In the process of researching the European Union’s tire label, I stumbled on the fact that the label covers more than passenger car tires. It also includes what they call “Van tires” and “Truck tires” – they label those C2, and C3, with C1 = passenger car tires.

Van tires (C2) is the equivalent of what we in the US call “LT tires”. These are tires for medium duty pickups and vans – although in the US, we don’t use those vans much. The Europeans use a different tire sizing system than the US does and it sometimes creates weird situations – and this is one of them!

Truck tires (C3) is what I like to call Truck/Bus tires, but the tire industry uses the terms “Medium Truck”. Just for reference, a “Heavy Truck” is not legal on US highways, except for certain circumstances, such as moving very heavy objects, which require permits and sometimes special escorts.

OK, I kind of knew the EU label applied to C2 and C3 tires, but didn’t think much about the implications – until I started writing up the article.

One of the implications was how to handle the testing – and, in particular, the need for standard reference test tires (SRTT) for testing. SRTT’s are used for several tests, including traction (its original purpose), rolling resistance, and wear testing. They’re there to account for differences in testing conditions, so the test results can be compared to other test results from a different time/place!

What I wasn’t prepared for is that there was more than just a single C2 and a single C3 SRTT!! There are actually a total of 9 SRTT’s! I am still researching this, but it appears that there are some special tires for special testing purposes.

BTW, Michelin produces all of them!

I will write up an article on SRTT’s when I finish my research!

******************************

There is a proposed change to tire regulations in the EU (European Union). It’s part of Euro7 – EU’s latest proposed vehicle emission regulations. It covers more than just tires. I’ll report on the proposal in a separate article.

************************************

I wrote a letter to the California Energy Commission commenting on their latest version of tire regulations. The regulations mostly cover rolling resistance.

I took the tack that guiding the market – rather than dictating compliance – was a better way to do this. I suggested they launch the database first and see what it says. In particular, I am concerned about the number of tires that would be banned if their proposal were enacted.

*************************

It’s been a week since I wrote the above 2 paragraphs. In that time, I questioned over and over, why the CEC didn’t know their proposal would ban so many tires! In their Feb 2023 proposal, the USTMA pointed out that 99% of the current tires would be banned. Surely the CEC would be concerned as that volume of banned tires would prompt a lawsuit!

Further, this latest proposal prompted Discount Tire to point out that 70% of existing tires would be banned using this latest proposal – still lawsuit country!

Then it occurred to me that the real problem might be the source – AB844, the bill from the California legislature that started this whole thing. I don’t understand how this works, but maybe the CEC is constrained by AB844 to issue regulations than ban any tire that exceeds the average rolling resistance of OE tires as per the bill. That would explain the timing of implementation and the proposed limits, both of which were the same each time – 2 years, followed by another round 2 years after that!

*************************

According to Tire Tech International, a magazine specializing in technology related to tires, Thailand is the world’s 2nd largest exporter of tires. This makes sense as Thailand is the largest producer of natural rubber as well as having the worlds lowest labor cost, so it makes perfect sense that companies want to have factories there. Tire Busines, another tire industry magazine says there are 22 factories owned by 20 companies in Thailand!

So why are they second??

BTW, China is first!!

*******************************

On July 31st, I became aware that the California Energy Commission had revised its latest tire regulation proposal. The changes are not significant, but I wanted to update my article on those regulations.

*************************