 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chevrolet / Chevrolet Trucks / December 2006into mtn snow and chains
I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry them. I was told that I only needed two and that I'd use them on the front wheels if they were needed. Is this true? zende >I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I >am, to have them at certain times, to go through the mtn. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >zende Maybe if it is front wheel drive only. You want the chains on the rear otherwise regardless of what some claim because you what to beable to keep the rear of the vechile behind your where it belongs and chains in the front on a 4x4 or rear wheel drive will let the vehciles rear end want to pass the front end at time. Chains in rear or on all four wheel with ice and snow. Even a 2wd vehical with rear wheel drive that has chains on it will badly out class a 4x4 without them in snow and ice. They are a bit of a pain to install and noisy but they have no peer on snow and ice and will transform even a mild 2wd into a "tank" in winter weather. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have > them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry > them. I was told that I only needed two and that I'd use them on the > front wheels if they were needed. Is this true? > > zende Good explanation of all combinations here: http://www.4x4abc.com/jeep101/chains.html >> I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have >> them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Good explanation of all combinations here: >http://www.4x4abc.com/jeep101/chains.html I do not share this view based on using them for 30 years. THe general stament they make are not true and too broad. They also fail to mention that in 4x4 on ice you loss directional control because tuires need to turn a different RPM in tirn and they cannot do this in 4x4 (unless it is a full time system with a differentail in the Tcase) so they tires break traction in a turn and you loose directional control. Again chains on front of a 4x4 is bad combo because you can trade ends pretty easy. Run in 2wd with chains of rear for best control or chains on all 4 wheels. Next on a front wheel drive, I have driven with them so I know first hand what they do. Unlike a rear wheel drive car, the rear tires are just going along for the ride and have no drive torque on them and do not tend to break loss of trade ends unless it is a very extreme manuver. You can tell by the generalization of the article in the link the writer has truely not "been there, done that". I have. More people spin out in 4x4 on ice and take a trip to the ditch because of the false sense of security articles and claims like that make about stabilty on ice. The only conbo you want front chains on is on a FWD not a 4x4. My wife drives a 2000 Cherokee with a 4cyl a 5 speed and 2wd that we bought new to work and it wears studded tires on rear in winter and it easily out performs 4x4's on ice that are studless. A few of her coworkers have scratched their heads as to how she gets by so well in even the worst of ice conditions when they bought 4x4 Cherokees and GC's and made a couple of trips to the ditch on ice first winter they had them and sold them next summer for a FWD car. You want to keep best traction in rear with a 4x4 or rear wheel drive vehicle period. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>> I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have >>> them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Rather than get advice from people like the one above who doesn't know what he is talking about you should call The State Police in the state that requires chains and I'm sure they will help you right out. It's probably on their State Website as well.... > Rather than get advice from people like the one above who doesn't know >what he is talking about you should call The State Police in the state that >requires chains and I'm sure they will help you right out. It's probably on >their State Website as well.... I question that. The "governement" is not usually the best source for such info. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>> I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have >>> them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Snowjob on the FWD. Engine breaking CAN cause the rear to keep going in certain conditions (downhill for instance as was the case with my s-i-l, such as where the op drives) and chains on only the front can multiply the breaking effect on the front wheels only. It is like using only the front brakes on a bike or motorcycle, POTENTIALLY DEADLY!!!!!!!!!! Best to have chains on all 4 wheels in a FWD vehicle. Mike D. >Snowjob on the FWD. Engine breaking CAN cause the rear to keep going in >certain conditions (downhill for instance as was the case with my s-i-l, >such as where the op drives) and chains on only the front can multiply the >breaking effect on the front wheels only. It is like using only the front >brakes on a bike or motorcycle, POTENTIALLY DEADLY!!!!!!!!!! Best to have >chains on all 4 wheels in a FWD vehicle. No you are the snojob here. I have lived with them in a place were you did not see the pavement for 6 months on some roads and i NEVER had a problem with the rear trying to pass the front with chains/cables on the front of a FWD. As a matter of fact the FWD toyota i had was the preffered rig when traveling at 30 and 40 below because it warmed up and rolled nicly in extreme cold with all drive components under hood and a bra blocking airflow into engine compartment. Both my 4x4 felt like they were dragging anchors at those temps with thick lube in axles and tcase (even with syn lube) Again if you had been there and done that you would know but you have not but you still think you know what is best. Knock yoursself out. I have seen it so darn cold that wheel bearing grease can freeze and you have to break them loose to roll the car. BTW, at 30 and 40 below ice is actually pretty grippy (for ice anyway) because tires never gets warm enough to melt it at contact area and grease the surface. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>Snowjob on the FWD. Engine breaking CAN cause the rear to keep going in >>certain conditions (downhill for instance as was the case with my s-i-l, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > problem with the rear trying to pass the front with chains/cables on > the front of a FWD. It is a snowjob when you think YOUR experience is the totality of the truth. My s-i-l came within inches of death by the rear end spinning past the front of a FWD car (her car came to a stop only inches from going over a cliff). All she did was use engine braking by taking her foot off the gas going downhill. Just because YOU didn't have that problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. Snowjob from the Snoman. As a matter of fact the FWD toyota i had was the > preffered rig when traveling at 30 and 40 below because it warmed up > and rolled nicly in extreme cold with all drive components under hood [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > (for ice anyway) because tires never gets warm enough to melt it at > contact area and grease the surface. Which explains why you are toatally ignorant of the lower 48 problems. > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com >It is a snowjob when you think YOUR experience is the totality of the truth. >My s-i-l came within inches of death by the rear end spinning past the front >of a FWD car (her car came to a stop only inches from going over a cliff). >All she did was use engine braking by taking her foot off the gas going >downhill. Just because YOU didn't have that problem doesn't mean the >problem doesn't exist. Snowjob from the Snoman. I think with will call you malarkey Mike. It is not my fault if person was incompetent driving. I see lots of them out there every winter thinlk they are in control with no respect for road conditions. THey were simply going to fast for conditions, no mystery here. And if it had been a RWD car they would have lost it worse. There is no magic cure for poor driving in poor conditons other than to remove driver from it if they are unable to properly adapt to it. I have logged tens of thousands of miles driving in ice in snow and I have NEVER had a accident doing it or a trip to the ditch but I have seen more incompetant drivers than I can count that over drive the conditions, get in trouble and then attack the car as fault rather than the nut behind the wheel because the car only does what it told or allowed to do and any fwd is far safey on ice and snow than any rwd car when no traction aids are in use. BTW I have seen far more 4x4's and rear wheel drive cars in ditch than FWD ones. Same every winter ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > >It is a snowjob when you think YOUR experience is the totality of the truth. > >My s-i-l came within inches of death by the rear end spinning past the front [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Hopefully, Santa will bring you a new soap box for Christmas. (the one you're using now is looking a little ragged) >Hopefully, Santa will bring you a new soap box for Christmas. >(the one you're using now is looking a little ragged) No where near as ragged and weak as yours. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>Hopefully, Santa will bring you a new soap box for Christmas. >>(the one you're using now is looking a little ragged) > >No where near as ragged and weak as yours. >----------------- >TheSnoMan.com We just picked our way to town the night before last through 3" of rain and "sugar" snow. The route is punctuated with hills and curves. Can't think of a hill without a curve (at least one) on it. Most of the curves are banked the wrong way. Took the truck as it is RWD and as soon as the foot comes up off the gas it tugs the rear end behind the front end.. We have had scary rides with the FWD car and would phone in first before taking it out of the driveway under such circumstances. As it was, the normally 50 minute drive took all of 1-1/2 hours. FWD is great as long as you don't have to use it in snow. Some of these hills are big and you have to give it gas (IF you have any traction) to keep the front end in front but you are going to fast you have to keep off the gas to slow down but then the front end becomes slower than the front end and you wind up down a 12' embankment with a stunned look on your face. When FWD was rare I cannot remember as many cases of cars crossing the center line as there are now (every winter). I wonder what tales the dead drivers would tell IF they had the chance. Anyway - Slow down. You'll live longer. Snowman - Don't try so hard (you know what I mean). - Regards Gordie >>It is a snowjob when you think YOUR experience is the totality of the >>truth. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I think with will call you malarkey Mike. I find it a little odd that YOU would attempt to hang a name on anybody. Especially given the fact that you have been given a bunch of names at every group you've been involved in. All of them truthful and fitting. In the spirit of the holidays I'll give you a reminder, don't push the issue. Here ya go! > TheWrongAnswerMan.com Pretty easy ain't it, and it fits. Oh, with all your experience with snow I think it a little strange that you didn't mention snow tires that have the snowflake stamped on the side wall. In many states if the tire has the snowflake on it you don't have to chain up. Blizzak was one tire. Or did they change the regs in the past couple of years since I last looked? >I find it a little odd that YOU would attempt to hang a name on anybody. >Especially given the fact that you have been given a bunch of names at every >group you've been involved in. All of them truthful and fitting. You will notice that I do not cuss or swear here like others and if I slip up and "name" someone it is because they are so full of malarkey or the like that they might as well go by the name. So many here are experts on subjects they know nothing about. (these are the ones that are so insecure and threatened by someone that might actual know something that they attack me to make themselves feel more secure because if they do not know or understand it, it must be wrong) My comments are based on first hand expericance, physics and science not on a feeling on something I read somewhere and now I am a expert like most here. If you want to knock it or learn from it the choice is yours. Your loss not mine. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>I find it a little odd that YOU would attempt to hang a name on anybody. >>Especially given the fact that you have been given a bunch of names at [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > slip up and "name" someone it is because they are so full of malarkey > or the like that they might as well go by the name. So then, you are in agreement with your many names. That's a good thing. >So many here are > experts on subjects they know nothing about. Like yourself. > (these are the ones that > are so insecure and threatened by someone that might actual know > something that they attack me to make themselves feel more secure > because if they do not know or understand it, it must be wrong) It could be because you have posted wrong info in the many groups you have been involved in. >My > comments are based on first hand expericance, physics and science not > on a feeling on something I read somewhere and now I am a expert like > most here. If you want to knock it or learn from it the choice is > yours. Your loss not mine. You, as usual ignored my question regards the snowflake stamped in the sidewall of a few dedicated snow tires (Blizzak being one) and the need NOT to chain up, if on those tires. >>>> I stopped into ask about tire chains...it's a law where I am, to have >>>> them at certain times, to go through the mtn. passes. At least to carry [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > >Mike D. You are correct. Once a FWD vehicle starts to "go" there is no way to correct it. Where I live we have a long and pretty steep grade that we call "mile hill". If you don't slow down before starting to descend and gear down at that point you run the risk of loosing it big time. You have a curve (still part of the hill) at the bottom and also a the top and can very easily be going too fast to make the bottom curve. Dropping a gear at that point makes the rear end pass the front end. When you are sliding backwards the drive wheels start to try to spin backwards, causing the engine to die - and then you loose the power brakes and steering. When a person has learned to drive with RWD they automatically correct for rear slide by taking their foot off the gas. This is done without thinking and is hard to unlearn but this very practice can be deadly with FWD. The best situation is all 4 wheels anyway since you have to stop and steer as well as get going. - Regards Gordie |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.