Alternative to tire chains?

I know there has been some discussion about chains on the TM. This might be an option:

http://www.autosock.us/

[ShrimpBurrito]

That is fascinating. The website says the Colorado DOT has approved them for use in lieu of chains during periods when they require chains.

Thanks for the link.

Dave

Being from a state where we never have a need for chains or studs (and they are actually not allowed here in LA), my first thought was why would you need them on a trailer......since it is being towed. Then I realized you would need them for braking purposes, when you would need it to maintain some form of traction.

Can you snowbirds educate us swamplanders, if this is a correct assumption, so should I ever get to a place where the temperature is below freezing.

[ShrimpBurrito]

Originally Posted by wmtire

my first thought was why would you need them on a trailer......since it is being towed. Then I realized you would need them for braking purposes, when you would need it to maintain some form of traction.

Can you snowbirds educate us swamplanders, if this is a correct assumption, so should I ever get to a place where the temperature is below freezing.

You are correct, Bobby. Trailer brakes don't do any good unless the tires can grip the road. Otherwise, the trailer won't contribute any stopping power, and perhaps worse, it is a piece of cake to jackknife (the trailer swings up along side the TV). During bad storms, you often see chains on the tires of semi trailers.

Dave

[Bill]

As Dave/ShrimpBurrito said, "Fascinating"!

I am always the skeptic with these new too-good-to-be-true miracle inventions, and I figured this was one of them. I took a look at the AutoSock website, and it was filled with the Internet buzzwords, hyperbole, and exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims that fairly scream "SCAM!" The claim about approval in Colorado caught my eye especially, so I Googled "Auto Sock Colorado chains". I got thousands of hits, almost all of which were reprints and rehashes of the original text written by Autosock. But there were no links to a reputable source. "Aha!" I said. "I was right."

Finally I found the Colorado Department of Transport's own web site - and there it was.

http://www.coloradodot.info/news/new...long-i-70-west

The paragraph of text that refers to the Auto Sock is interesting. In the middle of all the dull dry legalistic prose regarding Colorado chain law, this one paragraph reads like flowers coming up through a snowbank. I'm not sure who wrote it (it sure wasn't a Colorado DOT lawyer!) or how it got in there - but there it is.

I have no idea whether this is a good product or not, but apparently the "Approved in Colorado" claim is true.

Bill

[Wavery]

Originally Posted by Bill

As Dave/ShrimpBurrito said, "Fascinating"!

I am always the skeptic with these new too-good-to-be-true miracle inventions, and I figured this was one of them. I took a look at the AutoSock website, and it was filled with the Internet buzzwords, hyperbole, and exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims that fairly scream "SCAM!" The claim about approval in Colorado caught my eye especially, so I Googled "Auto Sock Colorado chains". I got thousands of hits, almost all of which were reprints and rehashes of the original text written by Autosock. But there were no links to a reputable source. "Aha!" I said. "I was right."

Finally I found the Colorado Department of Transport's own web site - and there it was.

http://www.coloradodot.info/news/new...long-i-70-west

The paragraph of text that refers to the Auto Sock is interesting. In the middle of all the dull dry legalistic prose regarding Colorado chain law, this one paragraph reads like flowers coming up through a snowbank. I'm not sure who wrote it (it sure wasn't a Colorado DOT lawyer!) or how it got in there - but there it is.

I have no idea whether this is a good product or not, but apparently the "Approved in Colorado" claim is true.

Bill

Not that I ever intend to tow (or drive or walk) in ice or snow but I also find it interesting that an official State website would make those kind of comments on a private company.

The product must either be very good or someone's driving a newer car than they did before.....

[MudDog]

Seems by the wording it is only approved for commercial vehicles over 26,000 GVW or carrying 16 or more passengers....

[Bill]

I also find it interesting that an official State website would make those kind of comments on a private company. The product must either be very good or someone's driving a newer car than they did before

Wayne, I noticed the same thing. I also noticed that the official Colorado DOT website is at www.dot.state.co.us, not coloradodot.info. Smelling a rat, I emailed the webmaster at the "real" site and asked him for the scoop. He said two things.

First, coloradodot.info is legitimate. It is new, and yes, it really is part of the Colorado DOT site.

Second, and regarding your observation, Wayne, he wrote "Thank you for bringing this to my attention. After extensive testing by the manufacturer, and a yearlong pilot program in which the Colorado Department of Transportation, and the Colorado State Patrol monitored the effectiveness of this particular alternative traction device, CDOT did in fact approve the use of the AutoSock alternative traction device. We did post that information to the web in probably the same manner as you saw. However, upon reflection we decided to change the wording to "Textile traction device" in lieu of naming the proprietary product. Unfortunately during the revisions to the web page this particular revision seems to have been lost. I will have my staff affect the revision ASAP."

So now you know the rest of that story.

MudDog, apparently Colorado chain law requires commercial vehicles to carry chains if they operate on certain sections of I-70. The law does not require passenger vehicles to carry chains. When the State Patrol thinks it is needed, it can institute mandatory chain-up, for commercial vehicles and passenger cars, but instances when actual chains are required are "extremely rare". More common is the requirement for all passenger vehicles to have adequate snow tires or tire chains. Adequate snow tires are defined as tires marked M/S (mud/snow) or studded snow tires with tread depth of 1/8th inch or greater. Four wheel drive engaged is considered an alternative to adequate snow tires or chains for passenger vehicles. Cables also fall in there somewhere. Sounds to me like a typical politician-written mush-mouth law. There are loopholes, so the AutoSock people may not have pushed so hard for approval.

Bill

[ShrimpBurrito]

Great follow-up, Bill. I had similar thoughts as you, so thanks for emailing the webmaster and posting further info. I had never even heard of such a device.

While it may not be often that chains on the tires are required in Colorado, there are portions of Southern and Central California where this happens quite often, such as on portions of US 395 through the Sierra range. Winter tires, snow tires, 4WD, or any combination thereof, won't do.

So while I would never plan on towing in snow, and would do everything to avoid it (perhaps even taking a extra day off to wait it out), having something like this would be nice insurance, if in fact they are effective as described.

Dave

I learned the hard way - despite growing up driving on snow/ice - that trailers with brakes tend to lock up on ice and will spin a 3/4 ton diesel truck all the way around (even at very slow speeds). Fortunately there was no injuries to vehicles or people, and I learned, the hard way, something that should have been obvious - ice is dangerous with a camper trailer.

So it's not just stopping distance, it's the tail wagging the dog once things start sliding. Even with a big, heavy tow vehicle.