tire presure
I was thinking about this statement while I was loading the dishwasher and I decided to write a poem. I had absolutely no help from my 10 year old son. I hope you like it:
Roses are red,
Violets are blue.
My name is Keith Oster,
I graduated from ODU.
I am a Mechanical Engineer,
and a Professional Engineer (PE) too.
I don't know jack freaking diddly squat about designing tires
and neither do you.
Also to the point, I am fairly certain my engine builder graduated high school. I know he didn't attend a single minute of college. He has forgotten more about engine building than 99.98% of the population will ever know. And I would trust him to build 100 engines before I would trust a ME to build ONE. Know why? It's what he does. It's all he knows. It is his life.
Shocker: You don't have to be an ME to be knowledgeable about something.
I'm fairly certain that those dumb goons at that silly company "BFGoodwrench" or whatever figured the warming of the tires into the mix when they put a maximum COLD pressure on the side of the tire.
Please keep on replying to questions asked and start new areas that show your knowledge, I really liked the clean your headlights one
because we all need a good laugh.
Good on them, is my opinion.
The relevance this has is as follows:
WHEN (not if) this fine gentleman has an insurance claim that could have anything to do with tire failure (loss of control...hit a tree...hit another vehicle...whatever) and the insurance adjuster spends ANY sort of time researching popular boards (I'm sure they do), this single statement would be exceptionally good grounds for not providing any sort of loss coverage.
Moreover, if said accident results in damage to any other property in the process, Mr. TooBroke would be a little more broker. Because he would then be personally liable for that damage as well.
All because the root cause was utter, sheer, and gross negligence. Not negligence such as "hasn't checked the brake pads in a while". Negligence such as making an ACTIVE and INFORMED decision to operate the vehicle in an unsafe condition.
I don't see this being any different as driving the car with three wheels then being SURPRISED when something bad happens.
Then telling the insurance company about ALL the times you've driven the car with three wheels and had absolutely no issue.
Then the adjuster saying, "Umm...sir? You're driving the car with THREE WHEELS (...replace with 'chronically underinflated tires'). What did you think would happen?"
Last edited by keithinspace; Dec 10, 2015 at 12:05 PM.
Please keep on replying to questions asked and start new areas that show your knowledge, I really liked the clean your headlights one
because we all need a good laugh.
A statement like this makes me remember about Mitsubishi, I think it was, that started scouring the interweb for evidence of owners' using their "Evolution" vehicles in track events. The deal was, if you brought your "Evolution" in for warranty service, they checked the different 'event' scoreboards. If your name popped up as driving a Mitsubishi Evolution, they did not honor the warranty.
Good on them, is my opinion.
The relevance this has is as follows:
WHEN (not if) this fine gentleman has an insurance claim that could have anything to do with tire failure (loss of control...hit a tree...hit another vehicle...whatever) and the insurance adjuster spends ANY sort of time researching popular boards (I'm sure they do), this single statement would be exceptionally good grounds for not providing any sort of loss coverage.
Moreover, if said accident results in damage to any other property in the process, Mr. TooBroke would be a little more broker. Because he would then be personally liable for that damage as well.
All because the root cause was utter, sheer, and gross negligence. Not negligence such as "hasn't checked the brake pads in a while". Negligence such as making an ACTIVE and INFORMED decision to operate the vehicle in an unsafe condition.
I don't see this being any different as driving the car with three wheels then being SURPRISED when something bad happens.
Then telling the insurance company about ALL the times you've driven the car with three wheels and had absolutely no issue.
Then the adjuster saying, "Umm...sir? You're driving the car with THREE WHEELS (...replace with 'chronically underinflated tires'). What did you think would happen?"
If I was an adjuster and I had a Crayola Blue (look up the color and tell me it doesn't match his avatar) C3 Corvette wrecked by a mid-60's retired Mechanical Engineer (just look for the person with a thermometer in his shirt pocket) in or around Midland, Texas that had 255/60-R15 tires on it, then I'd at least ask the question. At least to the point of taking the pressure of the remaining tires.
I mean...what OTHER person runs 20 PSI in their tires? That's as positive of an ID as any passport...
EVERYONE is looking to save money. I'm absolutely positive that the insurance community is not naive to the existence of forums. This forum, among a handful of others, is probably the largest centralized repository of Corvette owners out there. If that one individual that is tasked with combating insurance fraud by scouring the forums catches 3 or 4 people a year, then he's paid for his salary, and then some. No question it would be a good business decision. And I'd be extremely surprised if it wasn't already happening.
This is all my opinion and speculation. I'm just having a conversation at this point.
My point really is that this one individual is making a decision to DEFLATE his tires so his car rides better. Period. I just don't buy the tire wear part of it.
Last edited by keithinspace; Dec 10, 2015 at 02:19 PM.
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
OH HECK...I got sucked back in.
NOW we get into the debate/discussion that even if TooBrokes 'idea' of tire pressure standards allows him to get 10 years of tire life and still have great tread....then....WHEN should he replace the tires when they have passed the 'normal' length of time that tires should be replaced due to AGE and NOT tire wear.
And I also agree with 'kevininspace' and it really pisses me off when a person throws around there professional title of 'whatever'....especially when their professional title does not apply to what is being discussed...specifically. It is great when people are proud of what they accomplished. I get that. But thinking that just because they went through a specific curriculum...they somehow have ALL the knowledge about everything and want to be acknowledged as being the ONE who knows it all.....especially when their career does not directly apply. I have 'locked horns' with a few people like that. What generally ends up happening is they show that they need to be quiet and TRY to learn something new.
DUB






DUB be careful you may find that what you have been doing your whole professional career is wrong...you may get schooled by the ME of the correct way you need to do it.

sorry I find this thread now nothing but a big joke and have nothing of sheer use to add.
Volumes are different from a smaller tire to larger and likewise. Pressure is still pressure BFG DOES NOT recommend 20 psi in the rears do I need to say any more?
The weights of the cars have changed over the years steadily going up. The weight distribution is fairly balanced front to rear. TBTR states his rear is less....hmmm so how much does your c3 weigh? have you scaled the front and rear weights? 26 is recommended but certainly not the 20 that you state.
Have fun I'm just going to clean my headlights and remove my double pumper because I heard I cant run it on a street car.
DUB
Last edited by keithinspace; Dec 10, 2015 at 06:53 PM.
The results- their system recommends a minimum cold PSI of 26 for that tire on all 4 corners. Of course, hot PSI goes up by a few- and the weight in their system for C3s would be for the base car. The big blocks and other options would add weight and therefore make additional PSI a reasonable route to take. Additionally, as we all know, C3s gained weight throughout the years.
What say you, toobroke?

Two different professional sources that happen to recommend the exact same minimum cold PSI. Unfortunately, I forgot to ask the tech if he was a mechanical engineer.
We can probably expect another gem like this from toobroke-
"I wouldn't care if you found 100,000 people who would claim I'm wrong but that wouldn't faze me a bit. Right is right and wrong is wrong and I'm right. "





Last edited by Doug Kraft; Dec 11, 2015 at 01:20 AM.








