So Yosemite says they require all cars to carry chains into Yosemite in the winter, including 4wd with snow tires. My friend has a 4wd Subaru. Assuming we stay in the valley and no snowfall, would we be okay without chains? How is she legal to go on I-80 in a snowstorm but not Yosemite Valley? Seems odd to me. What are your opinions?

On 80 they always have the sign boards that read "carry chains", but that's when it's snowing or chance of snow, maybe it's the same? They aren't really going to check each vehicle are they? And on 80, 4x4 with m/s tires are always good or they close down the freeway.

R2 is the normal restriction where you either have to have chains or 4wd with snow tires.
R3 is chains for everyone. I can't ever remember actually seeing an R3 restriction- usually they close the road if it gets that bad.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/truck ... hains.html

If I have 4-wheel-drive, do I need to carry chains?

Yes. Even though weather conditions may not warrant the use of chains on 4-wheel-drive vehicles at a particular time, to enter a chain control area, you must have a set of chains (for one drive axle) for your vehicle in your possession. If conditions worsen or you have trouble controlling your vehicle, you must stop and install the chains

.

IMHO, you should be fine with w/o chains- and if the weather does get bad just leave the park on 140 instead of 120.
But the law is that you have to carry them (and you can get a fine if by chance you get pulled over and they check) I believe this is the case even on I-80.
So do so at your own risk.

I *do* have a set of chains for my subaru w/ snow tires and I usually carry them in the winter- but the wheel well on subarus is so tight that I don't think I'd ever risk actually putting them on.

It has been like 30 years ago since I remember 4x4 AND chain requiremnents, as fedak said, they just close the freeway.

The issue here is that Yosemite is run by the feds, not CalTrans. Thus they take a different approach when advising drivers what to do. The same thing occurs in SEKI.

Now we all know what to do when questioned by a ranger in Yosemite right? The same applies here.

You do NOT need to carry chains if you have 4wd, although they are required by law (just as they are when you go to Tahoe with 4wd). As the others said, the road will likely close if a storm is horrific, and in the valley you'd probably be ok regardless.

To answer your question, your friend is technically not legal on I-80 in a snowstorm with 4wd and no chains. They are supposed to be in your possession even if not required to be on the tires. But there is a difference in what is legal and what is practical and expected, even in the eyes of the CHP if not the feds in Yosemite.

When you drive into Yosemite they may advise you that chains are required to be in your vehicle even if you have 4wd. They may ask if you have them. Just do what I do and say you have them and you'll be on your way (there is no legal requirement for you to display them).

Thanks all, I think I have the info I need.

If you go before the next snowfall you wont need chains to get to the valley for sure. (not a patch of snow on the road all the way through tioga pass on the weekend just past). I didn't get checked the last two weekends in my 2wd passat. But yeah, chains are formally required, but I doubt it would be an issue in a 4x4

Over on 395, Caltrans will stop all vehicles heading north out of Bishop and ask to see your chains when there is a storm in the Sierra. CHP is often there to enforce the chain possession rule. Many tourists and locals have learned the hard way that there are no exceptions, and often they really do want to see the chains.

Some coworkers were turned around one morning though they had 4 wheel drive and snow tires. Had to drive all the way home to get the chains.

Sounds like the local law enforcement on the eastside are even bigger douchebags than the rangers in Yosemite.

mrchad9 wrote:Sounds like the local law enforcement on the eastside are even bigger douchebags than the rangers in Yosemite.

Unsure why "law enforcement" (i.e., Caltrans) should be considered douchebags for prohibiting mindless southlanders from traveling north on 395 when a storm is blowing up???

dyusem wrote:Unsure why "law enforcement" (i.e., Caltrans) should be considered douchebags for prohibiting mindless southlanders from traveling north on 395 when a storm is blowing up???

1. "CHP is often there..." was talking about CHP, not Caltrans.
2. Mindless is doing what someone else tells you to do, for no other practical reason.

Have you ever put chains on a 4wd vehicle on 395 due to R3 requirements? If not then you've been carrying them around mindlessly.

mrchad9 wrote:

dyusem wrote:Unsure why "law enforcement" (i.e., Caltrans) should be considered douchebags for prohibiting mindless southlanders from traveling north on 395 when a storm is blowing up???

1. "CHP is often there..." was talking about CHP, not Caltrans.
2. Mindless is doing what someone else tells you to do, for no other practical reason.

Have you ever put chains on a 4wd vehicle on 395 due to R3 requirements? If not then you've been carrying them around mindlessly.

I have been in a 4x truck with chains on 395, and have certainly put them on myself on a similar truck, in the town of Mammoth, more than once. . .

mrchad9 wrote:

dyusem wrote:Unsure why "law enforcement" (i.e., Caltrans) should be considered douchebags for prohibiting mindless southlanders from traveling north on 395 when a storm is blowing up???

1. "CHP is often there..." was talking about CHP, not Caltrans.
2. Mindless is doing what someone else tells you to do, for no other practical reason.

Have you ever put chains on a 4wd vehicle on 395 due to R3 requirements? If not then you've been carrying them around mindlessly.

Most people that head up to the Eastside from SoCal have little or no experience dealing with driving conditions in the Sierra. While I never have owned chains for any of my 4WD vehicles (whenever R3 went up I chose to just hang tight), trusting individuals that have minimal experience using their vehicles properly in those conditions is unwise policy and I support Caltrans and the CHP to do what they feel is best to regulate highway use under adverse conditions.

BTW, mindless also means either lack of mind/consciousness or as I was using it, displaying no use of intellect.

My point was that calling Caltrans/CHP douchebags under the situation that was originally intimated is inappropriate.

I've been going to Tahoe since 1974 and after about 1980, CalTrans has shut down/closed 80 when the snow depth is considered unsafe. CalTrans would then plow and when the freeway was relativly clear, then reopen 80. The R3 restriction (4x4 AND chains required) has not been used in 30 years as far as I know. Between 1974 and 1980 there were times when R3 was in force.

dyusem calling motorists who make intelligent and well-grounded decisions (like not buying and carrying around chains for 4wd vehicles) mindless is inappropriate.

dyusem wrote:While I never have owned chains for any of my 4WD vehicles

I rest my case.