!) with EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT RESULTS
"With compounds, tire carcass construction, belt angles, sidewall gauge/inserts -- a lot can be changed in a tire. (and more)"
all of these beneficial developments can be applied to a conical or camber tire...
"Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load."
I believe there is a lot more going on than distribution of load. have you ever looked at an F1 cars front tires after a race? does the wear look evenly distributed?? not to me. In fact i would bet that post race tires wear into a slight conical shape
cambering a tire creates a lateral load. this is called camber thrust...a poorly explained phenomenon....maybe because its poorly understood by the experts.
slip angle also produces lateral load. slip angle is what is primarily used on cars to generate turning forces...with a small amount of camber thrust in some instances.
If you have ever looked at tire data you can see that for some tires you can increase the maximum potential lateral load (regardless of slip angle) on a tire by cambering the tire slightly for a given normal (or downward) load....these tests are done on testing equipment, not vehicles, so the camber gain in the suspension is taken out of the picture. this advantage is particular to tires and usually a wider tire cant be cambered that much because you loose significant amount of contact patch-required for slip angle lateral load generation. so in most car tires there is a balance between adding camber thrust and loosing slip angle induced lateral load. back to camber thrust...take a look at a motorcycle tire-rounded bottom. motorcycle tires differ from car tires in that they generate most of their turning forces from camber thrust. take this motorcycle tire in your mind, now angle it 45 degrees to the ground, now press on the tire squishing the rubber to create a contact patch....make a contact patch around the entire tire by wrapping the ground around it into a cone shape....basically cambering a tire effectively changes the tire into a cone rather than a square...now take a red beer cup and roll it on the table...notice anything? it turns, or in other words generates lateral load with minimal friction.
Same thing is happening but to a much less degree when you camber a car tire...but you totally screw over your slip angle based lateral load generation because it is based primarily on contact patch pressure distribution.
What the camber tire does is allow gains in camber thrust without losses of contact patch..side note i thought that straight line performance would be worse as keeping the tire rolling straight would cause friction, but it appears to be better...
Im sure this small manufacturer cannot compete with the construction and compound development of major manufacturers, putting the camber tire at a disadvantage. this concept is also in its infancy, meaning it can probably be tuned to give way more advantage than this first prototype
I just found out about this tire yesterday but i thought up the camber tire idea nearly two years ago while designing a race car after reading up on camber thrust, analyzing tire data to pick the proper tires. but looks like this gentleman from Wisconsin beat me too it. Its definitely interesting and should be fun to watch. I am still skeptical that there are major drawbacks...real life tends teach a lot of lessons that nobody thinks of ahead of time.
wow...
maybe because it is a new idea...
"And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?"
from cambertire.com:
We have tested Goodyear Racing Camber Tires (borrowed our technology for their largest OEM customer's racing teams!) with EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT RESULTS
"With compounds, tire carcass construction, belt angles, sidewall gauge/inserts -- a lot can be changed in a tire. (and more)"
all of these beneficial developments can be applied to a conical or camber tire...
"Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load."
I believe there is a lot more going on than distribution of load. have you ever looked at an F1 cars front tires after a race? does the wear look evenly distributed?? not to me. In fact i would bet that post race tires wear into a slight conical shape
cambering a tire creates a lateral load. this is called camber thrust...a poorly explained phenomenon....maybe because its poorly understood by the experts.
slip angle also produces lateral load. slip angle is what is primarily used on cars to generate turning forces...with a small amount of camber thrust in some instances.
If you have ever looked at tire data you can see that for some tires you can increase the maximum potential lateral load (regardless of slip angle) on a tire by cambering the tire slightly for a given normal (or downward) load....these tests are done on testing equipment, not vehicles, so the camber gain in the suspension is taken out of the picture. this advantage is particular to tires and usually a wider tire cant be cambered that much because you loose significant amount of contact patch-required for slip angle lateral load generation. so in most car tires there is a balance between adding camber thrust and loosing slip angle induced lateral load. back to camber thrust...take a look at a motorcycle tire-rounded bottom. motorcycle tires differ from car tires in that they generate most of their turning forces from camber thrust. take this motorcycle tire in your mind, now angle it 45 degrees to the ground, now press on the tire squishing the rubber to create a contact patch....make a contact patch around the entire tire by wrapping the ground around it into a cone shape....basically cambering a tire effectively changes the tire into a cone rather than a square...now take a red beer cup and roll it on the table...notice anything? it turns, or in other words generates lateral load with minimal friction.
Same thing is happening but to a much less degree when you camber a car tire...but you totally screw over your slip angle based lateral load generation because it is based primarily on contact patch pressure distribution.
What the camber tire does is allow gains in camber thrust without losses of contact patch..side note i thought that straight line performance would be worse as keeping the tire rolling straight would cause friction, but it appears to be better...
Im sure this small manufacturer cannot compete with the construction and compound development of major manufacturers, putting the camber tire at a disadvantage. this concept is also in its infancy, meaning it can probably be tuned to give way more advantage than this first prototype
I just found out about this tire yesterday but i thought up the camber tire idea nearly two years ago while designing a race car after reading up on camber thrust, analyzing tire data to pick the proper tires. but looks like this gentleman from Wisconsin beat me too it. Its definitely interesting and should be fun to watch. I am still skeptical that there are major drawbacks...real life tends teach a lot of lessons that nobody thinks of ahead of time.
Jul 7, 2011, 05:06 PM
#13
"I have heard of no notable SCCA/NASA or other driver/team using this."
wow...
maybe because it is a new idea...
"And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?"
from cambertire.com:
We have tested Goodyear Racing Camber Tires (borrowed our technology for their largest OEM customer's racing teams!) with EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT RESULTS
"With compounds, tire carcass construction, belt angles, sidewall gauge/inserts -- a lot can be changed in a tire. (and more)"
all of these beneficial developments can be applied to a conical or camber tire...
"Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load."
I believe there is a lot more going on than distribution of load. have you ever looked at an F1 cars front tires after a race? does the wear look evenly distributed?? not to me. In fact i would bet that post race tires wear into a slight conical shape
cambering a tire creates a lateral load. this is called camber thrust...a poorly explained phenomenon....maybe because its poorly understood by the experts.
slip angle also produces lateral load. slip angle is what is primarily used on cars to generate turning forces...with a small amount of camber thrust in some instances.
If you have ever looked at tire data you can see that for some tires you can increase the maximum potential lateral load (regardless of slip angle) on a tire by cambering the tire slightly for a given normal (or downward) load....these tests are done on testing equipment, not vehicles, so the camber gain in the suspension is taken out of the picture. this advantage is particular to tires and usually a wider tire cant be cambered that much because you loose significant amount of contact patch-required for slip angle lateral load generation. so in most car tires there is a balance between adding camber thrust and loosing slip angle induced lateral load. back to camber thrust...take a look at a motorcycle tire-rounded bottom. motorcycle tires differ from car tires in that they generate most of their turning forces from camber thrust. take this motorcycle tire in your mind, now angle it 45 degrees to the ground, now press on the tire squishing the rubber to create a contact patch....make a contact patch around the entire tire by wrapping the ground around it into a cone shape....basically cambering a tire effectively changes the tire into a cone rather than a square...now take a red beer cup and roll it on the table...notice anything? it turns, or in other words generates lateral load with minimal friction.
Same thing is happening but to a much less degree when you camber a car tire...but you totally screw over your slip angle based lateral load generation because it is based primarily on contact patch pressure distribution.
What the camber tire does is allow gains in camber thrust without losses of contact patch..side note i thought that straight line performance would be worse as keeping the tire rolling straight would cause friction, but it appears to be better...
Im sure this small manufacturer cannot compete with the construction and compound development of major manufacturers, putting the camber tire at a disadvantage. this concept is also in its infancy, meaning it can probably be tuned to give way more advantage than this first prototype
I just found out about this tire yesterday but i thought up the camber tire idea nearly two years ago while designing a race car after reading up on camber thrust, analyzing tire data to pick the proper tires. but looks like this gentleman from Wisconsin beat me too it. Its definitely interesting and should be fun to watch. I am still skeptical that there are major drawbacks...real life tends teach a lot of lessons that nobody thinks of ahead of time.
wow...
maybe because it is a new idea...
"And lets be honest, don't you think Goodyear, Firestone, Michelin, et al. have tested and scrapped this idea?"
from cambertire.com:
We have tested Goodyear Racing Camber Tires (borrowed our technology for their largest OEM customer's racing teams!) with EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT RESULTS
"With compounds, tire carcass construction, belt angles, sidewall gauge/inserts -- a lot can be changed in a tire. (and more)"
all of these beneficial developments can be applied to a conical or camber tire...
"Would be good if you have an AX car that has to go drag racing. But for full events, not this short test would show real information. This shows nothing more than compound differences. Need to see an actual footprint for distribution of load."
I believe there is a lot more going on than distribution of load. have you ever looked at an F1 cars front tires after a race? does the wear look evenly distributed?? not to me. In fact i would bet that post race tires wear into a slight conical shape
cambering a tire creates a lateral load. this is called camber thrust...a poorly explained phenomenon....maybe because its poorly understood by the experts.
slip angle also produces lateral load. slip angle is what is primarily used on cars to generate turning forces...with a small amount of camber thrust in some instances.
If you have ever looked at tire data you can see that for some tires you can increase the maximum potential lateral load (regardless of slip angle) on a tire by cambering the tire slightly for a given normal (or downward) load....these tests are done on testing equipment, not vehicles, so the camber gain in the suspension is taken out of the picture. this advantage is particular to tires and usually a wider tire cant be cambered that much because you loose significant amount of contact patch-required for slip angle lateral load generation. so in most car tires there is a balance between adding camber thrust and loosing slip angle induced lateral load. back to camber thrust...take a look at a motorcycle tire-rounded bottom. motorcycle tires differ from car tires in that they generate most of their turning forces from camber thrust. take this motorcycle tire in your mind, now angle it 45 degrees to the ground, now press on the tire squishing the rubber to create a contact patch....make a contact patch around the entire tire by wrapping the ground around it into a cone shape....basically cambering a tire effectively changes the tire into a cone rather than a square...now take a red beer cup and roll it on the table...notice anything? it turns, or in other words generates lateral load with minimal friction.
Same thing is happening but to a much less degree when you camber a car tire...but you totally screw over your slip angle based lateral load generation because it is based primarily on contact patch pressure distribution.
What the camber tire does is allow gains in camber thrust without losses of contact patch..side note i thought that straight line performance would be worse as keeping the tire rolling straight would cause friction, but it appears to be better...
Im sure this small manufacturer cannot compete with the construction and compound development of major manufacturers, putting the camber tire at a disadvantage. this concept is also in its infancy, meaning it can probably be tuned to give way more advantage than this first prototype
I just found out about this tire yesterday but i thought up the camber tire idea nearly two years ago while designing a race car after reading up on camber thrust, analyzing tire data to pick the proper tires. but looks like this gentleman from Wisconsin beat me too it. Its definitely interesting and should be fun to watch. I am still skeptical that there are major drawbacks...real life tends teach a lot of lessons that nobody thinks of ahead of time.
Its a joke. As is your very first post sucking off on the concept.
Jul 7, 2011, 07:20 PM
#14
Evolved Member
iTrader: (42)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: St. Charles, IL
Posts: 2,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm about five seconds in and just by the way the guys standing and the way he looks I think its a joke. He looks like he is either trying to go number 2, or he has something up his rear..........
Now I'm about a minute in and I really can't handle him. He looks like he's trying to sit down or appear sitting down when he's actually standing up. Then he's leaning his torso backwards and flowing his arms around in circles. Dude is weird.
Oh and I lost respect for Leno as a car guy when I heard him talk about tires. Edit: Self admitted hack.
LOL! Stickers still on the treads for the test drive, fail.
Now I'm about a minute in and I really can't handle him. He looks like he's trying to sit down or appear sitting down when he's actually standing up. Then he's leaning his torso backwards and flowing his arms around in circles. Dude is weird.
Oh and I lost respect for Leno as a car guy when I heard him talk about tires. Edit: Self admitted hack.
LOL! Stickers still on the treads for the test drive, fail.
Last edited by Boltz.; Jul 7, 2011 at 07:27 PM.
Jul 7, 2011, 07:33 PM
#15
Evolved Member
iTrader: (42)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: St. Charles, IL
Posts: 2,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay now I've watched to video and have one comment to make.
Smike you were talking about the big's and questioning the fact of if this were the next big thing, why wouldn't they have jumped on it?
I think the possible answer to that is the fact that each tire has a different level of camber built in. It would be harder to homogenize a line of tires if you had to offer each size in different camber categories. That would certainly be a profit killer.
Is this the biggest thing since sliced bread? I don't know. Am I interested to hear or see more about these? Yes.
Smike you were talking about the big's and questioning the fact of if this were the next big thing, why wouldn't they have jumped on it?
I think the possible answer to that is the fact that each tire has a different level of camber built in. It would be harder to homogenize a line of tires if you had to offer each size in different camber categories. That would certainly be a profit killer.
Is this the biggest thing since sliced bread? I don't know. Am I interested to hear or see more about these? Yes.