calcium in rear wheels

• Rim Guard tire ballast

"...isn't nearly as dense as CaCl..."? At 10.7 lb/gal, it seems to me to be excellent ballast. I've been using CaCl in both my AC-B (rear only) and my Oliver 77 (front and rear) for many years (>30) without a problem. So I've nothing against CaCl. It's relatively cheap and does the job well. I use tubes and pay attention to the valve cores - and always use caps. I've found that replacing the valve cores every few years is great preventive maintenance if you are using CaCl. I use a 15% solution as recommended by my AC-B manual. That equates to about 9.5 lb/gal - which is significantly less than the 10.7 claimed for the RimGuard. If you are getting significantly more than 10.7 lb/gal with CaCl, what concentration are you using?

Rod

According to the handbook, the freezing point of a 15% solution is +13.5 degrees F. To get a freezing point between below -30 degrees F, the concentration must be 27 to 31%. If you live in the midwest, 15% would seem to be a bit weak.

I haven't purchased any CaCl in many years. I remember buying the 77% flake but cannot remember the cost. I am sure that it wasn't very expensive. I don't know, but strongly suspect, that the RimGuard, being a specialty product, will be significantly more expensive to load up large tractor rears. It appears to me that it would be an excellent substitute for CaCl if one is willing to pay whatever cost difference there is. I wonder how the cost compares also. I'd like to see a current product cost comparison of the two.

Rod