1. A wider solid loader will give you more hours of service.
   • Maybe – In certain applications, a wider footprint decreases tire slippage and reduces premature wear. 
2. The cost per hour is lower.
   • False – The cost of the wider footprint solid tire is much higher priced than the standard size solid tire, which gives the customer a higher cost per hour to run the wider footprint tire.
3. The machine has a higher load capacity with a wider solid tire.
   • True – The tire’s carrying capacity can be increased by a wider footprint but may exceed the manufacturer’s machine tolerances.
4. The wider footprint will have better traction than the standard size solid on hard surfaces.
   • True – The more rubber on the surface will give the machine better traction than the standard solids.
5. The wider footprint solid tire will make the machine more stable.
   • True – But in the waste transfer environment, the machine is used to push the trash. The bucket should be on the ground at all times, so no added stability is needed. This is the reason most loader buckets run rubber-cutting edges on their machines. The bucket should always be in contact with the surface, as these transfer stations are pushing trash, not loading, and the rubber cutting edge it keeps from wearing the tipping floor out prematurely and sparking fires in the trash.

In closing, with the little added traction and not-needed stability that the wider footprint solid loader tire offers, it does not outweigh the increased costs to run this tire in the waste transfer environment where cost-per-hour is the name of the game!