Errors in fuel consumption tire

[LinrLink]

This text has been translated from Russian into translate google. Upon request, hi original Russian text


1.36 DLC Michelin and goodyear, according to my many studies, tires do not correspond to fuel consumption with visual technical characteristics. All tires have their own tire labeling which scs software pointed to each tire. Fuel consumption, braking on wet pavement and noise level.
Euromarking tires. A.B.70.
The first letter indicates fuel consumption. The second letter - braking performance on wet pavement, numbers - shows the noise level.
A (green) maximum fuel efficiency.
B - very high fuel efficiency.
C - high fuel efficiency.
D - (yellow) average fuel efficiency.
E - (Orange) Lower-Average Fuel Efficiency.
F - low fuel economy.
G (red) indicates minimal fuel economy.


 Mercedes now actros 1848, 4x2 3.40R, without semi-trailer. cruise control 90km.ch. All tests were done on the same route Italy, Bologna, we leave the technical center to the south, towards Pescara. We stop at the toll road barrier, record the fuel level reading from the instrument panel, drive 500 km and record the remaining fuel, then we calculate the fuel consumption for 500 km with a simple calculation.
I know that front axle tires affect the way the car is driven.
315/70 sharper and sharper control than 315/80
315/80 soft, comfortable handling
The main differences between michelin and goodyear. Michelin is more responsive and sporty. Goodyear is soft and pleasant.
To begin with, it’s worth understanding how the front and rear axles affect fuel consumption, I made several test runs.
The first letter will indicate fuel consumption.
1 - front axle, 2 - rear axle.


1-D. 315/70 Trailmaster
1st. 315/70 Trailmaster
Fuel Consumption 24.8 / 100

1-D. 315/70 Trailmaster
2-D. 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde
Fuel consumption 21.6 / 100


1-C. 315/80 goodyear kmax s
2-E. 315/70 Trailmaster
Fuel Consumption 24.8 / 100

1-C. 315/80 goodyear kmax s
2-D. 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde
Fuel consumption 21.6 / 100


Judging from fuel consumption, we see that the rear axle affects fuel consumption
Did many races and got the following results

fuel consumption - A. 315/70 michelin line energy D2 ------- 23/100
fuel consumption - B. 315/70 michelin line energy Z -------- 23/100
fuel consumption - B. 315/70 goodyear fuelmax s ------------ 23/100
fuel consumption - C. 315/70 goodyear kmax D --------------- 23/100
fuel consumption - C. 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xze ---- 23.2 / 100
fuel consumption - C. 315/70 Runner --------------------------- 23.2 / 100
fuel consumption - C. 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xze ---- 21.4 / 100
 fuel consumption - D. 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xde --- 23.2 / 100
fuel consumption - D. 315/70 Elemental ----------------------- 23.2 / 100
fuel consumption - D. 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde ---- 21.6 / 100
fuel consumption - E. 315/70 Trailmaster --------------------- 24.8 / 100
  
 Why are heavy 315/80 large tires more economical than small 315/70 tires? should be the other way around.
Why does the 315/80 “D” michelin multiway 3d xde have less fuel consumption than the 315/70 “B” michelin line energy Z?

truck.michelin.ru this site, offers on request long-distance transportation, namely michelin multiway
I believe that the low fuel consumption of the 315/80 michelin multiway is a marketing move designed to increase multiway tire sales
Mercedes says its trucks are the most fuel efficient on the market. Michelin positions the line energy tires as the most economical. Mercedes trucks equip their vehicles with 315/70 michelin line energy tires. (hankook will be completed soon)
line energy is an old tire model, but the most economical one.
multiway is a new tire model, which is why it is advertised.
Let's try to put things in order. We have fuel consumption now.
A. - 23
B. - 23
C. - 21.4, 23, 23.2
D. - 21.6, 23.2
E. - 24.8


should be from what is
A. - 21.4
B. - 21.6
C. - 23
D. - 23.2
E. - 24.8
F. -?
G. -?
Goodyear and Michelin declares - the difference in fuel economy between A and G reaches 7%
The maximum flow rate is 24.8l. , 7% of 24.8 equals 1.7l,
Subtract 1.7l from the maximum fuel consumption of 24.8, we get the minimum consumption of A.- 23.1l
Runner tires should be labeled with fuel consumption label E. 24.3 / 100
Elemental tires should be labeled with fuel consumption label F. 24.5 / 100
The Trailmaster tires must be labeled with fuel consumption label G. 24.8 / 100
(on some sites I noticed a figure of 7.5%, I think this is a wound figure for advertising purposes)

We get a real, maximum realistic fuel consumption.
A. - 23.1
B. - 23.3
C. - 23.6
D. - 23.9
E. - 24.2
F. - 24.5
G. - 24.8
That's exactly in that order should be a picture of fuel economy after my tests
Now let's look at the correct fuel consumption of all tires
A.B.70 315/70 michelin line energy D2 ------- 23.1 / 100
B.B.69 315/70 michelin line energy Z --------- 23.3 / 100
B.B.70 315/70 goodyear fuelmax D ------------ 23.3 / 100
P.B.72 315/70 goodyear kmax D --------------- 23.6 / 100
C.B.72 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xze ----- 23.6 / 100
C.B.72 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xze ----- 23.6 / 100
D.C. 755 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xde--- 23.9 / 100
D.C.75 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde ---- 23.9 / 100
E.D.73 315/70 Runner --------------------------- 24.2 / 100
F.D.75 315/70 Elemental ------------------------ 24.5 / 100
G.F.76 315/70 Trailmaster ---------------------- 24.8 / 100
(As part of the gameplay, the difference between the letters can be made 1l,)



In ETS-2, the wear of all tires is uniform. Not one tire manufacturer will not officially declare the resource of their tires. I turned to the official dealers of goodyear and michelin in Russia, no one could clearly explain about treadwear, evaded the answer.

Michelin on its official website explains the difference between C.B.72 multiway 3d xze and D.C.75 multiway 3d xde. XDE bus mileage has been increased by 30%, which means they should be harder and noisier and fuel consumption increased, this is what Euromarking tells us about. Judging from my tests, the D.C.75 multiway 3d xde tires have a slightly higher fuel consumption (+ ~ 0.2). Here are just the same wear. Every 500km traveled minus 1%.


Here is some information on the unofficial tests on the tire resource https://shina.guide/press/7854/
“Two Mercedes Benz Actros MP4 trucks with three-axle trailers and telematics systems were used for the test. One of the bottoms was fitted with Goodyear FuelMax S 315/70 R 22.5 tires for the steering axle, FuelMax D 315/70 R22.5 for the drive axle and FuelMax T 385/55 R22.5 for trailers. The “shoe” of the second Mercedes consisted of Goodyear KMax S 315/70 R22.5 truck tires for the steering axle, KMax D 315/70 R22.5 for the drive axle and KMax T 385/55 R22.5 for the free axles.
Regarding the service life, the comparison showed that the total estimated mileage of FuelMAX tires ranges from 175,000 km for tires for free axles to 245,000 km for tires designed for the steering axis of a freight vehicle. KMax tire performance met the range of 191,000 and 276,000 km
The results, in terms of fuel consumption, were clearly in favor of the FuelMax model - 28.84 liters per 100 km, while KMax tires showed a consumption of 29.78 liters per 100 km. Although in both cases, we can say that the results are excellent. ”

Next we get the average
 B.B.70 315/70 goodyear fuelmax D 210000km
 S.B.72 315/70 goodyear kmax D 233500km
Tire life difference 23500km
And by the way, pay attention to the difference in fuel consumption B and C, almost 1l.
Based on these figures, as part of the game process, you can identify approximate tire wear - 1% per km of track. Let’s for a simpler calculation, round the tire life to 200 km and the difference in mileage of 50 km
The tire life of the 315/80 is greater than 315/70, but the 315/70 is more economical than the 315/80
Therefore, you have to choose economical tires or with a long resource.
Next, I combine fuel economy and tire life

A.B.70 315/70 michelin line energy D2 -------- 23.1 / 100. 160km / -1%
B.B.69 315/70 michelin line energy Z ---------- 23.3 / 100. 180km / -1%
B.B.70 315/70 goodyear fuelmax D ------------- 23.3 / 100. 200km / -1%
P.B.72 315/70 goodyear kmax D ----------------- 23.6 / 100. 250km / -1%
P.B.72 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xze ------ 23.6 / 100. 200km / -1%
P.B.72 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xze ------ 23.6 / 100. 300km / -1%
D.C. 75 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xde ----- 23.9 / 100. 250km / -1%
D.C. 755 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde ---- 23.9 / 100. 350km / -1%
E.D.73 315/70 Runner ----------------------------- 24.2 / 100. 180km / -1%?
F.D.75 315/70 Elemental ------------------------- 24.5 / 100. 160km / -1%?
G.F.76 315/70 Trailmaster ----------------------- 24.5 / 100. 140km / -1%?

And we get a completely balanced fuel consumption and tire life

DLC Raven Truck Design Pack contains aluminum forged wheels that are lighter than steel, and therefore fuel consumption should be less.
315/80 standard stamped metal disc weighs 50kg
315/70 weighs 42kg. Forged weighs ~ 29kg
Road train 12pcs 315/70 metal disks of 42 kg = 500 kg.
12pcs 315/70 Aluminum 350kg
Forged aluminum rims are 30% lighter, which saves 4% fuel.
In ETS-2 this parameter is not taken into account, in my opinion, it is worth fixing

Dear scs software, you insult the Michelin and Goodyear brands with your false fuel consumption readings. Please correct fuel reading according to European tire markings.
 We are waiting for an official response from scs software to this article.

[Max]

label are set by catalogs info and agreed by michelin and goodyears respectively.
our simulation works with labes exaclty as defined by european directives - which is rolling resistance formula, btw.
other factors that affect resulting fuel consumption are many and as such cant be directly translated to labels.

[LinrLink]

that is, you are not going to correct this mess?

А.-23
В.-23
С.-21.4, 23, 23.2
D.-21.6, 23.2
Е.-24,8

[boofy]

When you change the tyre size on the drive axle you are changing the overall gearing of the truck which probably affects fuel consumption more than the tyre ratings. I think only tyres the same size can be compared.

[Max]

what i told is, that i checked the labels and values connected to them and they look correct as is usage of rolling resistance.
thus the discrepancy must have different source. we have to track the source to do anything.

[Benedettini]

Great research out there! Something that buggered me also for long time, is highlighted thanks to you.

I feel like it's more about reduced rpm-to-speed ratio by bigger diameter playing bigger role in economy. However most of 385/55 tyres are having the best economy label (mostly A as I have noticed) , despite wider tyres touching and rolling on the ground therefore more resistance; and 385/55 does also have slightly less diameter than 315/70 , thus giving more RPM at same axle ratio.

[LinrLink]

Mercedes now actros 1851, 4x2 3.40 R, 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xze, without semi-trailer. cruise control 90 km.CH. all tests are made on the same route Italy, Bologna, we leave the technical center to the South, in the direction of Pescara. We stop at the toll road barrier, record the fuel level reading from the dashboard, drive 500 km and record the remaining fuel, then calculate the fuel consumption for 500 km using a simple calculation.

Influence of the transmission and engine on fuel consumption. Error +-0.2
2.73, 3.42, 4.83 this is the gearbox, Differential.
4x2---------------------2.73----------3.42----------4.83
OM471
421 HP ---------------20.8----------21.4----------30.6---/100km
449 HP ---------------20.8----------21.4----------30.6---/100km
476 HP ---------------21-------------21.6----------30.6---/100 km
510 HP ---------------20.8-----------21.4----------30.4---/100 km
OM473
517l. s.---------------23--------------23.4----------34.2---/100 km
578 HP ---------------23--------------23.4----------34.2---/100 km
625 HP ---------------23--------------23.4----------34.2---/100 km
To the above figures add the impact of the chassis on fuel consumption
6x4 --- +0.8
6x2 --- +0.6
6x2/4--- +0.6
8x4 --- +2.4

Mercedes now actros 1851, 3.40 R, 4x2, 21.4/100 BES semi-trailer ,
with empty semi-trailer Krone
Cool Liner 24/100
Profi Liner 23.8/80
Box Liner 23.6/100
Prifi Liner HD 23.8/100
Profi Liner cargo weight
10t---25.8/100
20t---28.2/100

Why do the line of motors from Mercedes OM471 and OM473 have the same fuel consumption, but different power?
Motors 421, 449, 476, 517, 578 are useless.

[pigbrother]

Just out of curiosity, do you have Realistic Fuel Consumption activated?

Regarding the problem with bigger diameter tires, this is how it should be, as said above by Benedettini. Bigger tires means bigger circumference, bigger circumference means higher speeds at the same RPM or lower RPM at the same speed, hence smaller fuel usage in the second scenario as the one you have.

[Some newbie driver]

Not only what you say @pigbrother. Tire diameter is a trade-of between max speed and torque (force) applied against tarmac. So max speed is higher, but acceleration is worse. Thus, consume profiles will be different for sure.

[LinrLink]

MAN TGX 480 3.08 4X2
А.B.70 315/70 michelin line energy D2 ------- 20 /100
B.B.69 315/70 michelin line energy Z ---------- 20 /100
B.B.70 315/70 goodyear fuelmax D -------------- 20 /100
С.B.72 315/70 goodyear kmax D ----------------- 20.4/100
С.B.72 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xze ---- 20.4/100
С.B.72 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xze ----- 19/100
D.C.75 315/70 michelin multiway 3d xde ---- 20.6/100
D.C.75 315/80 michelin multiway 3d xde ---- 19/100
C.D.73 315/70 Runner ------------------------------- 20.2/100
D.D.75 315/70 Elemental --------------------------- 20.6/100
E.D.76 315/70 Trailmaster --------------------------20.8/100

A---20
B---20
C---19, 20.2, 20.4
D---19, 20.6
E---20.8
the same imbalance as with the Mercedes