iRV2 Forums

iRV2 Forums (https://www.irv2.com/forums/)
-   MH-General Discussions & Problems (https://www.irv2.com/forums/f84/)
-   -   14" wide rear wheel conversion from dual (https://www.irv2.com/forums/f84/14-wide-rear-wheel-conversion-from-dual-174779.html)

mlmacchia 08-31-2013 10:11 PM

14" wide rear wheel conversion from dual
 
2005 Coachmen 380D, diesel pusher, 6 wheels, looking to replace the tires before next season. Currently running 275 80R 22.5's on 10-lug steel wheels with the fake wheelcovers. When I change the tires, I was considering replacing 4 of the wheels (front and outside rears) with forged aluminum wheels to save a little weight & upgrade the rig.

Then a wild thought popped into my head...how about the 14" wide-base wheels & tires to replace the rear duals? I'm sure many of you have seen tractor-trailers on the road with the "super-single" wide rear wheels in place of the duals...I'm wondering if they would (a) work in an RV application and (b) not look stupid.


I searched the irv2 forums and only found one thread regarding this, from 2008. Just wondering if anyone's tried it or any thoughts.

Thanks

Matt

worleybyrd 08-31-2013 10:35 PM

thats a good thought . i will keep look for the response from others

Mekanic 08-31-2013 11:13 PM

I think they look great, runn cooler and quiter than nearly any kind of DRW setup.
HOWEVER if you only have one rear axle, I wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole.
if you have a tag axle then I'd think ok.
Where is the safety factor of having another rear tire on each side should one of those rear tires have a sudden failure?
And even if you have a flat on one of you regular tires you could limp a half mile off the interstate @ 15 MPH to get a fix where if you flat with a super single you are done driving.

AFChap 08-31-2013 11:43 PM

Quote:

if you only have one rear axle, I wouldn't
X2 for reasons stated.

Skip426 09-01-2013 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFChap (Post 1709000)
X2 for reasons stated.

X3, and I'll add , just try and find a replacement , without waiting a week.:eek:

Mr_D 09-01-2013 01:16 AM

Newmar tested them several years ago. None of them were ever installed for cutomer use, nor offered as an option.
No idea why they didn't use/offer them although they must have found something the disqualified them.

H. Miller 09-01-2013 06:17 AM

And they cost as much or more than 2 "real" tires.....

Rick & Hope 09-01-2013 06:29 AM

Having run super singles on the semi for the last 3 years I would not let a single axle change my mind. Super single are available at every major truck stop. The ride quality and handling is much better than duals. Oh yea we won't mention the fuel saving of the super single!

Murf2u 09-01-2013 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mekanic (Post 1708988)
I think they look great, runn cooler and quiter than nearly any kind of DRW setup.
HOWEVER if you only have one rear axle, I wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole.
if you have a tag axle then I'd think ok.
Where is the safety factor of having another rear tire on each side should one of those rear tires have a sudden failure?
And even if you have a flat on one of you regular tires you could limp a half mile off the interstate @ 15 MPH to get a fix where if you flat with a super single you are done driving.

Just out of curiosity, do you have duals on your front axle too then?

Mekanic 09-01-2013 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mekanic (Post 1708988)
I think they look great, runn cooler and quiter than nearly any kind of DRW setup.
HOWEVER if you only have one rear axle, I wouldn't touch them with a 10 foot pole.
if you have a tag axle then I'd think ok.
Where is the safety factor of having another rear tire on each side should one of those rear tires have a sudden failure?
And even if you have a flat on one of you regular tires you could limp a half mile off the interstate @ 15 MPH to get a fix where if you flat with a super single you are done driving.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murf2u (Post 1709157)
Just out of curiosity, do you have duals on your front axle too then?

No, Sir You are either being silly or ..... :facepalm:

My RV is some what unique though. It has a loaded rear axle weight of under 9K lbs , That is UNDER the weight rating of 2 of its 4 rear tires. If I had a flat on the rear that wasn't a sudden blow out I might not know for a quite a while.

Ray,IN 09-01-2013 10:20 PM

The only drawback I can see about super-singles is with vehicles that do not always have a uniform weight. Without reducing air pressure from the loaded state to unloaded state, these tires will wear in the center only.
Since motorhomes are nearly always close to the same weight after a few months of use, that drawback is not an issue.
A simple check of the internet will reveal the availability aspect. I think it is a good idea, why worry about blowing a super-single rear tire when you could blow a steer tire; which is worse?

Mekanic 09-02-2013 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray,IN (Post 1710228)
.......
Since motorhomes are nearly always close to the same weight after a few months of use, that drawback is not an issue.
A simple check of the internet will reveal the availability aspect. I think it is a good idea, why worry about blowing a super-single rear tire when you could blow a steer tire; which is worse?

Not worse? I know you are going to say only the steer tire effect steering but that is false you only steer the vehicle with the steer tires because there is Stability provided by the rear tires.
(Ever have a rear tire on a motorcycle go flat? Same thing. Steer and Hang on for your life!!)
Look at it this way.
Lets say you are close to maxed out on your axle loads. And you have a 4200 on each of your front tires with a 10,000lb axle and on the rear you have
4200 on each of your rear tires on a 20,000 axle.
If you blow a front you have 4200lbs dropping weight suddenly and effecting the whole vehicle.
If you loose a super single you now have 8400 lbs doing the same, Your vehicle will turn,..... like it or not.

That is the only downside I see. (No pun intended)

Murf2u 09-02-2013 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mekanic (Post 1710419)
If you blow a front you have 4200lbs dropping weight suddenly and effecting the whole vehicle.

If you loose a super single you now have 8400 lbs doing the same, Your vehicle will turn,..... like it or not.

That is the only downside I see. (No pun intended)

Your math and science is wrong.

When a dual tire blows the weight it was carrying transfers to the tire next to it. When a single tire blows the weight it was carrying transfers to the carcass and the rim.

While there will be some changes in the suspensions geometry and therefore the weight distribution, I hardly think the term "turning" is anywhere close to accurate.

Mekanic 09-02-2013 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murf2u (Post 1710538)
Your math and science is wrong.

I see it I typed that last post with my phone.
Here is what I ment
Let say a front axle rated for 10K has 88oo lbs on it Divided by 2 = 4400 per tire

Rear axle of 20K has 17,600 lbs in it Divided by 4 = 4400 per tire
Now if that VERY SAME axle has only 2 super singles it has 8800 PER TIRE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murf2u (Post 1710538)
When a dual tire blows the weight it was carrying transfers to the tire next to it. When a single tire blows the weight it was carrying transfers to the carcass and the rim.

You are correct, And where is that weight until the wheel mashes the carcass into the pavement? Its on the move.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murf2u (Post 1710538)
While there will be some changes in the suspensions geometry and therefore the weight distribution, I hardly think the term "turning" is anywhere close to accurate.

Think about what I sad about The motorcycle, Rear tires on a vehicle provide the stability for front tire to its work (steer).
In my younger days I could steer my 88 Mustang GT with the throttle once I was in a turn. Plenty of fun.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.