Did you do it?

You're joking right?

You realize that michelin x-ones have the lowest profile of any tire? There's a reason they did that.

You probably believe everything truck salesmen tell you as well.

Look up XDA energies. They're the most efficient conventional tire out there. They're only available in low pro 22.5. There's a reason for that too.

Lo profile tires lower rolling resistance by having less sidewall flex. Thus less energy is lost to that...hence less rolling resistance.

I don't think it has anything to do with the number of times it rotates. It could rotate 5 rpm or 5,ooo and the same surface area of tire is still on the ground.

Guys, 24.5 is low pro too, so that's not a valid point. I don't have a "hard data" on this, just an opinion. And anyhow, difference on the same model 22.5 and 24.5 tires is very marginal! :roll:

Look at it this way, how many fleets or trailers run 24.5 tires?

May be that will answer your question! I guess, we were wrong! :roll:
http://www.bridgestonetrucktires.com...r_specs.asp#1a

Good post solo.

Interesting. I was always under the impression that 22.5's had lower resistance, smaller contact patch, smaller sidewall.

I'd love to see that SAE test.

I guess I wasn't joking Allan. 24.5's come in high and low profiles just like 22.5's. 90% of the reasons fleets use 22.5's is to save money when buying tires and usually there is more demand for 22.5 casings to be retreaded. The other reason is that they want to max out on cubes in vans and a taller tire raises the van up and could cost them space in the van.

Sure, but the contact patch for a 22.5 lo pro will be smaller then a 24.5 lo pro tire of the same width.

I'm REALLY surprised if a 24.5 tire is less resistant.