{"id":9107,"date":"2021-01-04T13:14:15","date_gmt":"2021-01-04T12:14:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/advancedfleetmanagementconsulting.com\/eng\/?p=9107"},"modified":"2021-01-04T13:14:50","modified_gmt":"2021-01-04T12:14:50","slug":"tco","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/advancedfleetmanagementconsulting.com\/eng\/2021\/01\/04\/tco\/","title":{"rendered":"Calculating the TCO of low rolling resistance tires"},"content":{"rendered":"

There are more than 300 tire brands offering low rolling resistance, and to find the ones to provide the best total cost of ownership, fleets must do their homework.<\/span><\/p>\n

This past October, the North American Council for Freight Efficiency (NACFE) updated<\/a> it 2015 Confidence Report on low rolling resistance (LRR) tires. NACFE defined rolling resistance as the force needed to keep the tire rolling at a constant speed on a level surface. LRR tires refer to any tire on the SmartWay-verified list, though some tires on that list will have an even lower resistance than others. LRR tires include all wide-base tires and many dual tires.<\/span><\/p>\n

These types of tires have an improved rolling resistance coefficient (RRC), calculated by dividing the force needed to keep a tire moving by the relative weight felt where the rubber meets the road. The variables in the equation include tire pressure and velocity. The lower that coefficient is, the less fuel energy is required to overcome any resistance to keep the tires rolling. That ends up equaling less money spent at the fuel pump.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which runs the SmartWay certification program, has put an emphasis on technology such as LRR tires for its greenhouse gas Phase 2 regulations, which call for improvements in tires and aerodynamics, for example.<\/span><\/p>\n

Regulations aside, NACFE\u2019s 59-page paper made clear that long-haul fleets simply cannot afford to ignore or under-value LRR tires.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cEven though the upfront costs of low rolling resistance tires may be higher, the cost of the fuel that a tire consumes due to its rolling resistance is five times greater than the initial purchase price of the tire,\u201d explained Mike Roeth, executive director at NACFE.<\/span><\/p>\n

Roeth said that fuel efficiency offsets initial costs that are \u201crecovered over the tire\u2019s operational lifetime.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The math bears this out. As stated in NACFE\u2019s data as of April 2020, a fleet\u2019s average fuel cost per mile is 43 cents, assuming $2.48 per gallon for diesel. Tire costs are just under 4 cents per mile. According to tire manufacturers, the fuel expended to overcome an aerodynamic Class 8 truck tires\u2019 rolling resistance at highway speed owns a third of that, or 14 cents. When using tires with higher rolling resistance, that could account for 28 cents per mile. For this reason, fleets need to calculate the whole tire equation, which includes several variables, from manufacturer to route to geography. Typically, these are best suited for the long-haul segment and low-scrub applications.<\/span><\/p>\n

It can be complicated, but fleets are beginning to run more scientific tests, crunch the numbers, and discover immense gains.<\/span><\/p>\n

Third-party tester MVT Solutions<\/a>, a subsidiary of Mesilla Valley Transportation, which routinely validates tires and aero kits, recently found the complement of fuel efficiency-boosting equipment that included LRR tires could dramatically cut costs for one large fleet.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIn one day of testing, we found them $55 million a year in savings,\u201d said Daryl Bear, lead engineer and chief operating officer of MVT Solutions. \u201cAnd every dollar of that equals greenhouse gases that are not being emitted.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\"MVT<\/span><\/p>\n

MVT Solutions workers swap out tires during testing. The company has an established system based on the racing industry to validate which LRR tires will provide a fleet the best ROI.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Bear said the testing cost the confidential fleet $3,000, with vendors picking up some of the total tab.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe biggest problem is that fuel savings have just been very difficult to measure in trucking,\u201d Bear said. \u201cPeople just haven\u2019t been informed. But then the second part of it is that they also don\u2019t know how to calculate fuel savings from tires. There\u2019s a science to it.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Less resistance to adoption<\/span><\/h3>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

LRR tires, which in the 1980s were called low-profile tires, had failed to gain a high adoption rate because of their lower tread depth and shorter lifespan as well as lower traction performance. They offered improved fuel efficiency of 3 to 4% but at a 15% higher initial cost with 30% less tread life. With fuel prices at $1.50 per gallon, the math didn\u2019t add up.<\/span><\/p>\n

That has changed as fuel costs have increased and manufacturing technology has evolved.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cOver the last five or 10 years, the tire manufacturers have really done a great job of redesigning the tires to get the low rolling resistance, but get longer wear and do well on traction and braking,\u201d Roeth said.<\/span><\/p>\n

Michelin\u2019s recently launched X One Line Energy T2 trailer tire utilizes a dual-compound tread design to prevent irregular wear and compounds that resist late-life tire aggression. It has reduced rolling resistance by 11% while allowing the trailer to carry an extra 287 lbs. of payload.<\/span><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the PRO Series LHT trailer tire<\/a> from Cooper Tire is designed with an improved casing for optimal value and multiple retreads. Gone are the days of merely comparing tire cost to miles driven, said Phil Mosier, Cooper Tire\u2019s manager of commercial tire development. The real driver of total cost of ownership (TCO) is the fuel efficiency component.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cFuel efficiency has a much greater impact on the value to the fleet than the original price they paid for the tire or even treadwear,\u201d he said.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"PhilPhil Mosier, Cooper Tire\u2019s manager of commercial tire development, shows off a PRO Series steer tire.<\/span>Photo: Cooper Tires<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Truck makers are also reporting a higher interest due to the improvement in tread wear and performance. NACFE reported 80% of new trucks and trailers now spec LRR tires.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cOne of the easiest ways to improve fuel economy is simply to spec an [LRR tire],\u201d said Jim Nachtman, Navistar\u2019s marketing director of the heavy-duty product segment. \u201cWe are seeing a lot more conversations going on between the customer and International, where the customers are asking us to make recommendations on tires to improve fuel economy. We do think moving forward, there will be greater shift for fleets moving toward [LRR tires].\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

n the updated <\/a>North American Council for Freight Efficiency (NACFE) <\/a> Confidence Report on low rolling resistance (LRR) tires<\/a>, the organization noted the EPA SmartWay-verified tire list grew 37 times larger over the past decade, inflating from eight tire offerings in 2010 to more than 300 as of 2020. They all provide at least some incremental improvement, but how does a fleet know which is going to offer the best total cost of ownership (TCO)?<\/span><\/p>\n

The quickest, easiest way is through a rolling resistance calculator offered by tire manufacturers, including Goodyear Tire and Rubber, Michelin, and Yokohama Tire. These do the math for fleets after details such as current tires versus potential replacement, number of trucks, and current fuel costs are plugged in. Yokohama\u2019s Fuel Savings Calculator even factors in average tire inflation levels, average tire load, and average fleet miles per gallon. It also calculates current rolling resistance, savings per truck, and carbon footprint reduction.<\/span><\/p>\n

These are great tools to get a start on optimizing tire TCO, but true efficiency means going beyond plugging in a few numbers.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cTire rolling resistance can play a large part in fuel efficiency,\u201d said Helmut Keller, Continental\u2019s head of brand and product management for commercial vehicle tires in the Americas region. \u201cHowever, driver behavior, routing, proper tire pressure management, and other factors also heavily influence a vehicle\u2019s fuel economy. To achieve maximum fuel efficiency, a fleet must take a holistic approach.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

This includes looking at the duty cycle. For instance, Continental\u2019s Conti Hybrid tires<\/a> were found to offer 6.28% better fuel economy versus two competitors in regional hauls and save up to $4,000 per truck per year (assuming average diesel costs of $3.89\/gallon, 5.91 fleet mpg, and 105,000 miles traveled). They provided a 2.11% uptick for long haul, saving $1,400 per truck per year. The test was run by PIT Group of FP Innovations. As mentioned in Part I<\/a>, Michelin\u2019s X-Line was recently improved<\/a> with the X One Line Energy T2 trailer tire. With so many brands and so much continuous improvement, relying on one manufacturer\u2019s data might not be the best formula for finding the best fuel-efficient tire for a particular fleet.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe truth is that they\u2019re all salesmen,\u201d asserted Bear, who said using a calculator can get a fleet in the right ballpark but should not end there. \u201cIf the fleet really wants to know, they have to hire someone to figure it out.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Putting tires to the test<\/span><\/h3>\n

Daryl Bear, lead engineer and COO of MVT Solutions, is the person some fleets have turned to \u201cto figure it out.\u201d The former Indy car engineer backs up his findings with data and proprietary data carried over from the racing industry.<\/span><\/p>\n

The main goal of MVT Solutions is to save fuel by any means necessary and often in surprising ways. For MVT\u2019s fleet, the subsidiary testing company found changing the mud flaps would save $300,000 across the fleet.<\/span><\/p>\n

“Tires are a major contributor to fuel consumption, which means they are a great way to save fuel, and that’s true whether a fleet is long-haul, regional or urban duty cycle,” he said.<\/span><\/p>\n

To find out just how much fuel can be saved, Bear said his team can factor in different weights, speeds, and fleet differences to mitigate the guesswork and help fleets make more informed decisions based on the numbers. Often, there still can be some guesswork.<\/span><\/p>\n

Phil Mosier,\u00a0 manager of commercial tire development for Cooper Tire & Rubber, said the life of the Cooper PRO Series tire can range from 180,000 to 400,000 miles. Trucks that make frequent stops wear faster, as do those with higher torque engines.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\u201cThe thing about numbers is they don\u2019t lie, but they can fool you,\u201d Bear cautioned.<\/span><\/p>\n

MVT Solutions seeks to provide transparency and truly solve for real-life fuel efficiency, a tall order for fleet managers tasked with so many other responsibilities.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019ve never seen a business that\u2019s as complicated as running a trucking company,\u201d Bear said. \u201cThey don\u2019t have time to work on efficiency; it always gets put on the back burner.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

To actually run a statistically valid test by themselves, he said a fleet would need 100 trucks as the sample size. And they would need to factor in variables such as tire temperature, tire pressure, and how results could skew from one driver to the next.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf measuring fuel savings was easy, then every fleet out there would have the best fuel economy you could get,\u201d Bear said. \u201cBut it\u2019s just not easy. There are too many factors and too many things to try and monitor.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Ralph\u2019s Foods found that out the hard way several years ago when MVT Solutions, formerly InnoMetric MPG, performed tests.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cGetting reliable answers on fuel economy is very challenging, and we evaluate products thoroughly,\u201d recalled Greg Peterson, senior manager of fleet services at Ralph\u2019s. \u201cA few years ago, our company did an extensive in-service test that included 30-plus trucks and 12-plus months of tracking fuel and maintenance. That took a lot of time and manpower with disputable results. In two days, InnoMetric performed similar tests with results that made total sense.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Bear said the tests he ran in three days with three different tire brands matched what Ralph\u2019s took a year to find. Bear pondered that it can be quite costly to wait a year to find 5% in fuel savings. A fleet can check how tread depth fares between LRR tire brands fairly easily. A fleet just runs one tire a certain number of miles on a truck, measuring the tread depth, and then swaps out to another brand (when uptime considerations allow it) to see which tire tread wore more over the same period. Sometimes the tire manufacturers make it easy on fleets and do their own third-party testing.<\/span><\/p>\n

On an International ProStar with a Cummins engine, for instance, Michelin X One tires were found<\/a> to save 6.70 gallons per 1,000 miles over that of a leading competitor for a 5.35% edge, equaling nearly $2,600 per truck in fuel savings. The ROI could be seen in less than three months.<\/span><\/p>\n