OK. Any vehicle driver knows what I’m talking about. I know that sand works at a lower temperature than salt, but you never see an area use both kinds (maybe rarely). For instance, the city of Chicago uses salt all the time (maybe even too much at times), but I remember when I lived there, roads were almost always driveable. Every other snow area I’ve gone to, have seen road conditions a lot worse. The Omaha area uses sand, and I think it blows. Granted, part of this may be due to the fact that they don’t do anything until it starts snowing, but still.
Kinda rambling here, but my question is, salt seems superior to sand in making roads safer, at temperatures above 20 deg F or so (which is when we would get most of our snow to fall). So, why is Omaha using sand? It doesn’t work as far as I’m concerned. I am hesitant to drive after about 1-2" of snow here, but would have no doubts about driving back in Chicago after the same amount.
Wild Guess:
Omaha is a thousand miles away from the sea, and in the middle of the prairies. My guess would be that, in that part of the country, sand is cheaper than salt.
Also, in warm-and-dry parts of the country, automobile parts are not sealed against salt, so salting the roads might damage the taxpayers’ vehicles.
Salt also goes has to go somewhere, and eventually ends up in the area around the road and ends up chemically burning the area. Plus, like mbh said, salt destroys vehicles. If you are buying a vintage car, you try to avoid one that got a lot of milage in the midwest, where they most likely got salt on the undercarriage and body. Colorado doesn’t use salt,(or much sand) using mostly gravel and scoria.
Utah, on the other hand, for obvious reasons, tends to use a lot of salt, and after a winter drive through Utah, every car looks white.
Well, maybe it is a cost analysis thing, although I swear. everytime I drive around here in a nuisance storm, I always see cars in ditches, tow trucks, and what not. A lot more than in Chicago. Wouldn’t the insurance companies do something about this? I’m guessing they would, if there were any benefits though.
Interesting about the sealing idea, never thought of that.
Oh well, I can dream about being able to drive in the winter, can’t I?
Huh? There’s no difference in any type of “Sealing” between Chicago cars and Nebraska cars. Other than engine block heaters for Alaska, rear-defrosters (not as an option) for New York, and differing emmissions components for California, you pretty much buy the same car anywhere in the country.
As for sealing against salt, we have clearcoat, paint, primer, and zinc to do most of that.
A couple of years ago, I got a recall notice advising me to check with a mechanic about replacing the muffler and exhaust pipe with corrosion-resistant parts. My mechanic told me that, here in the desert, it was not an issue; but if I ever moved to the seacoast, or to an area where they salted the roads, I should get new parts.
In wet and cold climates, sealant-coated parts are standard equipment, but you have to pay extra for air conditioners. In hot and dry climates, air conditioners are standard equipment, but you have to pay extra for sealant. Detroit adapts its product to different local markets.
No, that’s not true. Other than where states have different laws, Detroit uses the same parts for all locations. Your exhaust system was the same exhaust system in the desert or in Detroit. The respective climates merely have a different effect on the same system.
If an air conditioner is an option, it will be an option in Texas or in Minnesota. The difference is the dealer orders more cars with A/C because they’re a necessity for the market.
“Sealant” is never a factory option. It is always a dealer option, and unless you plan on keeping a car more than 8 or 9 years, is always a rip off. Even here in Salty Michigan, only suckers go for dealer-installed undercoating or other sealants, unless (again) they plan on driving their vehicle into the ground.
Salt and sand do different things. Salt is almost useless initially, it turns snow/ice into slush and driving may actually become more dangerous immediately after salt is applied. That’s why it is always applied mixed with sand, wich gives good traction. In some jurisdictions, salt is prohibited on the roads.
Salt lowers the melting point of ice below 32 degrees. F. However if the ambient temperature is low enough, that melting point will still be too high and the ice won’t melt. Sand, on the other hand, adds friction to the ice and will work at any temperature.
And, I might add, Chicago, being on Lake Michigan, has warmer wintertime temperatures than Omaha. Therefore, salt may be a viable option in Chicago and not in Omaha.