What exactly does cold pressure mean?

I get the impression that some posters are ignoring the fact that 15- passenger vans only have one rear tire on each side. Comparing these to vehicles with 2 or more rear tires on each side does not make sense.

This is an important factor in the rollover risk. About 15% of fatal rollovers in 15-passenger vans were initiated by a rear tire blowouts or tread separation.

Fatal left-rear tire failures are more common. 15-passenger vans have an aisle on the right side and the left tire ends up carrying most of the weight. Some transit operations have switched to center ailse seat layouts.

Back in 1992 when I visited Mexico for five days, a woman out in the country not far from Reynosa, she thought my 1978 Dodge van was a Mexican bus.She flagged me down.I took her to Reynosa. They use a lot of vans in Mexico for city buses/transit. cuhulin

This is why a broken tire belt on our van got my attention. We have never let the tire pressure get low and the tires had plenty of life left. We did not hit any potholes at high speeds. Fortunately, we felt the broken belt in the steering wheel and got the tires replaced.

I get the impression that some posters are ignoring the fact that 15- passenger vans only have one rear tire on each side.

*****

I never had nor drove one of these. I DID have a Dodge 2500 Custom Van, 1997 model. This was scary as hell when I first bought it. It was unwieldy in the wind, it rocked and rolled, unstable on braking, etc.

I first bought the best set of Michelin tires I could afford. That helped a lot. This definitely helped.

Next, I replaced the original shocks with Bilstein shocks. That helped a bunch.

And last, I installed an aftermarket roll bar assembly at the rear of the van. This greatly improved the wind problems on the road.

This transformed the wickedest driving bitch of a van into something that was relatively comfortable and controllable.

Although I am not a Dodge person, this was the most dependable vehicle of its type I have ever owned. In the years I had it, it used up an evaporator core and a water pump, and was pleasant to drive.

Well, I did post a link for the Bluebird Microbird, which comes in a lot of single wheel setups, as do many shuttle busses. These busses have even higher CG than a 15pass van, yet, most parents won't think twice about putting 19 of their kids in one, because it is a "school bus".

I do agree with you that the left weight bias is a safty risk. There is no real easy fix, other than putting the middle 3 rows on a sliding track, and have them slide towards the center.

Regarding tires, if they're within the load limit, and are pumped to

80 psi, then they should not fail. Any failure is a defect from the tire manufacturer, and lawsuit waiting to happen.

BTW, I don't believe this 45% weight resting on left rear tire hype. Assume it's true, then: left rear should be around 40% by simple geometry, that leaves the front tires carrying 10% and 5% of the van's weight? Impossible, you'd catch air over a speed bump if that was the case.

The rear tires carrying 35% / 30%, with front tires 15% and 20%, is a more plausible case. Even that seems exaggerated.

I don't know where you got 45%. I should have said "more of the weight" rather than "most of the weight".

Here is a center aisle layout for a 15 passenger van (second layout):

BTW, VSPI Inc. is the best organization I know of when it comes to managing these vans, and there is lots of info on their policies on the web. About the only way to improve on VSPI's approach is to reduce the seating capacity. I don't think they require daylight running lights, that's the only criticism I have of them.

I don't know what the tire weight ratios are. In a fully loaded E350

15 passenger van, you have about 600 pounds (4 passengers) behind the rear axle that counter balances the weight in front of the rear axle somewhat. And a full tank of gas adds weight (but a full tank is good in that it lowers the center of gravity)

You have to put this death trap thing into prospective. I think are probably about average in terms of safety (but that is a moving target since new cars are getting safer each year). They have a size advantage that somewhat cancels out the increase rollover risk. This web site makes a good case that the Smart Car is the most unsafe car on the road today:

The NHTSA says (in the fine print) that there safety ratings should not be used to compare cars with more than a 250-pound difference in weight.

I do think the 15-passenger vans are one of those vehicles that punish the owner more if they are not careful about safety-related maintenance and other practices.

If I don't ride to work in the van, I drive a 2000 Honda CRV (our second car) which I think is more of a death trap all things considered. I would not buy that car today with all I know now. I suppose our 2008 Honda Accord that has ESC is safer.

The tires are LT and they are as specified on the door panel.

Goodrich tire, probably the tire that Ford delivers the van with.

But, as I mentioned, we detected a belt separation via vibration in the steering wheel. The transit authority replaced both back tires (with the same make and modle tire I think).

We have not been able to determine the cause of the belt separation.

It extra stresses imposed by Rollgard along with the bumpy back roads along our route might be part of the problem.

On Dec 3, 8:05 am, Tom Adams wrote:  I don't think they require daylight

____________________

I guess that's a good thing - but personally I think DRLs are a CROCK. If you can't see a car coming in broad daylight you should be driving(or walking along the street) you really should be going out of the house at all!

Juss sayin..

-CC

"Nearly all published reports indicate DRLs reduce multiple-vehicle daytime crashes."

I guess that's a good thing - but personally I think DRLs are a CROCK. If you can't see a car coming in broad daylight you should be driving(or walking along the street) you really should be going out of the house at all!

Juss sayin..

-******** Just because the DRL stands for "daytime" running lights, you cant assume that you will be in "broad daylight". There are plenty of bad driving conditions in the daytime where augmented lights should be used. It is a law here in Texas....but people avoid it because (1) they are poorly trained as drivers and (2) lack of enforcement make people lax to comply.

IMO, DRL's dont hurt a thing, and in some cases they provide valuable safety functions.

so... you like DRLs because people are too stupid to turn on their headlights when they should? That doesn't make sense.

I personally *don't* like DRLs not on principle but because of their current implementations.

1) they don't provide any conspicuity except to the front of the car. Low beam headlights will turn on the taillights and side markers (on cars so equipped, which is most since 1968ish) as well. 2) current US regs allow high beam headlights or turn signals to be used for DRLs, both of which are incredibly bad ideas. High beams because of glare; turn signals because of the possibility of signal ambiguity.

nate

That makes PERFECT sense.

If I am on the road with someone who is too stupid to turn his headlights on when he should, I would support having some goofy electronic gadget do it for him.

Not only THAT, I would support having something that would turn on the turn signals for him since half the stupid people on the road can't figure those out either.

Now, from my perspective it would be better to arrest those people and force them to take a real driving class and an aggressive safety test before allowing them on the road. But that's not going to happen. So having some idiotic mechanical thing do it for them is about the only thing that will improve the situation.

--scott

Sorry, wrong answer. Give the incompetents a choice:

1) learn to drive

2) don't drive

Driving is not a difficult task to do correctly in a non-competition, non-inclement weather conditions. Making allowances for the incompetents only breeds more incompetence.

nate

This works in Europe, sure. But we are living in America where driving is a right and not a privilege and where you have to prove yourself extremely incompetent (by means of multiple serious traffic offenses) before your license will be taken away.

I think this is a terrible, terrible thing. But it's been this way for so long that it will be difficult if not impossible to change it.

At least they're taking drunk driving seriously these days, which they did not do when I was a kid.

I agree thoroughly. Unfortunately the folks who make and enforce the laws are elected, and the incompetents vote. And there are a lot of them, maybe even a majority of them.

--scott

_______________________

ter_3_piece_f.jpg

And during what part of the day, pray tell, do YOU think lights

*should* be turned on?

(at night or during precip, I hope!)

-CC