We already know that it’s possible to curb your fuel consumption just by having your tires properly inflated, or better yet, installing a set of low rolling-resistance tires, however, soon there may be an additional avenue to look at when picking the most fuel efficient rubber for your ride.
The answer is the camber of your tires, more specifically, the negative camber. This is when the tops of your car’s tires are angled inwards towards the chassis.
Racing cars typically feature negative cambered tires as they improve grip when cornering due to the tire being at a more optimal angle to the road, transmitting the forces through the vertical plane of the tire, rather than through a shear force across it. Another benefit is the increase contact area with the road, also when cornering.
Of course, there are negative effects too--namely increased tire wear and impaired ride quality--which is why production cars almost always have zero camber. However, a car enthusiast by the name of John Scott has devised a special tire dubbed the CamberTire that is claimed to negate the increase wear and ride penalties normally associated with cambered tires.
Scott first got the idea after seeing a heavily laden Lexus vehicle with its rear tires steeply cambered. In 1999 he filed a patent for a “tire with a constantly decreasing diameter” and the CamberTire was born. Prototypes of Scott’s CamberTire on a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution GSR test vehicle have shown to have shorter stopping distances, higher cornering speeds, improved ride and even improved fuel economy.
The key to his design is an asymmetrical tire mold that yields an outer sidewall slightly taller than the inner sidewall. The wheel alignment must be adjusted to provide at least three degrees of negative camber.
Scott is now working closely with a number of firms, including motorsports tire distributor M&H Racemaster, to further develop the CamberTire.
Have an opinion?
Michael Casavant Posted: 8/16/2010 4:49am PDT
Running zero (or near zero) camber is due to liability mostly. It is commonly accepted that the average driver can recover from understeer much more reliably that recover from oversteer. In a situation where the driver is going to hit an object (like a tree), it is much safer to impact the front of the car instead of the side.
It is a myth that increased camber causes accelerated tire wear. Most people who want a race car "feel" and increase camber, don't adjust toe or the caster rate to match the new angle of the tires. Improperly set toe is what wears tires. Also, people who usually run a fair amount of negative camber usually want the car the handle properly, so they will usually change the shocks and springs out to something more aggressive. The decrease in ride comfort is due to the mechanical aspect of the equipment, not the alignment of the tires.
What increased camber will do, though, is lengthen the stopping distance of the car, since less of the tire is in contact with the road while doing down the road in a straight line. Race cars have to deal with this too, which is why increasing negative camber is always a trade off with acceleration and braking performance.
Brian Knoblauch Posted: 8/16/2010 7:06am PDT
Alan Posted: 8/16/2010 8:24am PDT
Kaz Posted: 8/16/2010 2:58pm PDT
Camber is used to stabilize a car around corners. It has nothing to do with fuel economy. Aggressive driving and taking corners as fast as possible is antithetical to fuel economy.
Well-designed suspensions manage the camber of a wheel when the suspension spring is compressed during cornering and weight is transferred to that side of the car. In particular, a double-wishbone design will keep the camber about the same so that the wheel has decent contact whether traveling straight or taking a curve. In other words, there is no requirement for a tire shape to compensate for anything during cornering: this is the job of the suspension.
In a passenger car designed for economic A to B driving, you want next to no camber, and cylindrical wheels which roll straight.
It's possible that there may be some value in the conical wheels for racing application. But what does that have to do with fuel economy?
John Posted: 8/17/2010 8:46am PDT
jim Posted: 9/29/2010 3:14pm PDT
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!