Search Results

This paper is mainly an argument in favor of the use of large, single rear wheel truck tires instead of smaller dual tires. Although the practice of using large singles is comparatively new, the author gives the results of experience and research to show the advantages of the newer method of rear tire equipment. In developing his arguments in favor of single tires, the author goes into the history of dual tire application to show why it was necessary to use two tires in the earlier days of truck operation. As the necessity for increased carrying-capacity grew, tire manufacturers found the then existing single tire equipment inadequate, and they set about to develop suitable equipment to meet the new condition, the result being dual practice. The method of attaching the earlier dual tires is shown to have been poor, resulting in circumferential creeping of the whole tire to a much greater extent as the width of the dual equipment increased.

The author starts with the development of the pneumatic tire since its invention by Dunlop in 1888, and proceeds to show why several different types of tire construction are now in use. The merits of the three types of tires, namely, the clincher, straight-side and quick detachable, are discussed as regards energy consumption, traction, total mileage, cost-per-tire-mile, cushioning effect, reliability, ease of applying and service. The conclusions brought out show principally the advantages of the straight-side tire. Statistics are offered to show the trend of the rim situation, and it is pointed out that it is just a question of time when the quick detachable clincher will cease to survive. It had a legitimate place during the development stage, but with the developed straight-side tires giving entire satisfaction, the author holds that there is no excuse for continuing the quick detachable clincher type.

The author outlines the factors leading to the present high cost of automobile fuel, states that the introduction of new distillation processes will not solve the problem, but that the development of kerosene-utilizing appliances will produce results satisfactory to everybody. It is stated why kerosene cannot be used on the present gasoline cars. The adaptation of the gasoline automobile engine to the use of heavier fuels than will vaporize without the use of heat is entirely a problem of heating and heaters. The author reviews at length the principles embodied in and the construction of the heated vaporizers or vaporizing heaters now used in stationary and traction kerosene engines and in alcohol engines, giving illustrations of a number of such devices. After thus developing what in his opinion are desirable and good principles, the author describes a form of vaporizer embodying such principles, which he states has had successful trials (both block and road) in automobile service.