Wheels

[Restorer32]

A question re BCA judging if you don't mind. Two'53 Skylarks showed up at a show, both impeccably restored. One is wearing beautifully restored original wire wheels, the other close but not exact reproduction wires. Would the car with the original wheels be at an advantage points wise?

[JohnD1956]

Theoretically, no.  BCA Judging is supposed to be against a standard, not vehicle against a vehicle.

Edited December 10, 2015 by JohnD1956 (see edit history)

[Restorer32]

Of course, but in such a situation would the car with not quite right repro wheels be given a deduction? If not, then what is the incentive to restore a car properly ? What do the BCA judging guidelines mean by "Check for correct wheels for year and model. Incorrect wheels result in a 10 point mandatory deduction"? If correct wheels are available shouldn't an owner who went to the effort to restore a set of original wheels be rewarded for his effort?

[Guest DadsReatta]

Here we go again, it's obvious this is going to be a divided subject, thoses that go the extra mile to do a correct restoration, and those that don't. The bigger question is just where do you draw the line of what is correct and what is acceptable. The further into the acceptable side we slide the further away from originality and correctness we slide. Is is right that a car that

has been restored painstakingly to exacting standards has no benefit in judging as one that hasn't been restored to the same originality?

What would happen if you had a 53 Skylark in the archival class that someone tossed on a set of reproduction wheels?

[Bhigdog]

If a part has been "restored" by repair/refinish/replication of any kind or sort it is NOT original. It may look original and by your logic therefore be correct but it is not.

I would literally bet the farm that there is not a single highly awarded car in the country that is "correct" or "original" in that it is exactly as it would have been when it left the factory.

To insist other wise and sneer at as good a replication as practically possible is to descend into snobbery and arrogance.....Bob

Edited December 10, 2015 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Restorer32]

So you are saying that even where original parts are available that could be restored you are perfectly ok with a close but not exact replacement in place of a refinished original?

[Restorer32]

And no one is sneering. I have no problem with the replacement wheels but wouldn't a refinished original be closer to the mission statement of the club to encourage the preservation and restoration of cars to a condition as close as practical to the way they left the dealership?

[JZRIV]

Of course, but in such a situation would the car with not quite right repro wheels be given a deduction? If not, then what is the incentive to restore a car properly ? What do the BCA judging guidelines mean by "Check for correct wheels for year and model. Incorrect wheels result in a 10 point mandatory deduction"? If correct wheels are available shouldn't an owner who went to the effort to restore a set of original wheels be rewarded for his effort?

Interesting viewpoint. Since BCA is not concourse level judging I don't think scoring high in a BCA show should be the incentive at all. Certainly it can be a nice collateral effect though. Instead, the incentive to restore properly should be because the restorer is part historian and believes in the importance to preserve history as accurately as possible so the car they restore will best reflect how it rolled off the production line for generations to come. When a person restores a car their name may stay with it in future owners and sometimes even after they are dead and gone. So in addition anyone who takes pride in their work has natural incentive to restore correctly for that reason alone.

With the term restoration being so watered down and diminished by slap it together auto TV shows and Chinese reproduction parts these days, the true restorations done without shortcuts will always stand above all others in the eyes of the discriminating enthusiast. Problem is true restoration work is terribly expensive and rarely can it be justified from a cost perspective. Because of that standards tend to get lowered to reflect the reality of the hobby.

It has been my experience that its best for anyone who enters a car in any form of judging should be mentally prepared to be disappointed. Going in with high expectations is setting oneself up for a letdown.

[Bhigdog]

So you are saying that even where original parts are available that could be restored you are perfectly ok with a close but not exact replacement in place of a refinished original?

Nope not saying that at all. Just responding to the claim that a certain car is restored to "originality" or "correctness" when it obviously can be neither when a part has been "restored" since it then is not as originally manufactured. Splitting hairs maybe but someone has to say it .............Bob

Edited December 10, 2015 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Bhigdog]

And no one is sneering. I have no problem with the replacement wheels but wouldn't a refinished original be closer to the mission statement of the club to encourage the preservation and restoration of cars to a condition as close as practical to the way they left the dealership?

I totally agree. I also agree with your use of the wording "as practical"...............Bob

[Restorer32]

So "same as" actually means "close enough but not necessarily exact" in BCA judging. Got it!

[Guest DadsReatta]

So according to the chief judges statement, the fact alone that repop wire wheels do not require tubes should make them incorrect per his statement.

Edited December 10, 2015 by DadsReatta (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

  Children, children, must we continue this silly debate??  I, for one, am truly glad I "refurbished" mine. 

 

  Ben

[MrEarl]

Ben, I love a good debate as long as it doesn't turn personal and attacking the character of the members and becomes an argument for sake of arguing as a previous one did.

Peace brothers...and sisters...

[60FlatTop]

Probably need a guy with some legal experience in both written and oral expression.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

 

Bernie

[buick5563]

May I ask what you guys feel about Coker Classic tires?

[60FlatTop]

Wheels, rules, and definitions, not Choker Classic Tires.

 

B

[buick5563]

Isn't the point that upon close inspection that a knowledgable judge can tell an inauthentic reproduction?

From ten feet away, you can tell a Coker tire has a completely wrong rib pattern in the sidewall, but I have never heard complaints of bad reproductions.

[JohnD1956]

Mike, that can be expanded to other parts of the car too. If someone should be penalized for a reproduction wire wheel just because it does not require a tube, then, for a true restoration, anyone with perfect body panel gap alignment should also be penalized.  I am glad that the BCA judging system is lenient enough not to require either deduction.  

[The Old Guy]

I have lived in the Flint Mich area all my life , and have seen Buicks come off the assembly line for many years, ( and I am OLD ) 

In all this time, I have NEVER seen a perfect car built by Buick. 

  None have perfect paint or door fits, and there is always something wrong with the interiors. 

 In todays world, the BCA has decided that any Buick driven to the national meets are "second class" and should not be seen with the "Trailer Queens", 

   I was once quite active in the BCA, and helped start the  "Buicktown " chapter ,and also helped start the BDE (I was BDE 001,and the first director of the Buicktown Chapter) and decided after the 2009 meet in Colorado that the club had evolved into something other than members that enjoyed Cars.( I drove a Buick to every National from 1971 to 2009) 

    These discussions over judging convinced me that I did the RIGHT thing when I quit

[NTX5467]

 From my general observations, the repos ALWAYS usually have some details which are "generic" and not completely OEM is appearance.

 

I ALSO seem to recall that such a discussion happened at the last Arizone meet, years ago.  Now, this is "hearsay", but from a reliable source . . . that many from the CA area showed up with Buicks at that meet, in the 400 Point Judging, with the repro wire wheels on them.  They felt they were "close enough", but the meet judges said "No", so the mandatory deductions were applied, as they should have been (in my way of thinking from my interpretation of the BCA rules). 

 

Over the years, from looking at "restored" cars of all kinds at shows and otherwise, IF the owner uses a known repro part that is significantly similar to an OEM item, many feel that's "good enough" (as they find it less expensive to get the repro rather than invest the time/money to get the original item and then get it/them restored)  . . . usually will take some other "liberties" on what they did to the vehicle (either in quality or lesser-execution of repairs) in other parts of the vehicle.  I know that last sentence does not meet the hypothetical question, but if you look hard enough, you'll probably find that the "repro-item" car can be lacking in how other things were done on the vehicle.  Plus, the vehicle might also be "over-restored", which gains no points in the BCA scheme of things.  End result, the very-possibly-more-correct vehicle with the OEM-spec wire wheels could out-score the "repro wheel" vehicle.

 

Now, IF the BCA operatives might decide that the repro wheels are "acceptable, with a minor point deduction" (due to possible supply issues of finding the real thing, or similar), THEN it would be a different discussion.  But to me, we DON'T need another "flap" similar to the prior "radial tires and halogen headlights" discussion of decades ago!

 

5563, as for the "rib design" on your repro BFGs, the one pictured is more like the BFG Silvertowns of the circa 1963, after the edges got worn down from cornering wear.  "Superceded parts", to me, but of the correct size designation for the '55 vehicles.

 

I strongly concur with The Old Guy's observation that "end of the assembly line" does NOT guarantee a "perfect vehicle".  There were paint surface issues, molding alignment issues, excess sealer drips, and such.  But if those are painfully replicated when a vehicle is restored, then observers can wonder if the restoration shop did a good job or what!  So, the restored vehicles usually are nicer than any vehicle built on that same assembly line . . . be it much better paint (whether the original paint system or not), nicer molding alignments, door gaps and such tweaked for the "best fit" . . . as WE want to be proud of the vehicle and such things can enhance the pride of ownership somewhat.

 

If you really want to get picky about "originality" . . . a vehicle is only original ONCE, which is prior to the first oil change of its life.

 

Enjoy!

NTX5467

Edited December 11, 2015 by NTX5467 (see edit history)

[buick5563]

Sorry Willis,

I wasn't clear in my post earlier.

I posted the picture of the BFG as what I personally interpret as the correct rib pattern of mid-50's tires. This rib pattern is shown in the service manual as well as various period literature. The Coker branded tire was the rib style in question, along of course with the fact that there was never a company at that time called Coker.

They are obvious from ten feet to be incorrect, but if they are bias ply and the proper size They are allowed in BCA judging. I don't know about the AACA.

Look, I am not even arguing this point. Merely trying to give more food for thought. Much like the other thread I started yesterday. We have jumped on one issue that (IN MY NON-BCA SANCTIONED OPINION) is more difficult to notice versus other much more glaring errors in restoration. I have heard and even made the "argument" that if "this" is incorrect, then what else did they scrimp on. Anybody who has ever restored a car can tell immediately if a car was done correctly. There are cues. C'mon...you guys can tell within a minute of walking up to a car the degree of restoration. We, as restorers, don't get fooled by shiny paint. We see the stainless line up. We see proper headed fender bolts that weren't bought at Lowes. We see tight seams in upholstery. We see different sheens of black in the engine compartment. You AACA peeps know this to be true.

I want to know these answers because I have been a team captain before. Perhaps I was just handing out high medals for no apparent reason. I do know that I had a Senior car not repeat because it was painted an incorrect color, which of course put me on the hard-ass judge side of the argument.

[buick5563]

Me either, but it says Coker Classic really big on the side. It is a very obvious flaw that GM (or Ford) never could have had on the sidewall. At least Firestone and Goodrich could have been on the car. So is using a brand that didn't exist at that time considered lazy?

Jake, you and I have been sideways in the distant past, right? Not to the point of name-calling, but we have always at least (if I recall) had arguments about differing opinions. Just reiterating that discourse lets us grow. Plus, I respect your opinions even if we don't agree.

[Guest DadsReatta]

No. An inner tube is not visual during judging.  Many judged cars run reproduction tires and many of those are radials with the appearance of bias ply. Tires, batteries etc are considered consumables.   I would not expect any archival car to try touring on dated tires, batteries, maybe hoses and so on.  It's cool to see, but the BCA does more then just show the cars.  As with most clubs including the AACA, cars are driven and best enjoyed in their element.

 

So whether a wheel/tire is tubed or not is not relevant to points deduction. 

 

 

 

I would argue the term performance should have the definition of  how the specs of the item original performed/functioned. Totally different concept of how a wire wheel performed and functioned.   It amazes me to think that a wire wheeled car with the proper original wire wheels sitting with 4 tubes would be seen the same as a car that has modern wheels with no tubes.  That car is missing 4 substantial items that the car came when new.   Just how much further from original standard can you get from that. 

 

As far as radials that have a bias appearance - don't even try to go there, they are substantially different in appearance  - those would be a mandatory deduction.

 

Your analogy is also flawed with regard to Archival cars, lets say a 65 Electra was in the Archival class - if it had radials, Gates hoses and a Sears battery - those would all be deductions and not overlooked. 

 

I agree that it's great that the BCA does more than just show line cars as you say, but the cars that are show line cars need to be just that, not a hybrid of show and go. 

Edited December 11, 2015 by DadsReatta (see edit history)

[MrEarl]

A post from a member stating "The Chief Judge has asked me to speak for him since he is not coming on the forum to answer these questions" has been removed from the discussion. Because I know this member and his manner of speaking, I suspect it was made in jest. However, it was unclear to those not knowing him and in my opinion should not have been made regardless. Please folks stick to the facts. Such sarcasm and argumentative posts may be part of the reason the Chief Judge and others do not participate more. I personally think it would help if certain members with authority would speak up sometimes, it would help quell dissension instead of allowing it to continue to grow. But regrettably many do not see it that way.   

[1953mack]

So whether a wheel/tire is tubed or not is not relevant to points deduction. 

I totally disagree with this statement. Read my post tomorrow addressing the question asked by the OP in his Post #1...along with what you just stated.

 

 

Al Malachowski

BCA #8965

"500 Miles West of Flint"

[buick5563]

And those Coker Classics are bias ply. Not radial hybrid.

[Guest DadsReatta]

A post from a member stating "The Chief Judge has asked me to speak for him since he is not coming on the forum to answer these questions" has been removed from the discussion. Because I know this member and his manner of speaking, I suspect it was made in jest. However, it was unclear to those not knowing him and in my opinion should not have been made regardless

Thanks for clarifying - I find that lie to be in total poor taste and inexcusable, hopefully it gets back to the chief judge that someone is speaking for him

 - I will know now not to take anything he posts as fact or relevant.  And people wonder how facts get bent

Edited December 11, 2015 by DadsReatta (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

  ANYONE should have been able to see his tongue in cheek!!!  Gheeeze!

 

  Ben

[MrEarl]

Thanks for clarifying - I find that lie to be in total poor taste and inexcusable, hopefully it gets back to the chief judge that someone is speaking for him

 - I will know now not to take anything he posts as fact or relevant.  And people wonder how facts get bent

 

I will know now not to take anything he posts as fact or relevant.

 

 

Dianna, granted Jake aka Imperial62 may be hard to read sometimes and is sometimes a bit too frank for his own good, but he also makes some good points and contributes a lot to the forum especially in helping spread the word about Buicks on the market.  He is rather knowledgeable about the history of not only Buicks but other makes and models of antique autos. I really don't think Jake was "lying" nor meant any true harm.  To never take anything he posts as fact or relevant based on this one occasion is in my opinion a bit extreme but certainly your prerogative.  Hopefully you will give him and others here another chance and learn to be more tolerant of us old time forum members. I will borrow a phrase that was once the signature of a member who chose to leave for reasons fully unknown but who is probably missed by quite a few, me for one. Some pretty simple words to live by....

 

 

I have enjoyed and share many of  your viewpoints about correctness in restorations and judging etc. and look forward to following more of your perspective of the old car hobby. 

[MrEarl]

I totally disagree with this statement. Read my post tomorrow addressing the question asked by the OP in his Post #1...along with what you just stated.

 

 

Al Malachowski

BCA #8965

"500 Miles West of Flint"

 

Look forward to hearing this Al.

[The Old Guy]

Itis quite evident that i hit a sore spot , as my info was removed !!!!!!

[NTX5467]

For what it's worth, a "tubed tire" is highly evident as the valve stem on the tube looks significantly different from a tubeless tire's valve stem (the rubber, "pull through" design, although the metal "bolt-in" versions are definite indication of a tubeless tire).  If you see them side by side, performing the same function of holding air in the tire, the difference is obvious (at least to me, from what I've seen over the years).  The tubed-tire valve stem relies on the tire's air pressure to keep it where it needs to be, whereas the tubeless tire valve stem has an extra "bump" on the outside that, in concert with the "bump" on the inside, with a "groove" between them, is what keeps the tubeless tire's valve stem in place.  "Pull through and snap in place".

 

NTX5467

[MrEarl]

Itis quite evident that i hit a sore spot , as my info was removed !!!!!!

I don't think so Joe, certainly not by me. Perhaps it is in another similar thread?

[buick5563]

It's the last post on page one.

Keep looking, Joe

[MrEarl]

Thanks bro. I am on the road to see ol cod

[The Old Guy]

Lamar

      I said I was OLD , and this proves it !!! 

   SORRY about the Post. (Not the original one ) 

        Joe  T

[NTX5467]

In some aspects of "things", WE in the hobby see different things when we look at a car on display (or in a more public driving environment) with different sensibilities and sensitivities than many "normal people" can.  I'd see the tubed-tire valve stem on the wheel (especially if the car came with tubeless tires!) and wonder what sort of tire/wheel problem the vehicle might have which caused that change, for example.  Then, additionally, I might look for other things which would be "incorrect for model year" on the vehicle.  Same if I saw tubeless tire valve stems on a vehicle which was supposed to have tubed tires on it (as the earlier OEM factory wire wheels tended to be), then similarly look for other upgrades the owner might have made to the vehicle (which might also better define the owner's "use intentions" for the vehicle at the same time).

 

It is that last scenario which can cause some "differences of orientation" to surface . . . where some national-level vehicle judging orientations can be compared to each other (as to what's allowable, by which club, and "which one's better/best").  My long-term observations have been that there is one orientation of owners which dictates that they will put the car to "OEM-spec", at greater investments in cost/time, only deviating whenever what they might desire "can't be done" -- period.  These "strict preservationists" might end up with an alternative item, but they will point out these "indiscretions" (which the average person might not notice until they are pointed out to the observer, THEN it can become obvious).

 

Depending upon just where an owner/restoration facility might be, especially in earlier times with decreased "network" capabilities in the more isolated pre-Internet era, using what was locally/regionally available usually happened.  Then add an owner that wants a functional car more than an "exact" car, and some things were done which were not exactly correct, but used "available" items instead which would perform the same function, if not a little better.

 

From that part of the continuum, we can progress to the owner who wants a restored/archival car that looks "fresh, sharp, and acts that way".  Nothing the matter with that!  Just how well the upgrades were integrated into the vehicle can be important.  The "looks factory", but isn't degree of execution, for example, or "more-incognito upgrades".  In some areas of the particular-marque hobby, some upgrades are "acceptable", whereas other aspects of the hobby would cry "MODIFIED!!"  In this orientation, the "path of least resistance" can be operative, to varying degrees, depending on many factors (time, money, availability, maintenance issues, and others).

 

In the present time, as the availability of reproduction parts is much greater than what it was in prior times (relative to the age of the vehicles involved), "waving plastic" and having nice parts arrive a little while later is much different than slogging through salvage yards (especially when they were much more numerous!!) to find that special part on a particular vehicle to use on YOUR vehicle.  Manufacturing advances and related processes have made these later repro parts much better than the originals they replace, which in many cases, can be very obvious (even to the casual observer).

 

Many who can be "new to the hobby" and who have not followed the above-mentioned progressions might take the repro parts to be "OEM", when they are not, or consider the newer basecoat/clearcoat finishes to be THEN-OEM-spec, when it is not.  Or wonder why the headlights are so "dim" compared to the ones in their newer car!  These have been "moveable points of reference" for decades!  UNLESS the one "passing judgment" might have a mentor who can point out why these things are as they are . . . which is where WE are supposed to come in, hopefully, to point out how things used to be and why they are as they are compared to later vehicles.

 

In the "world of consumable parts", for example, we went from a period-correct battery "case" (empty) for show, to a case that had the guts in it and was operational, to the proliferation of repro period-correct "factory-made" batteries for our vintage vehicles (at least for most popular applications, whose list has expanded greatly over the past 30+ years.  In those earlier times, having a battery that was of the same brand as the vehicle would have come with might have been acceptable for most high-level judging classes.

 

The same might be also said about tires.  Certainly, there still can be some gaps in coverage of repro tires in the "bias-belted" era, not to forget about the number of whitewall stripes (and width types/combinations!!) for particular brands of vehicles!.  In some cases, "going backward" to bias ply tires can be done, provided than a "radial option" was not available.  In many cases, when new, the bias-belted tires had cosmetics whch were basically the same as the prior bias-ply tires they could replace . . . except in the performance car area where white letters  ("Bill Board", as I seem to recall seeing in some Buick brochures) proclaimed a model name which was "bias-belted".

 

Now, as things have progressed . . . it's much easier to build a vehicle (in refurbishment/restoration) with "select" modern items to both maintain the "look and function" of the original vehicle, but with greater durability of the vehicle AND making it nicer/more reliable to drive cross-country, typically.  Some posters in these forums have learned these things as they are "motivated to do so", while also maintaining some of the designed-in idiosyncracies of these same vehicles.  But as they are "motivated", they can live with these things more easily than a "normal consumer" might.

 

BUT . . . the fact remains that EACH judging entity (as a function of their related national/regional/local club/marque orientation) has "rules" by which they perform their individual (and possibly unique) vehicle classification/judging functions.  Each vehicle owner has an idea of what they want to do with the vehicle AND other related "use" factors in that mix, too.  Although some of the judging/classification criteria CAN be similar, they are NOT universal!!  NOR should they be "universal" as the orientations/demographics/sensitivities of the respective clubs are NOT universal, although similar!

 

The particular sensitivities/orientations of each group needs to be respected and understood by others in the hobby . . . and those coming into the hobby.  There's enough space for everybody!!  Each group's orientations/sensitivities have been in place long before the newer members (and possibly members) came on-board.  NOT that evolutionary changes can't or possibly shouldn't happen as things progress (like the greater-availability of restoration supplies and expanded knowledge of techniques to "do: our vehicles, which has resulted in a general elevation of the quality and execution of said vehicles), but there are also some basic things which should remain the same and correct-for-the-model year and model of the respective vehicle, whenever possible in the expanded network of available parts we have in the current times.

 

The BCA Judging Manual has a wealth of knowledge of which factory equipment was on which model year and model of Buick, and "Authorized Accessory" and factory-optional equipment.  Each level of judging should also be explained in the Judging Manual, also.

 

In many respects, it seems that many of these orientations and the degree of intensity tith which they are viewed can be somewhat cyclical in nature.  Moving between the "enjoyment of the vehicle, even with some visible-upgraded items" and "strict preservationist" orientations every so often.  My observations indicate that the general public (which ever-shifting-younger demographics!) see the "upgraded" vehicle, compares it to current vehicles (fit, finish, and such) and now considers that vehicle "normal",  but the vehicle sitting next to it, with a very-correct restoration (in accurate-for-original paint systems) and sees it as "sub-standard", which it is correct-for-the-vehicle.  If it might be an unmolested original vehicle, then "Somebody didn't take very good care of it . . . ".  But then, those that know what they're looking at, can see things differently.

 

So, get those judging manuals, see which "game" you might desire to participate in, see what might need to be done to your vehicle for "active participation" (or similar) in that group(s), and proceed as you might desire.  There will always be observers who will walk up to the vehicle and say "You SHOULD have left it stock", "You SHOULD add __________", or "That's a NEAT vehicle" (even it it's "not-to-your-taste").  In any event, "letting it rust" possibly is not an option if it can be saved (financial issues might apply!!) and enjoyed by somebody later on, or as a parts donor vehicle so another vehicle can live.

 

Personally, I like to see an un-molested vehicle and appreciate why it's that way.  Just as I can understand the "improved" vehicle to make it better and more enjoyable to use (while still having all of the original sensory/tactile inputs!), plus how this orientation can expand all the way to a "powertrain modified" vehicle (which can lose much of the things I liked about the original in the process!!).  Many times, I can sense the orientation of the owner by what's been done or not done (which can also have financial implications, too!!).  Key thing is . . . Everybody has fun, including the vehicle!!

 

Happy Holidays!!

NTX5467

[1953mack]

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2015 at 5:44 AM, Restorer32 said:

A question re BCA judging if you don't mind. Two'53 Skylarks showed up at a show, both impeccably restored. One is wearing beautifully restored original wire wheels, the other close but not exact reproduction wires. Would the car with the original wheels be at an advantage points wise?

If I was judging chassis’ in BCA’s 400-point Class G, 1953-1954 Skylarks competition, my answer would be…

 

Addressing both the wire wheel and the tire at the same time, I would not deduct any points from the 1953 Skylark with the five OEM Kelsey-Hayes (KH) 40-spoke, 6 1/2"-wide wire wheels provided that the bias-ply tires are the correct size (8.00x15) and inner tubes are installed, but I would deduct points from the 1953 Skylark with the five repop Wheel Vintiques (WV) 40-spoke, 6”-wide wire wheels with the same size, tube or tubeless type tire, due to the non-authentic wheel width size and running the same size  tire on the narrower repop wheel. However, if I was judging two 1954 Buick Skylarks, one with five OEM KH 6"-wide wire wheels with the correct size (7.60x15) bias-ply tires with inner tubes and the other with five WV repop 6"-wide wire wheels with the same size tube-type or tubeless tire, I would not deduct points from either Skylark because IMHO the repop WV wire wheel is close enough in appearance to the OEM KH wire wheel even though I counted seven (7) visible differences when I placed one of each wheel side by side without a mounted tire. My list of  differences exclude the OEM chrome plated carbon steel spokes vs. the polished stainless steel spokes available on the repop WV wire wheels. 

 

I ran across a similar situation while judging at a BCA Nationals a few years ago. All I’m going to say is that…I was reminded that we are not here to kill the car….the HJ requested that I send him some information on what I was talking about and he would read it over, and…..the owner drove away in his questionable paint color 1953 Buick Skylark equipped with repop wire wheels and the wrong color trophy.

 

Written information on OEM Buick Skylark and repop WV wire wheels is almost non-existent. There are way too many uninformed car owners, buy them and drive them wire wheel owners, judges, editors, and Forum posters that are unaware of just the basics: how to measure a wheel width, number of spokes, how many wheels to a complete set, what years and models got what size, what years and models wire wheels were not offered on, etc.; let alone getting into the technical stuff and all the differences. They are not alone. Check out this Coker Tire link (Coker owns WV) and note the number of spokes the ad mentions: https://www.cokertire.com/wheels/wire-wheels/buick-skylark-wheel.html

 

Here are a few more items to back-up my reasoning: 

1. Talking about incorrect information, check out the current 2005 BCA Judging Handbook (page 32) and a 1928-1954 BUICK MASTER CHASSIS PARTS BOOK (Group 5.803, Part Number 1165713). They both incorrectly state that 1953 Skylarks take a 15x6 wire wheel. Unfortunately, that is what the uninformed might be hanging their hat on as being 100% correct.

 

2. The 1953 Buick Skylark Model 76X was the only Year and Model that came from the factory equipped with 40-spoke 15x6.5 KH wire wheels. The wheels are stamped   15x 6 1/2 L and 53 on the drop center well near the valve stem hole. OEM wire wheels for 1954 Skylarks are stamped 15x6 L and 54. If you’ve ever wondered about what the “L” stands for, it is called the Rim Contour designation that meets certain dimensional criteria.

 

3. Unless the car owner can prove otherwise, all WV repop 40-spoke wire wheels that I have, have seen, have seen advertised, and read about, are 15x6 wheels.    

 

4. BCA judging is based on authenticity, condition, and workmanship. A 1954 OEM Buick KH or a repop WV 6"-wide wire wheel on a 1953 Buick Skylark is not authentic. Why did Buick engineers specify a wider wheel for the 1953 Skylark with the larger tire and then downsizing it for the 1954 Skylark with a smaller tire?

 

Final comments related to this topic:

■ When you purchased a new 1953-1954 Skylark or paid for the wire wheel option on other 1954-1955 Buick Models (if offered), you received  5 wire wheels + 5 hub caps + 5 appropriate hub cap emblems…not 4 of each.

 

■ The price differential between restoring an OEM wire wheel and purchasing a new WV repop wire wheel with polished stainless steel spokes is minimal, if any. If you have a good core (rim + hub…throw away the old spokes and nipples and buy new ones), this month’s price from a major restoration shop is running around $650-$700 per wheel. If you don’t have a restorable core, they are still available for around $300 each. Add the two numbers together and you have around $1,000 in each wheel. If you checked out the WV wire wheel prices lately, they are running very close to that number, if and when they are available. 

 

■ Personally, I would not put a wire wheel with chrome plated spokes on any of my cars. When restoring an OEM wire wheel or considering purchasing a WV repop, buy the stronger polished stainless steel spokes. Google hydrogen embrittlement for why I am saying this.

 

■ The BCA Judging Handbook (page 29) states that...wire wheels must, of course, use (inner) tubes... IMHO, that statement doesn’t go far enough and should be reworded to say something similar to this: All cars running any type of tire, bias ply or radial without an inner tube, on any wire wheel or steel disc wheel that is not designed for a tubeless tire, should not be allowed to compete in any type of BCA judging competition. The 1953-1954 Buick OEM wire wheels (plus zillions of pre mid-1950s steel wheels) were not designed for tubeless tires. They do not have the safety beads and they are most likely illegal to run them without an inner tube in your state or country. I suggest you have a talk with your insurance agent to see if you’re covered or local law enforcement department if you have any doubts. Read the fine print for disclaimers, restrictions, and liability issues when you purchase wheels or tires; nobody likes surprises. The WV wire wheel repops do have the safety bead humps that are designed to (i) achieve a better tire fit; (ii) prevent tire slide from the bead seat; and (iii) prevent loss of air pressure from horizontal forces to the tire’s sidewall when cornering. You do not want to be involved or liable for a serious or fatal mishap due to running tubeless tires on a wheel that wasn’t designed for tubeless tires. I guarantee it. 

 

Check out the following link if you are interested in reading about all the differences between the OEM 1953-1954 Buick Skylark KH vs. the WV repop wire wheel:

http://forums.aaca.org/topic/268491-oem-1954-buick-kelsey-hayes-wire-wheel-vs-wheel-vintiques-repro/ 

 

 

Al Malachowski 

BCA #8965 

"500 Miles West of Flint"

 

Edit: added link 

Edited November 19, 2016 by 1953mack (see edit history)

[buick5563]

Outstanding Al.

The only thing I would like to address is why Buick changed from 53-54. I would say it is probably because the 53 was large series and 54 was small series.