Follow this blog:
RSS

Unstoppable! Airless tire will never go flat

By | March 8, 2013, 4:15 AM PST

As much as big tire companies like to sell you more and more tires, they know that there’d be huge demand for ones that don’t go flat.

That’s why eight years ago Michelin introduced the Tweel, an experimental tire that features an airless outer band wrapped around a complex network of flexible polyurethane spokes. This approach allowed the wheel to sense and adjust to the road terrain while also maintaining strength and support. In 2011, Bridgestone unveiled their own version that features a lattice-style array of thermoplastic spokes. Both, however, have been beset by drawbacks such as loud noise (Tweel) and durability issues (Bridgestone airless), which are currently being ironed out prior to any kind of widespread market roll-out.

Polaris, a much lesser known manufacturer, has since thrown their own design into the ring. The difference, they believe, is that their tire not only runs silently, but also possesses military-grade ruggedness. In fact, the company says they’ve developed the technology specifically for off-road military ATVs.

Hearing the company tout the tire’s toughness easily brings to mind the razzle-dazzle of inventions showcased on late night infomercials. Apparently, it can not only cushion heavy weight loads and absorb shock easily, the airless wonder has also been shown to withstand being punctured by a .50 caliber bullet or rail spikes while continuing to log over 1,000 miles. The official word is that the tire can sustain up to 30 percent damage to the web structure and still function seamlessly.

Like the Tweel, the inner core is comprised of plastic spokes molded in a honeycomb pattern, which prevents rocks and other debris from lodging into the webbing. While the principle behind the technology appears to be quite similar to the prototypes put forth by the industry heavyweights, Polaris hasn’t gone into much detail as to how they’ve overcome some of the challenges encountered by previous designs.

For now, the firm’s street cred comes from tests conducted in collaboration with the U.S. military. According to the Star Tribune’s report:

Haddad envisions a day when 60 percent of Polaris’ consumer customers may opt for the new tires. If true, it could mean tens of millions of dollars in new revenue and a seat at the industry table with Michelin, BMW and others working to develop indestructible tires.

But for now, Polaris has captured the interest of the military. The Army began testing eight Polaris tires on military ATVs about four weeks ago. “The Army is always looking at innovative next-generation technologies that improve capabilities for our soldiers,” said Dov Schwartz, a U.S. Army spokesman at the Pentagon.

Polaris hopes to have the airless, flat-proof tire ready for consumer launch as early as next year with an estimated price of $500 each. The million dollar question, though, is whether this is something you would buy.

Smarter solutions:

Transportation innovations:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Tuan Nguyen

About Tuan Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen was a contributing editor for SmartPlanet from 2011 to 2013.

Tuan Nguyen

Tuan Nguyen

Contributing Editor

Tuan C. Nguyen is a freelance science journalist based in New York City. He has written for the U.S. News and World Report, Fox News, MSNBC, ABC News, AOL, Yahoo! News and LiveScience. Formerly, he was reporter and producer for the technology section of ABCNews.com. He holds degrees from the University of California Los Angeles and the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism.

Follow him on Twitter.

Tuan Nguyen

Tuan Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen does not hold any investments in the technology companies he covers.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
16
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Marketing
Depends on the Warrenty and Availability and the Durability. SO it will need to be marketed well to get 2k from me.
Posted by rcmarcotte
8th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
Not All That Expensive
$500 a wheel isn't that much more than a good performance tire. I'm assuming that this includes the wheel as well. Large scale should drop that price into the realm where I'm ready to look at a set.
Posted by 1revorg
8th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
Indestructible Tire
Last time I thought about this was when I was a little kid. My tricycle had a solid rubber and steel wheel and tire, no compressed air. I think it should cost less than $500 per wheel to do this. It will probably also be somewhat noisier and rougher in ride.
Posted by Arctic Char
8th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
And a lot heavier
than an air-filled tire...
Posted by Jeffp77
11th Mar
+3 Votes
+ -
Police departments won't be happy about this,
and they'll probably have to look at a replacement for the spike strip they use to stop cars?

Also, how good with that tire be in snow or in muddy areas where that kind of material will get into every chamber of the honeycomb? Snow and mud will add a lot of weight and the engines will have to work a lot harder. Or, has that been resolved and it wasn't mentioned?
Posted by adornoe
8th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
Ugly
I repeat, ugly...but good, but good.
Posted by bill1514@...
8th Mar
-4 Votes
+ -
Where is the outrage?
.Where are people who complain about government investing in new ideas? You know picking winners and loser. Oh yeah if the bloated war machine does it, it is ok. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Posted by dennyinusa
8th Mar
-3 Votes
+ -
Call it what it is: Government wasting (not spending),
since, most of what government does is wasteful, and unnecessary. The only functions that government should be responsible for is national defense, and police forces, and roads/highways, airline support systems, and judicial systems. Other than the necessary functions, everything else is intrusion.

Government spending has been spun to government "investing" which is the way that big government lovers justify the waste. Fact is that, regular industry doesn't need for government to invest for new ideas, since they can handle that spending on their own.

Government spending is what has this country on it's knees, with about 24 million people out of work or under-employed. It's what has so many companies sending manufacturing and millions of jobs overseas. Government "investments" is just an excuse to raise taxes and impose bigger controls on the economy, and all of it has failed, and now we have huge trillion+ deficits every year, and a $17 trillion national debt, and tens of trillions in unfunded social programs. Poverty has continuously increased with each round of more government spending, and in the last 4 years, the number of people who are classified as poor has doubled, and the number of people on food stamps has increased by 15 million dollars, and now, about half the U.S. population is dependent on some government program or other. When government takes money away from the private sector economy, including businesses and the employed, then the repercussions will be a lot bigger than whatever "benefits" might be derived from "government investments".

The problem with the liberal mind-set is that, they don't know how to consider the negatives from any government intrusion into industry and into our private lives. Repercussions is a word that democrats and liberals ignore or fail to understand.
Posted by adornoe
9th Mar
+3 Votes
+ -
The real culprit
So you're suggesting the government should have no interest in regulating what businesses can and can't do? Because deregulating the banking system is what caused the housing market collapse. Or do you believe that was caused by government spending too? The government "investments" that you refer to are grants designed to encourage innovation in this country. But I guess you would argue that's not the governments responsibility. Who's responsibility is it then? No one? We don't need innovation?

The national deficit/debt problems we have now are NOT a result of social programs. It's a result of massive increases in "defense" spending. You know, the trillions of dollars we spend destroying Iraq and Afghanistan and then rebuilding them. Defense spending is like the 500 lb. gorilla in the room covered in blood that you are ignoring to instead accuse a tiny slug on the floor of killing someone because its "icky".

The problem with conservatives AND liberals is that they have both fallen for the two-party system trap. The problem is not social programs, government spending, not enough regulations, too many regulations, or any other "talking point" you've been tricked into taking sides on. The real problem is corporations have taken over the ENTIRE political process in this country and insidiously keep regular people bickering among themselves with polarizing "news". The banks, oil companies, and media outlets are all controlled by the same few people. And I'm sorry to say even your beloved Fox News.

Yes, the government is intruding too much on our lives. Yes, our freedoms are systematically being taken away from us. And yes, something has to be done about our deficit spending. But the answers do not lie anywhere near the argument of whether conservatives or liberals are right. They're both wrong. They are the good cop, bad cop routine designed to confuse us into turning on our fellow Americans.

Together we stand, divided we fall.
Posted by IndredKold
10th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
I so wish I had said that !
When I see such sober thinking, I am suddenly unable to hold the urge and desire to click on the + vote more than just once!

Well said IndredKold!
Posted by fo128
13th Mar
-4 Votes
+ -
Just Takes One RPG
The Army is always looking at innovative next-generation technologies that improve capabilities for our soldiers, said Dov Schwartz, a U.S. Army spokesman at the Pentagon.

It can still be rendered useless by a RPG.
Posted by rocketman67
8th Mar
+4 Votes
+ -
So what?
An RPG would take out a regular tire too and probably tank tracks as well.
Posted by riverat1
8th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
Cover the sides
Why not cover the whole honey comb part with a sheet of flexible rubber. Then you wouldn't have the issue of stuff getting caught inside.
Posted by Jeffp77
11th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
no hubcaps
The reason is because since the plastic spokes have some give and adjusts to the road, a cover would just fall off. For regular tires, the give is in the outer tube, not the wheel itself.
Posted by tuancnguyen
12th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
Diaphragm rubber!
Wouldn't diaphragm rubber be suitable instead of solid wheel cover (probably what the previous poster suggested and had in mind)?
Posted by fo128
13th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
Tyre prices
What do you think these types of tyres will do to the market of tyre prices when they go commercial?
Posted by Shishempeon
11th Jun
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!