The Diesel Stop banner

Why no tire chains allowed - 2008?

8K views 28 replies 19 participants last post by  Alaska Ranger 
#1 ·
I'm looking through the fairly extensive set of papers I'm supposed to sign in order to take delivery of my Job 2 '08 F-350.

One reads, in full:


TIRE CHAIN DISCLOSURE

The manufacturer of this


________________________________________________________
(Describe year, make and model)

indicates that AS EQUIPPED, THIS VEHICLE MAY NOT BE OPERATED WITH TIRE CHAINS, BUT MAY ACCOMMODATE SOME OTHER TYPE OF TIRE TRACTION DEVICE. SEE THE OWNER'S MANUAL FOR DETAILS.



and then there is space where I'm supposed to date and sign it; salesman's signature already is on it.

This surely can't be for wheel well clearance height - I've got the stock 17" wheels, not any 20"-ers. Could it be width clearance? Not wanting some brake lines to be rubbed?

Not driving with chains in Alaska or the Yukon is like not driving with a steering wheel.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
awww...but i like the old kind destroying the tires and all.
 
#4 ·
I have a Job 2 2008 and never saw - much less signed - something like this.

With all due respect to Bobby (2nd post) cable chains are a joke - especially on rigs with our rear tire torque. Even babying the truck, cable chains are sure to fail and wrap themselves around your axle, lines, etc.

If I need 'real' extra traction I need 'old school' chains. My rig had 20" rims/wheels. I went to Les Schwab and they fitted me with 'real chains' that will work if the crap gets that deep. I expect that this is typically a 5-15 mile drive at real slow speeds.
 
#5 ·
I guess that I'll have to put this as another reason to keep my 96. The next thing that you will see on the 08's is that you can't take them into the dirt or mud. But then when you buy a $50,000 truck you really don't want to use it as a truck was designed too be used, or at least that is what I have been seeing latley. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Jim
 
#7 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BWilliams</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Audie,

The form is referring to the old school tire chains. Using the cable type is fine and is what is normaly used. </div></div> "NORMALLY USED" By who? People in cars in southern CA? What exactly does the owners manual say? Somebody also mentioned this NO CHAINS issue for a DRW F350 about a year ago. So is there a brake line clearance problem or a fender problem possibly on a 2WD? Maybe they are worried about a broken chain eating a DRW fender.
 
#8 ·
From what I received in PMs, this apparently is a California Issue...and since Sunrise Ford is based in soCal, those purchasing their trucks from same get the letter I received.


I also replied that I never have seen those cables in Alaska. That is not quite true - I bought a pair for my minuscule VW Golf. There is no way there exists enough well clearance for anything more substantial. I sure hope I never have to use them, though - just as Bullmack stated, there is a fine chance of them wrapping themselves around a brake line.

All of which brings up the following: is it safer or more dangerous to:
1) use traditional chains, which chew up road surfaces and potentially your tire AND rim, but when properly fastened provide the finest traction available for any wheeled vehicle;

or

2) use cable, nylon belting, etc. "Chain-lite" devices, which, in my opinion, run a significantly higher risk of torquing themselves around, e.g., one's brake lines?

"Counselor, that is an unfair and misleading question. I object!" /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
 
#9 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaska Ranger</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

All of which brings up the following: is it safer or more dangerous to:
1) use traditional chains, which chew up road surfaces and potentially your tire AND rim, but when properly fastened provide the finest traction available for any wheeled vehicle;

</div></div>

Properly installed "real" chains will not chew up the road ..its covered in snow!!! and they will not dammage the tire or rim either.

Cary
 
#10 ·
I have to agree with you: I never have suffered any rim or rubber damage from chains. They have been a trip saver, time saver and - who knows???? - life saver for me NOT when driving through deep snow, but, for example, about halfway up the province of BC one year when I was passing through transition temps (ie, just above and below freezing) and I encountered close to 100 miles of otter-snot-slick ice. I could hardly extend the toe of my boot down from my driver's seat onto the road surface without ending up rump over teakettle. Crikeys that was tough!
 
#11 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...BUT MAY ACCOMMODATE SOME OTHER TYPE OF TIRE TRACTION DEVICE... </div></div>

How about a set of these?
 
#12 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OMCUSNR_RET</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...BUT MAY ACCOMMODATE SOME OTHER TYPE OF TIRE TRACTION DEVICE... </div></div>

How about a set of these? </div></div>
I don't use chains but these things look like an accident waiting to happen. I can't imagine that these things can even be sold they look so dangerous.
 
#13 ·
They are big here in Colorado for school buses in the mountain areas. They work well without any maintenance issues and eliminate "chaining up" by operators. They have been around for a long time.
 
#14 ·
Yep, I see them on school buses and ambulances around here. I have seen many trucks with "automatic" chains.
 
#16 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OneTonHillBilly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You rarely see chains around here but I stick by my last post, they look CRAZY DANGEROUS! </div></div>

<span style="color: blue"> Only if you're trying to hold yourself underneath the vehicle like in the movies. We have no need for them down here, but I've talked to some fire departments in the norther areas and they said they are awesome.

Later, </span>
 
#18 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OneTonHillBilly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You rarely see chains around here but I stick by my last post, they look CRAZY DANGEROUS! </div></div> If you are a squirrel out in a snow storm and you though that you only had to stay out of the path of the tires, then they are crazy dangerous. Otherwise, there is no danger.
 
#19 ·
Oh, I have drooled over the thought of having a set of on-demand chains for years.

Anyone want to buy them for me?
 
#20 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OMCUSNR_RET</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> How about a set of these? </div></div>

Ahhh, I've seen a few trucks around here on occasion that I have seen short chains hanging down around the differential and I wondered what the purpose of those chains hanging there were for. Another one of lifes questions answered! Only a few left to go before Im done here ;-)
 
#21 ·
CYA.
They told you not to and if you do you have no leg to stand on when the fender gets demolished from use of chains that fail and you were to use the "you didn't tell me not to" argument to get it fixed at no charge to you.

There are front drive vehicles and some rear drive too, that do not have the clearance and conventional chains are out.

Others may have ABS codes when susing chains because the chains effectivel increase the circumference of the tires they are placed on. This gives speed differences that the ABS may not like and could set codes and turn off ABS function (you slide into something and they bring out the paper you signed....)
 
#22 ·
Maybe it's an "inside clearance issue"? Easy to figure out once you get your's & look. To say it's calif. issue dosen't make any sense to me? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif Your certainly way up north.

btw..I wouldn't run cables on a heavy vehicle.JMO! AFAIK..chain controls in calif. don't include 4 wheel drive. Never seen "mandatory" chain or traction control's for 4X4 on I80 over Donner Summit etc. Was told road would be closed if DOT thought 4X4 would need chains etc. to get thru. But, that ain't alaska. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif Update when u can. TIA Good luck/enjoy new ride.
 
#23 ·
cya is not California. it is cover your buttocks
 
#24 ·
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: OT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Maybe it's an "inside clearance issue"? Easy to figure out once you get your's & look. To say it's calif. issue dosen't make any sense to me? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif Your certainly way up north.

btw..I wouldn't run cables on a heavy vehicle.JMO! AFAIK..chain controls in calif. don't include 4 wheel drive. Never seen "mandatory" chain or traction control's for 4X4 on I80 over Donner Summit etc. Was told road would be closed if DOT thought 4X4 would need chains etc. to get thru. But, that ain't alaska. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif Update when u can. TIA Good luck/enjoy new ride.




</div></div>


Some places here is SOcal you have to put chains on 4x4 or they wont let you go... BS i know Cali has issues....
 
#26 ·
You're right on that - the owners manual does, in fact, discuss the proper installation and operation of chains. So that brings it back to this being a Cali-specific situation - which is not of concern to me.

I will note, however, that in some winter driving I've done in the northern Sierras - somewhere near Forks of the Salmon - I've seen more snow on the roads than anywhere in Alaska outside of Thompson Pass.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top