Clare...

The fact that the cost is small compared to a new set of tires really isn't, and shouldn't be, the issue. The point is that paying $10 for nitrogen in a new set of tires costing $600 is still a waste of $10, and there's nothing good, admirable or even sexy about wasting anything, even a lowly 1.7 percent. I would no more pay $10 to have nitrogen in my tires than I would pay $20 to have a factory racing stripe painted onto my car. In both cases I know I'm wasting my money, and my brain is hard wired to avoid that.

In fact, a good arguement can be made AGAINST the use of nitrogen in a car's tires. Having the driver of the car acutely aware that ordinary air leaks out of the car's tires a tiny bit faster helps to ensure the driver pays attention to his car's tires and their inflation pressure, and that alone is worth more than $10 in fuel savings and longer lasting tires. With nitrogen in the tires, vehicle owners may be more complacent about looking at and paying attention to their tires because with nitrogen in them, they may feel they don't need to pay as close attention.

Bottom line here is that they should change the name from "Nitrogen" to "Racing Air" and it'd probably sell like crazy. After all, everyone knows that ordinary air is 78 percent nitrogen anyway. Racing air, on the other hand, is obviously what high performance cars use, so it might be worth the extra ten bucks in better performance.

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 1:11:58 PM UTC-5, Jeff Strickland wrote:
"Dan Espen" wrote in message
...
"Sasquatch Jones" writes:

I have a slow lead in the side wall that came from scraping some kind
of sharp object laying by the curb. Looks like a 1/2-inch cut, but
jagged. Tire is tubeless radial. Is it possible to patch something
like this on the side wall? Patch kits say they are for the tread but
don't say specifically not to use them on the side.

2nd thought -- can I put a tube in it? Seems like I remember tire
places say tubeless can't be fixed with a tube, but I can't see why
not.

A tube should work, but any kind of cut could lead to a blow out.
Especially one on the side wall.
I say replace the tire.

--
Dan Espen


Worst advice ever. A tube will not work, that's why they do not put them in.
Firstly, without a rim that can be taken apart, the tire mounting machine
can pinch the tube and damage it before the first pound of air goes in.

Total nonsense. Autos, AFAIK, never had rims that came apart and tires with
tubes were mounted to them before the switch to all tubeless.


Secondly, tubeless tires are built differently than tube-type tires.

That's probably true. IDK about putting a tube in a tubeless, other than
I've never seen it done.



Thirdly, the sidewall of a tire is by design the weakest part of the tire,
it is typically two-ply where the tread is four-ply. The sidewall constantly
moves and changes shape, and if there is a tear, then the tear will be even
weaker and a catastrophic failure is all but certain.


Agree that I would not patch a sidewall.

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 1:17:12 AM UTC-5, nestork wrote:
;3304912 Wrote:

Ten bucks too much for you. That's fine. On a $1000 purchace, what is
$10.00??? Or even on a $600.00 purchace.

Clare...

The fact that the cost is small compared to a new set of tires really
isn't, and shouldn't be, the issue. The point is that paying $10 for
nitrogen in a new set of tires costing $600 is still a waste of $10, and
there's nothing good, admirable or even sexy about wasting anything,
even a lowly 1.7 percent. I would no more pay $10 to have nitrogen in
my tires than I would pay $20 to have a factory racing stripe painted
onto my car. In both cases I know I'm wasting my money, and my brain is
hard wired to avoid that.


There's still a difference. At least with racing stripes you have something
that's visible and if you like it, then it's worth it. In the case of
nitrogen, what you have is 99% marketing gimmick to add $$ to the bottom line. AFAIK, what they have done is extend nitrogen from critical applications where the difference it makes can matter, to the family car, where the difference is negligible.

Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.

--
Tekkie

2x on that. Best tires on the rear axle. It's easier to control a blowout on
the front, you can still steer.
Rear blowouts are prone to causing the rear to come around, IE spin out.

On 11/5/2014 8:03 PM, nestork wrote:
'Stormin Mormon[_10_ Wrote:
It's been a few decades, but nitrogen
atomic weight 14, oxygen is 16.


100% true, but oxygen is more "electronegative", which means that it
hoards it's electrons more closely to it's nucleus. It's the fact that
the electron shells around an oxygen nucleus are smaller that make
oxygen a smaller atom than nitrogen and O2 a smaller molecule than N2.

Except for Fluorine at 4.0, Oxygen is the most highly electronegative
atom on the periodic table at 3.5

'Bond Polarity' (http://tinyurl.com/o577e5s)

You gotta know this stuff to be king.

Well, I'd not heard that. But then, I didn't take
some of the higher level college courses. Thanks
for helping me understand.

I guess if I filled my trailer with nitrogen, I'd
have less air leakage, and keep the heat in better?


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"trader_4" wrote in message
...
There's still a difference. At least with racing stripes you have
something
that's visible and if you like it, then it's worth it. In the case of
nitrogen, what you have is 99% marketing gimmick to add $$ to the bottom
line. AFAIK, what they have done is extend nitrogen from critical
applications where the difference it makes can matter, to the family car,
where the difference is negligible.


Yes, the racing stripe is something you can see and impress people with,
just like the added wing type spoiler on the trunk of some cars. Or like a
diamond ring costing several thousand dollars. Not good for much,but people
think they want it. The nitrogen is not visiable to look at nor will it do
any good that I am aware of.

I thought I read somewhere about nitrogen in airplane tires had some kind of
advantage, but that could have just been some internet dribble.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 11/5/2014 1:11 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote:

"Dan Espen" wrote in message
...
"Sasquatch Jones" writes:

I have a slow lead in the side wall that came from scraping some kind
of sharp object laying by the curb. Looks like a 1/2-inch cut, but
jagged. Tire is tubeless radial. Is it possible to patch something
like this on the side wall? Patch kits say they are for the tread but
don't say specifically not to use them on the side.

2nd thought -- can I put a tube in it? Seems like I remember tire
places say tubeless can't be fixed with a tube, but I can't see why
not.

A tube should work, but any kind of cut could lead to a blow out.
Especially one on the side wall.
I say replace the tire.

--
Dan Espen


Worst advice ever. A tube will not work, that's why they do not put them
in. Firstly, without a rim that can be taken apart, the tire mounting
machine can pinch the tube and damage it before the first pound of air
goes in. Secondly, tubeless tires are built differently than tube-type
tires. Thirdly, the sidewall of a tire is by design the weakest part of
the tire, it is typically two-ply where the tread is four-ply. The
sidewall constantly moves and changes shape, and if there is a tear,
then the tear will be even weaker and a catastrophic failure is all but
certain.

At best, a tube will hold air. It will not make the sidewall sufficient
to carry the vehicle. Do not put a tube into a tubeless tire. You have
to go to the tire store to have the tire and rim broken down, so they
are the venue for putting the tube in and they will not do it.



Just out of morbid curiosity, did you ever work at a place that
installed tires (I did). If you had, you would know that practically
all auto and light truck rims are one piece (the OP didn't say what kid
of vehicle). You would also know that tires with tubes were routinely
installed on those rims without incident (except for the odd idiot that
was not paying attention to what he was doing). There was also a
specific tube for radial tires that could stand more flex than tubes for
bias ply tire tubes. A puncture in a bias ply sidewall could be
repaired. Not so for a radial. However, if it was just a puncture the
radial could be used by putting in the proper tube.

I agree that in this case the tire should be replaced, but not for the
reason you state.

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 7:30:41 AM UTC-5, repairman54 wrote:
Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.

--
Tekkie

2x on that. Best tires on the rear axle. It's easier to control a blowout on
the front, you can still steer.
Rear blowouts are prone to causing the rear to come around, IE spin out.

The actual rationale is that less tread = more possibility of sliding in adverse weather conditions. Your average driver's reflexes handle understeer (front sliding) much better than oversteer (rear sliding)

Personally if my tires are thin enough that I'm worried about blowouts, in my mind it's about time for new tires...

nate

No idea what you mean. (?)

Are you talking about filling your trailer TIRES with nitrogen, or filling the living space of your trailer with nitrogen?

If it's the latter, you can't have air leakage if there's no air inside the trailer to begin with. Also, I don't know why there would be any difference in heat loss from the trailer living space if it was filled with nitrogen. (?) It would seem to me that would be entirely dependant on the insulation (if any) you have in the walls of the trailer and the temperature difference across those walls. I don't see any reason for nitrogen to be any warmer than air under the same circumstances.

Probably a better idea would be to fill the living space of your trailer with helium and invite everyone over to have a Funny Voice party.

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 21:54:26 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

wrote:

Jeff, tubes have been used on steel safety rims for several decades.
That's the exact same rim used on today's cars (alloy wheels have the
same rim profiles) You just have to know what you are doing. I've
installed a few hundred tires with tubes over my life as amechanic -
only damaged a very few tubes.

The 'know what you are doing' part is the rub. I bought a set of tube type
tires in Knoxville and the inbred knuckledraggers managed to pinch all four
tubes. Thanks to copious quantities of fix-a-flat and a portable air pump, I
made it back to Arizona. Mexican mechanics still understand tubes.
The "secret" is simply to lightly inflate the tube before installing
the second bead, then inflate to low pressure, bounce the wheel, and
inflate to seat the bead. Sure isn't rocket science!!!

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 07:29:07 -0500, "repairman54"
wrote:


Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.

--
Tekkie

2x on that. Best tires on the rear axle. It's easier to control a blowout on
the front, you can still steer.
Rear blowouts are prone to causing the rear to come around, IE spin out.

That's not the reason though. The reason is the rear end needs to stay
BEHIND you, and with less tread on the rear, it WILL come around just
when you least expect it. This is why in MOST jurisdictions it is
ILLEGAL to put snows on the front only on a front wheel drive car.

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:11:49 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 11/5/2014 8:03 PM, nestork wrote:
'Stormin Mormon[_10_ Wrote:
It's been a few decades, but nitrogen
atomic weight 14, oxygen is 16.


100% true, but oxygen is more "electronegative", which means that it
hoards it's electrons more closely to it's nucleus. It's the fact that
the electron shells around an oxygen nucleus are smaller that make
oxygen a smaller atom than nitrogen and O2 a smaller molecule than N2.

Except for Fluorine at 4.0, Oxygen is the most highly electronegative
atom on the periodic table at 3.5

'Bond Polarity' (http://tinyurl.com/o577e5s)

You gotta know this stuff to be king.

Well, I'd not heard that. But then, I didn't take
some of the higher level college courses. Thanks
for helping me understand.

I guess if I filled my trailer with nitrogen, I'd
have less air leakage, and keep the heat in better?
The way the wind passes through your redneck bungalow it would need
something a lot stiffer and thicker than nitrogen to keep the heat
in!!! (like good foam insulation, perhaps)

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 06:34:47 +0100, nestork
wrote:


;3304912 Wrote:

Ten bucks too much for you. That's fine. On a $1000 purchace, what is
$10.00??? Or even on a $600.00 purchace.

Clare...

The fact that the cost is small compared to a new set of tires really
isn't, and shouldn't be, the issue. The point is that paying $10 for
nitrogen in a new set of tires costing $600 is still a waste of $10, and
there's nothing good, admirable or even sexy about wasting anything,
even a lowly 1.7 percent. I would no more pay $10 to have nitrogen in
my tires than I would pay $20 to have a factory racing stripe painted
onto my car. In both cases I know I'm wasting my money, and my brain is
hard wired to avoid that.

In fact, a good arguement can be made AGAINST the use of nitrogen in a
car's tires. Having the driver of the car acutely aware that ordinary
air leaks out of the car's tires a tiny bit faster helps to ensure the
driver pays attention to his car's tires and their inflation pressure,
and that alone is worth more than $10 in fuel savings and longer lasting
tires. With nitrogen in the tires, vehicle owners may be more
complacent about looking at and paying attention to their tires because
with nitrogen in them, they may feel they don't need to pay as close
attention.

Bottom line here is that they should change the name from "Nitrogen" to
"Racing Air" and it'd probably sell like crazy. After all, everyone
knows that ordinary air is 78 percent nitrogen anyway. Racing air, on
the other hand, is obviously what high performance cars use, so it might
be worth the extra ten bucks in better performance.
The use of nitrogen inflation actually started with aircraft tires.
Where it DOES make a significant difference. EXTREME temperature and
pressure differences during every takeoff and landing.

On 11/6/2014 12:42 PM, wrote:
That's not the reason though. The reason is the rear end needs to stay
BEHIND you, and with less tread on the rear, it WILL come around just
when you least expect it. This is why in MOST jurisdictions it is
ILLEGAL to put snows on the front only on a front wheel drive car.

You know, at the WALMART near me, they INSIST on put
the NEW TIRES on the drive wheels. Which in MY CASE
is the BACK. That didn't MUCH help when I got HIT BY
a semi driver on THE HIGHWAY. My vehicle SLID SIDE WAYS
and then tipped UP on its SIDE and slid SOME MORE.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 11/6/2014 11:23 AM, nestork wrote:
'Stormin Mormon[_10_ Wrote:
;3305044']
I guess if I filled my trailer with nitrogen, I'd
have less air leakage, and keep the heat in better?


No idea what you mean. (?)

Are you talking about filling your trailer TIRES with nitrogen, or
filling the living space of your trailer with nitrogen?

If it's the latter, you can't have air leakage if there's no air inside
the trailer to begin with. Also, I don't know why there would be any
difference in heat loss from the trailer living space if it was filled
with nitrogen. (?) It would seem to me that would be entirely dependant
on the insulation (if any) you have in the walls of the trailer and the
temperature difference across those walls. I don't see any reason for
nitrogen to be any warmer than air under the same circumstances.

Probably a better idea would be to fill the living space of your trailer
with helium and invite everyone over to have a Funny Voice party.




I've not decided if you're dense, obtuse,
or throwing my nonsense back at me.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 08:14:21 -0800 (PST), N8N
wrote:

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 7:30:41 AM UTC-5, repairman54 wrote:
Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.

--
Tekkie

2x on that. Best tires on the rear axle. It's easier to control a blowout on
the front, you can still steer.
Rear blowouts are prone to causing the rear to come around, IE spin out.

The actual rationale is that less tread = more possibility of sliding in adverse weather conditions. Your average driver's reflexes handle understeer (front sliding) much better than oversteer (rear sliding)

Personally if my tires are thin enough that I'm worried about blowouts, in my mind it's about time for new tires...

nate
Well PAST time. In 46 years of driving I have NEVER had a blowout and
have only had 4 tires go flat on the road - 2 from cracked valve
stems. Those 46 years included a couple million miles of driving on 2
continents.

On 11/6/2014 12:44 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:11:49 -0500, Stormin Mormon

I guess if I filled my trailer with nitrogen, I'd
have less air leakage, and keep the heat in better?
The way the wind passes through your redneck bungalow it would need
something a lot stiffer and thicker than nitrogen to keep the heat
in!!! (like good foam insulation, perhaps)

Just fill the entire trailer with blown
cellulose. Problem solved.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 11/6/2014 12:46 PM, wrote:
The use of nitrogen inflation actually started with aircraft tires.
Where it DOES make a significant difference. EXTREME temperature and
pressure differences during every takeoff and landing.


Been a WHILE since I saw it, but one SHOW had a
feature about a PLANE that got into TROUBLE. The
guys had RUN OUT of nitrogen, and left the TIRE
a bit soft. That caused a CRASH.

--
..
Christopher A. YOUNG
Learn ABOUT Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 11/6/2014 12:51 PM, wrote:
Well PAST time. In 46 years of driving I have NEVER had a blowout and
have only had 4 tires go flat on the road - 2 from cracked valve
stems. Those 46 years included a couple million miles of driving on 2
continents.


A COUPLE of years back, I noticed my VAN was
NOT QUITE right. I was on the 55 zone limited
ACCESS ROAD, so I pulled over at an EXIT and
turns out one TIRE had SEPARATED at the side
wall. Ended up call AAA and get FLAT BEDDED
home. the next day I took OFF the TIRE AND
brought it back to WALMART, as I had the
WARRANTY. Inside, I noticed I'd PICKED up a
NAIL through the TREAD. Back home, and PUT
the new TIRE back on.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Tekkie®" wrote in message
...
Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.


That should make a case for rotating the tires every 5000 or whatever miles.
They all have about the same ammount of tread and should all be replaced at
the same time.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 11:55:53 AM UTC-7, Sasquatch Jones wrote:
I have a slow lead in the side wall that came from scraping some kind of sharp object laying by the curb. Looks like a 1/2-inch cut, but jagged. Tire is tubeless radial. Is it possible to patch something like this on the side wall? Patch kits say they are for the tread but don't say specifically not to use them on the side.

2nd thought -- can I put a tube in it? Seems like I remember tire places say tubeless can't be fixed with a tube, but I can't see why not.

Anyway, thanks in advance for any help.

SJ

I was told by a service station operator that my sidewall break was unrepairable. I took it to a tire shop where they repaired it but cautioned that the tire should only be used as a spare and if so used should be driven at speeds under 40 mph.
====

On 11/06/2014 11:46 AM, wrote:
....

The use of nitrogen inflation actually started with aircraft tires.
Where it DOES make a significant difference. EXTREME temperature and
pressure differences during every takeoff and landing.

But that's not the reason for using it--it's still an essentially ideal
gas at those pressures (roughly 200 psi) so the pressure fluctuations
are no different than with air (which, remember is 80% N to start with).

The reason is to eliminate the entrapped water vapor that can turn to
ice crystals at high altitude. I suppose there's a very slight
improvement in minimizing pressure loss owing to diffusion at the low
pressure of high altitude since N permeability is about a third less
than that of O, but given the duration of flights and the religiosity
with which stuff is checked I really doubt the effect would be
measurable within the allowed precision.

The same effect could be accomplished by purging and using dry air or
any other (non-explosive) gas with a molecular weight as great or
greater than O2 as long as one displaced the air vapor in free air.

It's those secondary effects that are the only real benefits that is why
for ordinary application in passenger car/light trucks it's _way_
overkill in that there just won't be any discernible symptoms that it
cures that ordinary care and maintenance don't resolve, anyway.

--

wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 18:33:15 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:


"Jeff Strickland" wrote in message
...

DO NOT PAY EXTRA FOR NITROGEN. This is snake oil for tires. It might
work
as
claimed, but the air we breathe already is full of nitrogen. My only
point
is, do not pay an upcharge for nitrogen. If they do it for free, then do
not
refuse. But do not pay extra.




Up to $2.50 per tire extra for nitrogen fill can be rationalized. Any
more is highway robbery.


No, nitrogen is snake oil. The air we breathe is already something like
80% nitrogen. You can do a search, but paying a tire shop for nitrogen is
a waste of money, $10.00 using your threshold.


With the air in the tire already 80% nitrogen and the outside of all tires
has the same mix of 80 % nitrogen and 20% oxygen (with a trace of other
elements) what good does the all nitrogen do ? Especially if the car is
not driven enough to heat up the tires.

My cars often are. I found the tires inflated with nitrogen
maintained pressure better than when inflated with 80% nitrogen.
Marginally - but enough that I'll pay the $10 for a set of 4.
You may not find it worth while. That is your perogotive.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Hi,
Specially in cold weather region like where I live. I can see less
pressure fluctuation with N filled tires by monitoring with TPMS on the
dash. N is not snake oil at least for me.

On 11/06/2014 1:11 PM, dpb wrote:
....

The same effect could be accomplished by purging and using dry air or
any other (non-explosive) gas with a molecular weight as great or
greater than O2 as long as one displaced the air vapor in free air.

ERRATUM: ...displaced "WATER VAPOR", not air, of course...

--

On 11/06/2014 1:11 PM, dpb wrote:
....

The same effect could be accomplished by purging and using dry air or
any other (non-explosive) gas with a molecular weight as great or
greater than O2 ...

Or, use He and gain some lift . At the (very) approximate cost of 3X
the effusion rate for pressure loss during the flight.

--

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 12:47:57 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 11/6/2014 12:42 PM, wrote:
That's not the reason though. The reason is the rear end needs to stay
BEHIND you, and with less tread on the rear, it WILL come around just
when you least expect it. This is why in MOST jurisdictions it is
ILLEGAL to put snows on the front only on a front wheel drive car.

You know, at the WALMART near me, they INSIST on put
the NEW TIRES on the drive wheels. Which in MY CASE
is the BACK. That didn't MUCH help when I got HIT BY
a semi driver on THE HIGHWAY. My vehicle SLID SIDE WAYS
and then tipped UP on its SIDE and slid SOME MORE.
OK JackAss - you made yoir point.

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:14:01 -0500, "Ralph Mowery"
wrote:


"Tekkie®" wrote in message
...
Sasquatch Jones posted for all of us...

Along with all the posts in the thread the OP admits he needs new tires
anyway...

The latest information I have read is that the best tread should be
mounted
to the rear axle.


That should make a case for rotating the tires every 5000 or whatever miles.
They all have about the same ammount of tread and should all be replaced at
the same time.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
I move them front to rear every time I change them.take off the snows
and put on the summers opposite of how they came off. I never rotate
tires left to right.

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 12:51:01 -0500, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 11/6/2014 11:23 AM, nestork wrote:
'Stormin Mormon[_10_ Wrote:
;3305044']
I guess if I filled my trailer with nitrogen, I'd
have less air leakage, and keep the heat in better?


No idea what you mean. (?)

Are you talking about filling your trailer TIRES with nitrogen, or
filling the living space of your trailer with nitrogen?

If it's the latter, you can't have air leakage if there's no air inside
the trailer to begin with. Also, I don't know why there would be any
difference in heat loss from the trailer living space if it was filled
with nitrogen. (?) It would seem to me that would be entirely dependant
on the insulation (if any) you have in the walls of the trailer and the
temperature difference across those walls. I don't see any reason for
nitrogen to be any warmer than air under the same circumstances.

Probably a better idea would be to fill the living space of your trailer
with helium and invite everyone over to have a Funny Voice party.




I've not decided if you're dense, obtuse,
or throwing my nonsense back at me.
You finally got it. good thing too, 3 times and you are out.

On 11/5/2014 9:12 PM, wrote:

'Buy our tires and get free nitrogen,' is a good sales pitch.

'Buy our tires, we'll put in nitrogen for ten bucks,' is ten bucks too much.
Ten bucks too much for you. That's fine. On a $1000 purchace, what is
$10.00??? Or even on a $600.00 purchace.


If I spend $1000 for tires, the least you can do is give me the nitrogen
that cost you 50 cents to make.

On 11/6/2014 10:31 AM, Mike wrote:

I agree that in this case the tire should be replaced, but not for the
reason you state.

Good thing you did not say what those reasons are. We'd not want you to
educate anyone.

wrote:

The "secret" is simply to lightly inflate the tube before installing
the second bead, then inflate to low pressure, bounce the wheel, and
inflate to seat the bead. Sure isn't rocket science!!!

Yup, works great 98% of the time. I put a Kenda 21" knobby on the front
wheel of one of the bikes. The rear went like planned, but that damn front
bead would not seat. I aired it up to 90 psi, aired it down, poured on soapy
water, beat on it, took it out for a ride, and it finally seated. I'm going
back to Dunlop 606's next time.

I learned to deal with tubes damn near 60 years ago changing tires on my
genuine 'English' bicycle with the three speed Sturmey-Archer planetary hub.
I also learned there are a lot of springs in one of those things, but that's
another story.

OK, so the reason nitrogen is used in aircraft tires is because at the -50 deg. Celsius temperatures the tires cool down to when cruising at 30,000 feet altitude, the humidity in the air in the tires turns into frost, and that significantly lowers the tire pressure. When the plane comes in to land, the tires are still extremely cold and therefore at a lower pressure than they should be at to support the weight of the airplane on landing. Using pure nitrogen avoids that problem because no precipitation of frost occurs.

Is that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I still think using helium would be more fun. We could inflate plastic bags with helium from our car tires and suck the helium out of the bags so we could talk like Micky Mouse for a few seconds. That's gotta be worth a laugh if you're in court or meeting you're kid's school teacher for the first time.

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 12:54:49 PM UTC-5, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/6/2014 12:46 PM, wrote:
The use of nitrogen inflation actually started with aircraft tires.
Where it DOES make a significant difference. EXTREME temperature and
pressure differences during every takeoff and landing.


Been a WHILE since I saw it, but one SHOW had a
feature about a PLANE that got into TROUBLE. The
guys had RUN OUT of nitrogen, and left the TIRE
a bit soft. That caused a CRASH.

--
.
Christopher A. YOUNG
Learn ABOUT Jesus
www.lds.org
.


Here's a couple of Boeing videos that show why you need nitrogen in airplane
tires. It's the rejected takeoff test of the 777, stopping 750K pounds going
at 160mph. That plane is a great American achievement, the best plane I've
ever flown on. I went from JFK to Hong Kong, 16+ hours, non-stop on one. And
over the north pole, if something goes wrong, there isn't a handy airport nearby.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4LFErD-yls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr4V680UQ-k

On 11/5/2014 10:24 AM, Jeff Strickland wrote:

snip

DO NOT PAY EXTRA FOR NITROGEN. This is snake oil for tires. It might
work as claimed, but the air we breathe already is full of nitrogen. My
only point is, do not pay an upcharge for nitrogen. If they do it for
free, then do not refuse. But do not pay extra.

It isn't just the fact that it's nitrogen versus a mix that includes
nitrogen, there are other reasons for using nitrogen versus air as well.

The reason that Costco doesn't charge for nitrogen is not a marketing
ploy, the use of nitrogen reduces failures and Costco is one tire store
that actually honors its road hazard and tread life warranties. The cost
to them of including nitrogen is trivial given the benefits to them.

If you have a source of pure dry air for your tires, and check the
pressure often, and adjust for temperature changes, then plain air is
just fine. Tire stores will have driers on their compressors to remove
some moisture from air but it's not as moisture free as nitrogen.

But you're right, paying extra for nitrogen versus dry air isn't worth
it since most tire stores charge at least $5 per tire for it. And of
course you can always go to Costco and add nitrogen to your tires for
free. They have a hose there near the entrance to one of the bays.

One issue that comes up more and more is very sensitive TPMS systems. If
you're right at either edge (high or low) then pressure changes due to
tempearature will activate the TPMS warning light. Dry nitrogen has less
pressure changes due to temperature than moist air.

One other thing, is if you have a TPMS sensor fail (flashing TPMS
warning light at start-up) Costco does replacements at a cost far less
than the dealer. The batteries in the factory sensors fail at about 7
years. I just had them replace one last month. The next time I get new
tires I'll have them replace the other three since they are all going to
fail within a year and if they change them while they are doing mounting
and balancing there's no additional labor charge.

On 11/5/2014 2:53 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote:

No, nitrogen is snake oil. The air we breathe is already something like
80% nitrogen.

You do not understand the difference between dry nitrogen and the air we
breathe.

What you should be saying is this "a tire shop fills your tires with air
from a compressor that has a dryer attached to it. The drier removes
much of the moisture from the air."

Costco likely calculated that the cost of compressor dryers, in terms of
energy and maintenance, increased tire warranty repair costs, and labor
costs dealing with customers coming in with TPMS issues, made including
nitrogen at no extra cost a good idea financially.

Tire stores have nitrogen generators they don't get nitrogen deliveries.
The incremental cost of nitrogen to the tire store once they purchase
the machine is trivial, membrane and filter replacement only.

The bottom line is "don't pay extra for nitrogen and don't buy tires at
any store that does not include nitrogen at no extra charge."

On 11/5/2014 3:11 PM, dpb wrote:
On 11/05/2014 4:25 PM, wrote:
...

Up to $2.50 per tire extra for nitrogen fill can be rationalized. Any
more is highway robbery.

"Rationalized" on basis of dealer cost, maybe, but I can't see there's
anything close to the payback possible for an ordinary passenger car
tire on an automobile driven routinely.

What minimal advantages there are really only accrue for extremely long
intervals between changes such as collector or antique vehicles or very
specialized applications such as racing or hazard duty where the
flammability in accident might conceivably be an added risk.

Otherwise, just nothing that it does is sufficient to make any
discernible difference in the bottom line to the end user.

Not true. There is a discernible advantage, but not one that is worth
paying anything extra for. Just never buy tires at a retailer that does
not include nitrogen inflation at no extra charge.

On 11/5/2014 3:33 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"Jeff Strickland" wrote in message
...

DO NOT PAY EXTRA FOR NITROGEN. This is snake oil for tires. It might
work
as
claimed, but the air we breathe already is full of nitrogen. My only
point
is, do not pay an upcharge for nitrogen. If they do it for free, then do
not
refuse. But do not pay extra.




Up to $2.50 per tire extra for nitrogen fill can be rationalized. Any
more is highway robbery.


No, nitrogen is snake oil. The air we breathe is already something like
80% nitrogen. You can do a search, but paying a tire shop for nitrogen is
a waste of money, $10.00 using your threshold.


With the air in the tire already 80% nitrogen and the outside of all tires
has the same mix of 80 % nitrogen and 20% oxygen (with a trace of other
elements) what good does the all nitrogen do ? Especially if the car is
not driven enough to heat up the tires.

Yeah, if you only drive a mile or two between long periods of non-use,
the tires won't heat up.

But as has been explained repeatedly, there are definite benefits to
nitrogen to passenger car tires, but it's probably not worth paying
extra for provided the tire dealer has good dryers on their compressors.

The benefit accrues more to the tire dealer, even when they are
including the nitrogen at no extra cost (and the reality is that it
costs them only pennies per tire to have a nitrogen generator). The
benefits to the tire dealer are the following:

Fewer warranty repairs
Fewer tread life warranty claims
Fewer TPMS issues by customers

Remember, the average driver isn't out there checking their tire
pressure once a month or once a week, or ever. Minimizing pressure loss
and pressure changes due to temperature, is a big plus.

On 11/5/2014 6:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:50:44 -0800, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

'Buy our tires, we'll put in nitrogen for ten bucks,' is ten bucks too much.
Ten bucks too much for you. That's fine. On a $1000 purchace, what is
$10.00??? Or even on a $600.00 purchace.

It's the principle. The tire store accrues a benefit from using nitrogen
and the cost to them is trivial. Just don't buy tires at any store that
charges for nitrogen.

On Friday, November 7, 2014 10:57:13 AM UTC-5, SMS wrote:
On 11/5/2014 2:53 PM, Jeff Strickland wrote:

No, nitrogen is snake oil. The air we breathe is already something like
80% nitrogen.

You do not understand the difference between dry nitrogen and the air we
breathe.

What you should be saying is this "a tire shop fills your tires with air
from a compressor that has a dryer attached to it. The drier removes
much of the moisture from the air."

Costco likely calculated that the cost of compressor dryers, in terms of
energy and maintenance, increased tire warranty repair costs, and labor
costs dealing with customers coming in with TPMS issues, made including
nitrogen at no extra cost a good idea financially.

Tire stores have nitrogen generators they don't get nitrogen deliveries.
The incremental cost of nitrogen to the tire store once they purchase
the machine is trivial, membrane and filter replacement only.

The bottom line is "don't pay extra for nitrogen and don't buy tires at
any store that does not include nitrogen at no extra charge."

When you have a study or any actual data at all that shows what you clain,
ie nitrogen gives you less warranty claims, longer treadlife, etc, I'm
sure we'd all be happy to see it. You have no way of knowing why Costco
or anyone else uses nitrogen. It very well could be that it's just marketing
hype. Some segment of customers believe that nitrogen does what you claim,
so Costco provides it to lure in those customers. Until someone has some
real data that shows nitrogen makes a material difference, I say it's BS.

On 11/5/2014 9:34 PM, nestork wrote:

In fact, a good arguement can be made AGAINST the use of nitrogen in a
car's tires. Having the driver of the car acutely aware that ordinary
air leaks out of the car's tires a tiny bit faster helps to ensure the
driver pays attention to his car's tires and their inflation pressure,
and that alone is worth more than $10 in fuel savings and longer lasting
tires. With nitrogen in the tires, vehicle owners may be more
complacent about looking at and paying attention to their tires because
with nitrogen in them, they may feel they don't need to pay as close
attention.

That's a very weak argument. The driver today does not check oil,
coolant, or other fluids. They may add some windshield washer fluid
because they know when it's needed, and gasoline because there's a
warning light.

The way drivers know that there's a tire pressure issue these days is
the TPMS warning light, and at least on my vehicles that have this
system it's a very narrow range of pressure for which the light is off.
Dry nitrogen versus moist air makes a big difference in pressure changes
due to temperature. Of course a good tire store that doesn't use
nitrogen should at least have well maintained dryers on their
compressors but these still don't take out all the moisture.

The use of nitrogen in tires benefits both the consumer and the tire
dealer. It should be included at no extra cost because it costs almost
nothing to provide. The cost of a nitrogen generator is just part of the
cost of doing business, just like a compressor or a hydraulic lift.

The bottom line is don't pay extra for nitrogen and don't buy tires at
any store that doesn't include nitrogen at no extra cost.