http://www.cambertire.com

Yeah, their website is trash.

Saw this mentioned in the current Autoweek. I can't decide out if this is a passing fad with no performance advantage, or something that we'll all be running in 3-5 years...

Thoughts?

 

Look like the triumph of marketing over science to me:

• Automobile Magazine tested them and declared them to be superior. How exactly they came to this conclusion is completely beyond me given the data. The performance of the 140 treadwear Scott's tire was essentially identical to the performance of the 180 treadwear identical tire. The R-compound Scott's tire running 3 degrees of negative camber outperformed the 180 treadwear street running 1 degree of negative camber, but that proves nothing -- a conventional R-compound tire running 3 degrees of negative camber would also outperform a 180 treadwear street running 1 degree of negative camber.
  
  

• Many people have argued "racers have been doing this forever, so it must work", not realizing that racers have actually been doing the exact *opposite*. The fabled BFGoodrich Comp T/A R1 tires had stiffer (and thus effectively dynamically taller) inside sidewalls, whereas the Scott's tires have taller outside sidewalls. Likewise, those who shave their tires asymmetrically shave more off of the outside edge to make it shorter (and build in more effective camber), whereas the Scott's tires have a taller outer edge (building in less effective camber).

Complete and utter snake oil, in my opinion.

 

A cone doesn't roll straight. The tire will want to fight itself going down the road. As said above, this seems like a Snake-Oil marketing gimmick.

-Froth

 

definately snake oil!