Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:13 pm
by nzKAOSnz
Our concentration is to enter the market with lower-speed, lower-weight Tweel applications.
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:33 am
by BAC5.2
Ahh, I thought you meant they were testing on lower speed, low weight, low performance vehicles. My bad.
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:19 pm
by IronMonkeyL255
I was under the impression that they would be fully enclosed once they hit mass production (so you couldn't see the spokes).
One concern I have is weight. Looking at it, it seems that they would weigh more than a traditional pneumatic tire.
I think it will take a LOT more development before these can take on a serious role in motorsports.
I think they may be helpful on rally cars, though. You don't have to worry about a puncture.
I think it would be neat if they combined the technologies. Have a tweel tire that can be pressurized for more stiffness......
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:39 am
by isotopeman
I was wondering when someone was going to mention the advantage of puncture-.... something.
They dont' go flat.
So what kind of spare would that make? Better than a donut?
As far as twisting on take-off goes, I think braking would have more potential to induce more stress (on any wheel) than taking off.
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 4:40 am
by THAWA
why would you need a spare?
Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:34 pm
by Brat4by4
isotopeman wrote:As far as twisting on take-off goes, I think braking would have more potential to induce more stress (on any wheel) than taking off.
True that. Corvettes do 60-0 in something ridiculous like 2.3 seconds.