Crossing fingers for stud ban
An annual winter issue in Washington state concerns the use of studded tires. I’m definitely against their legality and have defiantly resisted mounting them on my drivers since 1978.
Way back then, Goodyear discontinued studs, and since I had a national account card for my company car, I opted for their new all-season “Tiempo” tires on all four wheels. That year, I successfully travelled Montana’s roads and mountain passes all winter. The next year, Goodyear offered the more-aggressive-treaded “Arriva” tire option. I used those in the winter wonderland of Idaho and Montana to safely drive my rear-wheel-drive vehicle to any destination desired.
As the years passed, non-studded winter tires have steadily improved. Winter-specific rubber compounds, unique tread design and built-in “siping” have all contributed to tires that rival studded versions on glare ice, equal their effectiveness on snow, and GREATLY exceed studded-tire traction for cornering and stopping on wet and dry roads.
That last characteristic (better on wet and dry roads) is not hard to achieve, since even the cheapest non-studded tire has superior traction over a studded one in such conditions — the conditions that we experience over 95% of the time in our region. And since most of our winter driving occurs on wet and dry roads, it puzzles me why studded-tire users are willing to drive on tires that have longer stopping distance and compromised cornering adhesion. I guess it’s their notion that the studs offer a slight advantage on ice — a notion that is barely meritorious, and actually without any merit when compared to the best of today’s winter-specific tires.
Each year, Washington’s legislators have drawn up some sort of proposed bill to curb studded use. That’s mainly because those tires, even though only legal in Washington from November 1st though March 31st, are damaging the state’s roadways to the tune of $25 million per year.
Unfortunately, those bills are annual failures — I believe due to the fact that lawmakers are afraid of losing constituent votes from the many, though declining, numbers of stud users. The most they have dared was to impose a $5-per-tire fee a few years back.
There are many detractors when it comes to the continued use of studded tires. Besides Goodyear dropping studded-tire offerings decades ago, Costco does not sell them and ten states have outright banned their use, including the “snow” states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Washington State Department of Transportation has even weighed in heavily on discouraging studded tire use and encouraging modern alternatives. Through billboards, radio spots and the Website DitchTheStuds.com, the DOT outlines the woes of studs.
Well maybe the current Washington legislators will do the right thing. They have now drafted a bill (HB 1309) that would phase out the nuisance by 2025. To rapidly discourage their purchase, a $100-per-tire surcharge is proposed until the date of the total prohibition.
I sincerely hope that our lawmakers will pass the bill, since neither I nor anyone else has a need for the outdated technology of studded tires. I only wish the total-ban date were moved up, since even the $100-per-tire fee is only expected to raise $3-4 million — far short of the annual road damage tally. And it isn’t just the cost — severely rutted roadways often cause drivers to lose control of their vehicles. If anyone has a legitimate defense of studded tires, I haven’t heard it.
Readers may contact Bill Love via e-mail at precisiondriving@spokesman.com.
An annual winter issue in Washington state concerns the use of studded tires. I’m definitely against their legality and have defiantly resisted mounting them on my drivers since 1978.
Way back then, Goodyear discontinued studs, and since I had a national account card for my company car, I opted for their new all-season “Tiempo” tires on all four wheels. That year, I successfully travelled Montana’s roads and mountain passes all winter. The next year, Goodyear offered the more-aggressive-treaded “Arriva” tire option. I used those in the winter wonderland of Idaho and Montana to safely drive my rear-wheel-drive vehicle to any destination desired.
As the years passed, non-studded winter tires have steadily improved. Winter-specific rubber compounds, unique tread design and built-in “siping” have all contributed to tires that rival studded versions on glare ice, equal their effectiveness on snow, and GREATLY exceed studded-tire traction for cornering and stopping on wet and dry roads.
That last characteristic (better on wet and dry roads) is not hard to achieve, since even the cheapest non-studded tire has superior traction over a studded one in such conditions — the conditions that we experience over 95% of the time in our region. And since most of our winter driving occurs on wet and dry roads, it puzzles me why studded-tire users are willing to drive on tires that have longer stopping distance and compromised cornering adhesion. I guess it’s their notion that the studs offer a slight advantage on ice — a notion that is barely meritorious, and actually without any merit when compared to the best of today’s winter-specific tires.
Each year, Washington’s legislators have drawn up some sort of proposed bill to curb studded use. That’s mainly because those tires, even though only legal in Washington from November 1st though March 31st, are damaging the state’s roadways to the tune of $25 million per year.
Unfortunately, those bills are annual failures — I believe due to the fact that lawmakers are afraid of losing constituent votes from the many, though declining, numbers of stud users. The most they have dared was to impose a $5-per-tire fee a few years back.
There are many detractors when it comes to the continued use of studded tires. Besides Goodyear dropping studded-tire offerings decades ago, Costco does not sell them and ten states have outright banned their use, including the “snow” states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Washington State Department of Transportation has even weighed in heavily on discouraging studded tire use and encouraging modern alternatives. Through billboards, radio spots and the Website DitchTheStuds.com, the DOT outlines the woes of studs.
Well maybe the current Washington legislators will do the right thing. They have now drafted a bill (HB 1309) that would phase out the nuisance by 2025. To rapidly discourage their purchase, a $100-per-tire surcharge is proposed until the date of the total prohibition.
I sincerely hope that our lawmakers will pass the bill, since neither I nor anyone else has a need for the outdated technology of studded tires. I only wish the total-ban date were moved up, since even the $100-per-tire fee is only expected to raise $3-4 million — far short of the annual road damage tally. And it isn’t just the cost — severely rutted roadways often cause drivers to lose control of their vehicles. If anyone has a legitimate defense of studded tires, I haven’t heard it.
Readers may contact Bill Love via e-mail at precisiondriving@spokesman.com.
An annual winter issue in Washington state concerns the use of studded tires. I’m definitely against their legality and have defiantly resisted mounting them on my drivers since 1978.
Way back then, Goodyear discontinued studs, and since I had a national account card for my company car, I opted for their new all-season “Tiempo” tires on all four wheels. That year, I successfully travelled Montana’s roads and mountain passes all winter. The next year, Goodyear offered the more-aggressive-treaded “Arriva” tire option. I used those in the winter wonderland of Idaho and Montana to safely drive my rear-wheel-drive vehicle to any destination desired.
As the years passed, non-studded winter tires have steadily improved. Winter-specific rubber compounds, unique tread design and built-in “siping” have all contributed to tires that rival studded versions on glare ice, equal their effectiveness on snow, and GREATLY exceed studded-tire traction for cornering and stopping on wet and dry roads.
That last characteristic (better on wet and dry roads) is not hard to achieve, since even the cheapest non-studded tire has superior traction over a studded one in such conditions — the conditions that we experience over 95% of the time in our region. And since most of our winter driving occurs on wet and dry roads, it puzzles me why studded-tire users are willing to drive on tires that have longer stopping distance and compromised cornering adhesion. I guess it’s their notion that the studs offer a slight advantage on ice — a notion that is barely meritorious, and actually without any merit when compared to the best of today’s winter-specific tires.
Each year, Washington’s legislators have drawn up some sort of proposed bill to curb studded use. That’s mainly because those tires, even though only legal in Washington from November 1st though March 31st, are damaging the state’s roadways to the tune of $25 million per year.
Unfortunately, those bills are annual failures — I believe due to the fact that lawmakers are afraid of losing constituent votes from the many, though declining, numbers of stud users. The most they have dared was to impose a $5-per-tire fee a few years back.
There are many detractors when it comes to the continued use of studded tires. Besides Goodyear dropping studded-tire offerings decades ago, Costco does not sell them and ten states have outright banned their use, including the “snow” states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Washington State Department of Transportation has even weighed in heavily on discouraging studded tire use and encouraging modern alternatives. Through billboards, radio spots and the Website DitchTheStuds.com, the DOT outlines the woes of studs.
Well maybe the current Washington legislators will do the right thing. They have now drafted a bill (HB 1309) that would phase out the nuisance by 2025. To rapidly discourage their purchase, a $100-per-tire surcharge is proposed until the date of the total prohibition.
I sincerely hope that our lawmakers will pass the bill, since neither I nor anyone else has a need for the outdated technology of studded tires. I only wish the total-ban date were moved up, since even the $100-per-tire fee is only expected to raise $3-4 million — far short of the annual road damage tally. And it isn’t just the cost — severely rutted roadways often cause drivers to lose control of their vehicles. If anyone has a legitimate defense of studded tires, I haven’t heard it.
Readers may contact Bill Love via e-mail at precisiondriving@spokesman.com.
An annual winter issue in Washington state concerns the use of studded tires. I’m definitely against their legality and have defiantly resisted mounting them on my drivers since 1978.
Way back then, Goodyear discontinued studs, and since I had a national account card for my company car, I opted for their new all-season “Tiempo” tires on all four wheels. That year, I successfully travelled Montana’s roads and mountain passes all winter. The next year, Goodyear offered the more-aggressive-treaded “Arriva” tire option. I used those in the winter wonderland of Idaho and Montana to safely drive my rear-wheel-drive vehicle to any destination desired.
As the years passed, non-studded winter tires have steadily improved. Winter-specific rubber compounds, unique tread design and built-in “siping” have all contributed to tires that rival studded versions on glare ice, equal their effectiveness on snow, and GREATLY exceed studded-tire traction for cornering and stopping on wet and dry roads.
That last characteristic (better on wet and dry roads) is not hard to achieve, since even the cheapest non-studded tire has superior traction over a studded one in such conditions — the conditions that we experience over 95% of the time in our region. And since most of our winter driving occurs on wet and dry roads, it puzzles me why studded-tire users are willing to drive on tires that have longer stopping distance and compromised cornering adhesion. I guess it’s their notion that the studs offer a slight advantage on ice — a notion that is barely meritorious, and actually without any merit when compared to the best of today’s winter-specific tires.
Each year, Washington’s legislators have drawn up some sort of proposed bill to curb studded use. That’s mainly because those tires, even though only legal in Washington from November 1st though March 31st, are damaging the state’s roadways to the tune of $25 million per year.
Unfortunately, those bills are annual failures — I believe due to the fact that lawmakers are afraid of losing constituent votes from the many, though declining, numbers of stud users. The most they have dared was to impose a $5-per-tire fee a few years back.
There are many detractors when it comes to the continued use of studded tires. Besides Goodyear dropping studded-tire offerings decades ago, Costco does not sell them and ten states have outright banned their use, including the “snow” states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Washington State Department of Transportation has even weighed in heavily on discouraging studded tire use and encouraging modern alternatives. Through billboards, radio spots and the Website DitchTheStuds.com, the DOT outlines the woes of studs.
Well maybe the current Washington legislators will do the right thing. They have now drafted a bill (HB 1309) that would phase out the nuisance by 2025. To rapidly discourage their purchase, a $100-per-tire surcharge is proposed until the date of the total prohibition.
I sincerely hope that our lawmakers will pass the bill, since neither I nor anyone else has a need for the outdated technology of studded tires. I only wish the total-ban date were moved up, since even the $100-per-tire fee is only expected to raise $3-4 million — far short of the annual road damage tally. And it isn’t just the cost — severely rutted roadways often cause drivers to lose control of their vehicles. If anyone has a legitimate defense of studded tires, I haven’t heard it.
Readers may contact Bill Love via e-mail at precisiondriving@spokesman.com.
