We're hosting a live conversation with 40 Under 40 honorees
this Thursday at 3pm ET. Click here to learn more.

Makers fear defeat in tire tussle

Decision near on pressure monitors

Cheap, fast, safe
Automakers want antilock brake technology to measure tire pressure because it is

  • Cheaper; $13 per vehicle compared with $79 for sensor in tire

  • Faster; antilock technology is widely available and ready to adapt

  • Just as safe as using direct sensors

  • WASHINGTON - Automakers and the rubber industry have battled to a draw so far in their latest face-off over tire safety, but car companies fear they may end up losers in the fight over tire pressure monitors.

    They worry that new federal rules will inadvertently disallow the kind of tire monitoring systems they prefer - so-called indirect systems that take advantage of antilock brake hardware already engineered into vehicles.

    Much of the tire industry and many safety advocacy groups favor direct systems, which require an electronic sensor inside each tire and wheel to gauge air presure.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, facing a congressionally mandated deadline, has completed a final regulation requiring tire pressure monitors in new motor vehicles beginning a year from now.

    The rule, still subject to White House review, has not been made public, but those familiar with its contents say it is meant to be technology-neutral. That is, it is designed to allow either the direct systems or the indirect systems, which calculate tire pressure by using the antilock brake technology to count wheel revolutions. When pressure is low, revolutions per minute increase because the wheel is slightly smaller, allowing the antilock devices to measure tire pressure.

    Unintended consequences

    But automakers believe some of the fine print - such as a requirement that the pressure in all four tires be monitored simultaneously under all conditions - could make antilock brake-based systems unworkable.

    "The structure of the final rule may be such that it in fact mandates direct monitoring systems," said Robert Strassburger, vice president for safety of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

    Not that the automakers are opposed to direct systems, which require an electronic sensing device inside each tire or wheel, but they say indirect systems have important advantages.

    The antilock brake-based systems would be less costly and could be installed on more vehicles quickly. This is because only a few small companies make the sensors needed for direct systems, and the demand would be for more than 60 million tires and wheels a year.

    And antilock-based systems would be almost as effective as the direct systems, automakers contend.

    "It's not clear there is an additional safety benefit going to the more sophisticated system," said Michael Cammisa, director of safety for the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers.

    $13 vs. $79

    Adding monitors to a vehicle engineered for antilock brakes would cost about $13, NHTSA estimates. Installing a direct system would cost about $79 a vehicle, the agency says. The cost issue could be an ace in the hole for automakers.

    The person principally responsible for the rule's final review is John Graham, the Bush administration's new regulatory czar in the Office of Management and Budget. As a Harvard University researcher, he was best known for studies of costs and benefits of public policies.

    The tire pressure monitoring rule will be the first he will consider that has a direct impact on the auto industry.

    ATTENTION COMMENTERS: Automotive News has monitored a significant increase in the number of personal attacks and abusive comments on our site. We encourage our readers to voice their opinions and argue their points. We expect disagreement. We do not expect our readers to turn on each other. We will be aggressively deleting all comments that personally attack another poster, or an article author, even if the comment is otherwise a well-argued observation. If we see repeated behavior, we will ban the commenter. Please help us maintain a civil level of discourse.

    Email Newsletters
    • General newsletters
    • (Weekdays)
    • (Mondays)
    • (As needed)
    • Video newscasts
    • (Weekdays)
    • (Weekdays)
    • (Saturdays)
    • Special interest newsletters
    • (Thursdays)
    • (Tuesdays)
    • (Monthly)
    • (Monthly)
    • (Wednesdays)
    • (Bimonthly)
    • Special reports
    • (As needed)
    • (As needed)
    • Communication preferences
    • You can unsubscribe at any time through links in these emails. For more information, see our Privacy Policy.