Is there a difference between trailer and drive tires?

8978

** Commie Express **
Premium
I started running drive tires that look like steer or trailer tires with non aggressive tread. If it's bad enough outside I chain up. My question is. I was just looking at my trailer tires and drive tires and don't see any difference.

Is there a difference in my case?
 
Probably not. But I'll wait for the REAL experts to chime in.

Are you getting any better fuel economy with the ribbed tread on the drives?

You oughta keep a "B" set of drives for winter though if you can spare the $$$$ & have a place to keep them. I wouldn't run "trailer" tires in snow if I could avoid it.
 
I can't measure fuel mileage, I pull a flatbed so all bets are off. I can pull a low, heavy tarped load of bagged sand and get 6.5 then pull a large fork lift that weighs 20k and get 5.5. Wind resistance really kills us.

I ran steer type tires this past winter on my drives and they are excellent. I'm seeing more and more trucks with steer tires on the drives. Well, not real steer tires. Just non aggressive tread.
 
I can't measure fuel mileage, I pull a flatbed so all bets are off. I can pull a low, heavy tarped load of bagged sand and get 6.5 then pull a large fork lift that weighs 20k and get 5.5. Wind resistance really kills us.

I ran steer type tires this past winter on my drives and they are excellent. I'm seeing more and more trucks with steer tires on the drives. Well, not real steer tires. Just non aggressive tread.
Yeah I know what you're talking about but I'd assume that fleets that are all about saving fuel would already know & be using them on their drives. I'll have to make a note to take a look at the drive tires next time I see a Prime truck or a MVT.
 
I wonder what happened to MVT. They put a trailer on an empty lot in Oregon so they could get the APU rebate. They got like 4 million dollars and then Oregon found out they are really based in another state. Never heard what happened.
 
I wonder what happened to MVT. They put a trailer on an empty lot in Oregon so they could get the APU rebate. They got like 4 million dollars and then Oregon found out they are really based in another state. Never heard what happened.
Really? :rolllaugh2:

I don't know whether to cuss them out for ripping off the tax payers like a bunch of liberal bums or congratulate them for sorta "trolling" a liberal tree-hugger program.
 
It means you can take that 4 million off your taxable income.
That's what I thought. But the article keeps going back & forth between calling it "tax credits" and "subsidies". A subsidy is a government handout, actual funds. Where taking $$$ off your taxable income is just a tax break. No actual funds, just money NOT collected in the first place.

So if it's a "tax credit" they took advantage of, well good for them. I applaud them.

It's no different than when one of the brainy kids with glasses tricks the schoolyard bully into NOT beating him up & taking his lunch money.

However the article also said that MVT only runs 1% of their mileage in Oregon, which kinda makes me think that if that is an accurate fact, the author of the article might be wrong and it might have been subsidies. How many miles would MVT have to run in order to "owe" $4 million in taxes to the state of Oregon had there been no "tax credit" to abuse? If they were abusing subsidies, then shame on them.
 
What exactly is a "tax credit"?



From the article


For example, Oregon helps pay to install auxiliary diesel generators that help trucks save more than 80 percent of fuel used when idling. The units cost $4,000 to $14,000 but pay for themselves within four to 24 months, according to Cascade's marketing materials.


With Oregon taxpayers covering 35 percent of that cost through BETC, it's no surprise that "efficient truck technology" incentives have seen the same kind of explosive growth that has caused deep concern about the state's entire energy subsidy program. In 2006, Oregon taxpayers were on the hook for $173,287 to outfit trucks with fuel-saving equipment. By 2009, that amount topped $4 million.


The company currently has 817 trucks listing Oregon as their base state -- one of the main criteria for BETC eligibility. Between 2007 and 2009, Mesilla received final approval for 752 tax credits, according to state records. The underlying cost of the upgrades was $12.8 million, of which Oregon taxpayers covered 35 percent, or nearly $4.5 million.

Mesilla, like many recipients, sold the tax credits as part of the BETC pass-through program. That's a mechanism many companies use to raise cash up front or if they don't pay enough Oregon taxes to use the credits themselves. Individuals or corporate taxpayers buy the credits from the project owner at a discount to reduce their own tax bills.

The transactions netted Mesilla $3.9 million, almost $5,200 per truck.
 
I'm thinking of going to a straight tread tire for drives also. What some people don't realize is when snow gets built up in the tread the tire is about the equivalent of a slick.

On the apu junk, they aren't worth the trouble IMO! My dad bought a used one cheap and it's been nothing but a POS! Every time I turn around he's working on it.
 
Mesilla, like many recipients, sold the tax credits as part of the BETC pass-through program. That's a mechanism many companies use to raise cash up front or if they don't pay enough Oregon taxes to use the credits themselves.
So, .... they got a piece of paper from Oregon saying "you don't have to pay taxes on XXX amount of revenue". Then since they don't even "owe" that much due to not running in Oregon that much, they sold that piece of paper to other business who DO owe taxes to Oregon, almost certainly for significantly less than the tax credits would've saved them.

So it wasn't a subsidy. Taxes not collected is NOT the same as tax revenue spent, given away or stolen, regardless of how taxaholics might explain it. "Don't count your eggs before they hatch" is apparently a lesson that the state of Oregon seems to have forgotten if they think Mesilla has "stolen" anything from them.



Anyway though, .. Skateboard's tire question is still unanswered.
 
On the apu junk, they aren't worth the trouble IMO! My dad bought a used one cheap and it's been nothing but a POS! Every time I turn around he's working on it.

Well, number one it's used. First mistake. Second mistake is working on it yourself. If he's always working on it then he's doing something wrong.
 
Well, number one it's used. First mistake. Second mistake is working on it yourself. If he's always working on it then he's doing something wrong.
5000 hours on a "new" one makes it used no matter if you bought it new or not. Mine lasted 8000 hours before the cam wore out and you cant buy a cam for that motor so now mine is setting in the corner of the garage. On the hottest of days and the coldest of days it was all but useless anyways.
The up side to having one was keeping the battery's charged.
I dont miss not having it other wise.
 
So, .... they got a piece of paper from Oregon saying "you don't have to pay taxes on XXX amount of revenue". Then since they don't even "owe" that much due to not running in Oregon that much, they sold that piece of paper to other business who DO owe taxes to Oregon, almost certainly for significantly less than the tax credits would've saved them.

So it wasn't a subsidy. Taxes not collected is NOT the same as tax revenue spent, given away or stolen, regardless of how taxaholics might explain it. "Don't count your eggs before they hatch" is apparently a lesson that the state of Oregon seems to have forgotten if they think Mesilla has "stolen" anything from them.



Anyway though, .. Skateboard's tire question is still unanswered.


I'm sure that's the way the company's lawyers would explain it, and in fact, most of the BETC works that way. The APU deal worked a little different. It was a 35% taxpayer subsidy if you bought one. Now if you DIDN'T buy one, but sold the credit for cash, that's similar to taking your food stamps to the dope man.
They didn't just find that money on the tree out back, ya know.
 
Well, number one it's used. First mistake. Second mistake is working on it yourself. If he's always working on it then he's doing something wrong.

The point I was trying to make is they become problematic after time. I've heard from several people how great they are at first then after a year or so they become nothing but a headache.

Dad working on it wasn't so much the problem. We do 99% of our own work on everything without any issues. Him buying an older/used one is a great way to see how it is going to work after years of service. Needless to say, they aren't as great as everyone seems to think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim
The point I was trying to make is they become problematic after time. I've heard from several people how great they are at first then after a year or so they become nothing but a headache.

Dad working on it wasn't so much the problem. We do 99% of our own work on everything without any issues. Him buying an older/used one is a great way to see how it is going to work after years of service. Needless to say, they aren't as great as everyone seems to think.
What are the typical problems? Engine-related or with the alternator/generator, A/C system, ... or "all of the above"?
 
All the above. With the engine it was just stupid simple things like fuel solenoid.
 
I'm thinking of going to a straight tread tire for drives also. What some people don't realize is when snow gets built up in the tread the tire is about the equivalent of a slick.

On the apu junk, they aren't worth the trouble IMO! My dad bought a used one cheap and it's been nothing but a POS! Every time I turn around he's working on it.
One thing you gotta keep in mind is the straight tread tires wont have the deep tread like a drive will. A 29/32 tire will out live a 19/32.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top