Plans to create correct looking tires for 65 Riviera

[1965rivgs]

13 hours ago, jframe said:

I am DEFINITELY no expert, but the factory 1965 service manual says in Section 0, Page 8 that 8.85X15 was an optional tire size on the Riviera. Creates more confusion. I think a set of bias ply look radials would look great on my 65 someday, just want the correst size, or something close.

Service manual is incorrect...NO oversize tire option available from the factory for the `65 Riviera,

  Tom

[Ted "Wildcat65" Nagel]

The 8.85 was an option for the 65 Wildcat.  8.45 blackwall was standard like the Riv.

It says right on the tire Replaces 7.60!

Edited May 31, 2018 by Ted "Wildcat65" Nagel (see edit history)

[Ted "Wildcat65" Nagel]

Just for fun here is the 8.45 spare from my 67.

 

[RivNut]

The 63 and 64 Rivieras had a 7.10 x 15 tire as the standard size and a 7.60 x 15 was optional. The 7.10 came on a 5.5" wheel and the 7.60 came on a 6" wheel.  Oddly, the 65 Riviera came only with the 8.45 x 15 but the 8.85 x 15 was not an option. 

 

The center hole in the 65 and later steel wheel was smaller than previous years.  The only reason that I can think of for that is that the rally wheel needed a register ring and Buick needed to make the hub smaller to accommodate that register ring in the back of the wheel.  The 64 Wildcat only rally wheel did not have a register ring on it.

[telriv]

The only thing Winston & others will have another worry thing to think about. At 30-32PSI in radial tires would almost look flat as opposed to bias ply tires unless they are inflated to 50 or more PSI to have the exact same look as bias ply's. Otherwise the judges will KNOW that they are radial tires.           What do you do now????

[Seafoam65]

       I'll just pump them up to bursting for the judges then let the air back out when the show is over......great point!

[telriv]

Guess I'm good for something

[RivNut]

25 minutes ago, telriv said:

Guess I'm good for something

Biggest understatement of the year

[KongaMan]

A set of radials will cost you 8 points, correct (one point each for type and size on each tire)?  You can lose 15 points and still receive a Gold award.  That is, it is still possible to get a Gold award even with radial tires, isn't it?

 

A set of 4 custom tires may easily cost $1000.  That's $125 per point.  If the goal is a Gold award, might it be easier and/or more economical to pick up those extra points by fixing the other deductions instead? 

 

One might also note that an over-inflated radial is still a radial.  Why would pressure mitigate the mandatory deduction?  Or put another way, would you expect to lose points for an under-inflated bias-ply?

[Paul K.]

23 hours ago, KongaMan said:

A set of radials will cost you 8 points, correct (one point each for type and size on each tire)?  You can lose 15 points and still receive a Gold award.  That is, it is still possible to get a Gold award even with radial tires, isn't it?

 

A set of 4 custom tires may easily cost $1000.  That's $125 per point.  If the goal is a Gold award, might it be easier and/or more economical to pick up those extra points by fixing the other deductions instead? 

 

One might also note that an over-inflated radial is still a radial.  Why would pressure mitigate the mandatory deduction?  Or put another way, would you expect to lose points for an under-inflated bias-ply?

Just my opinion but Absolutely ridiculous this rule. 8 point deduction for tires? I recently attended a Concours judging training  seminar for the Rolls-Royce and Bentley Owners’ Club. One would think they’re very fussy about certain items And they are but not to this degree. 

Rules like this take a lot of the fun out of the hobby and aid in making it a rich man’s game. With a point deduction so large for tires a lesser car condition wise (paint, underhood, etc. )  could  beat a car in better condition if the owner spent the big bucks and installed correct tires. 

[telriv]

I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH PAUL K.   IMHO SHOULD BE COMPLETELY TAKEN OUT OF THE RULE BOOK.

[KongaMan]

Seems to me that someone needs to come up with pasties for the sidewall.  A piece of black rubber with an embossed size (e.g. 7.10 x 15).  Spray it with some adhesive and stick over the size markings on the tire.  Doesn't seem to be philosophically different than the battery caps that some folks use do cover their DieHards..

[RivNut]

10 hours ago, KongaMan said:

Seems to me that someone needs to come up with pasties for the sidewall.  A piece of black rubber with an embossed size (e.g. 7.10 x 15).  Spray it with some adhesive and stick over the size markings on the tire.  Doesn't seem to be philosophically different than the battery caps that some folks use do cover their DieHards..

https://www.google.com/search?q=narrow+white+port+o+walls&client=tablet-android-samsung&biw=1024&bih=768&noj=1&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjh0LKi-rfbAhVKG6wKHXXwBIIQ_AUIDygC#imgdii=V16DpydtqJBaBM:&imgrc=s_eik9vjDeDGZM:

 

Just get the manufacturer to add the bias ply info to their 15" port-o-walls.  

Edited June 3, 2018 by RivNut (see edit history)

[Seafoam65]

                    This  project is in limbo for the time being, because Diamondback hasn't come out with the proper size bias ply appearing

radial for the Riviera, and they refuse to put the triple whitewall on a set of Coker bias ply appearing radial blackwalls. They claim they will

have them available sometime this fall. A second problem is that the Diamondback bias ply appearing radials say radial on the sidewall

in a couple of places near the tread, which defeats the whole purpose of a bias ply appearing radial. The Coker tires don't say radial on them anywhere,

but Coker doesn't offer a triple whitewall, or even a 1 inch whitewall, only blackwall or wide whites. I've  got to get this tire thing resolved by next summer

because I'm doing point judging at the BCA national meet next June. It is my hope that I can get Diamondback to "wipe" all the radial designations

off the side of their tire when they do the triple whitewall installation.

[KongaMan]

What is a "bias ply appearing radial" if not a radial?  And if it's a radial, how could it be the correct tire in any form?  The judging manual seems pretty clear that it is type rather than appearance which determines the deduction.  Putting a crown on your head doesn't make you the King of England.  

[Seafoam65]

               Ouch......Konga Man let me know if you will be judging my car next year....could save me a lot of trouble and expense.

You're like the Miss America judge who is checking for traces of silicone! If you are judging my car next year, I'll buy a set of wander all over the road

bias plies and I'll pick up an extra so you will have one to cut open and check for steel belts.

[KongaMan]

19 minutes ago, Seafoam65 said:

               Ouch......Konga Man let me know if you will be judging my car next year....could save me a lot of trouble and expense.

OTOH, you could probably save yourself a lot of trouble and expense by fixing the other things that are wrong with your car. Then the tires wouldn't matter. ;)

 

19 minutes ago, Seafoam65 said:

 If you are judging my car next year, I'll buy a set of wander all over the road bias plies...

If you want to live within the rules, that's the choice you make.  If the ends justify the means and you have no problem with using deception to skirt compliance, have at it.

 

Or let's try this: it's a mandatory 10 point deduction for having the wrong engine in the car.  Suppose you've got a 63 401 in a 64.  Are you good with grinding off the original serial number and stamping in one that matches the VIN?

[Seafoam65]

Nope, I don't  care about matching numbers, and I don't stock point judge my non matching numbers cars, but the stupid bias ply tire rule costs a lot of points

for something that flat doesn't matter in the least, the car handles horribly with them and I actually drive my cars, therefore if there

is a way around this dumb rule, I'm going to take it, with no apologies. (Please let me know if you  are judging next year!)   

Edited June 5, 2018 by Seafoam65 (see edit history)

[KongaMan]

24 minutes ago, Seafoam65 said:

Nope, I don't  care about matching numbers, and I don't stock point judge my non matching numbers cars, but the stupid bias ply tire rule costs a lot of points

for something that flat doesn't matter in the least, the car handles horribly with them and I actually drive my cars, therefore if there

is a way around this dumb rule, I'm going to take it, with no apologies

No argument about it being a dumb rule, but as long as it is a rule, it should be applied fairly and equally.  Anything else creates the worst of all worlds, as it draws into question the integrity of both the judges and the judged.  If deception becomes commonplace, then the reflexive response to hearing about a Gold award or the like is "What part did you cheat on?".  That is, the assumption becomes that you didn't earn it; you took it. The corollary to that is that the doubt spreads like a creeping stain, until all such awards are tainted by doubt and suspicion.

 

It's not quite clear why anyone would place that much importance in one of these awards, but for those who do, one might think that they would want to know they got it fair and square.  I guess I don't understand how someone would take pride in receiving a Gold award when they know that was acquired through fraud rather than merit.

[Seafoam65]

 Konga man, I don't usually respond when you start trolling, but I was curious how far you would take it, and now I see that this could go on for weeks

if I don't stop feeding the troll, so on this topic I will be bidding you adios now..........it really has been quite amusing!

[SwedeDownUnderR63]

Could someone post a link to the judging rules?

looking forward to see if there is a deduction for the lack of lead in the gas...

 

Sorry, I am one of the guys that loves to drive my car and don’t mind changing it to get it more secure and fun to drive while still keeping it mainly original.

I recently bought 4 new tires for ~AUD$500. Good quality modern radials instead of good old style looking white wall radials that would have been close to 4 times the price. I know this isn’t a cheap hobby but I refuse to get robbed, I could accept to pay twice the price but 4 times...

 

I hope we we all can enjoy our cars in our own ways but I can’t understand why original looking radials should be judged worse than the crappy bias ply, that is just sad.

[KongaMan]

40 minutes ago, SwedeDownUnderR63 said:

I hope we we all can enjoy our cars in our own ways but I can’t understand why original looking radials should be judged worse than the crappy bias ply, that is just sad.

 

Concur.  IMHO, radial tires are seat belts are better/brighter headlamps.  That is, I place a higher premium on my safety and comfort than I do on rigid adherence to arbitrary rules.  Which is why my cars are kitted out the way they are.  And which is also a big reason that I don't play in the sandbox that is judged cars.

 

Having said that, it is also my opinion those who do choose to play in that sandbox should be cognizant of the rules therein and should accept the consequences of any deviation rather than attempt to avoid deductions through deception, because any awards "earned" that way are tainted. Of greater concern, if deception becomes standard practice, then all awards become meaningless and the entire process is invalidated.

 

The way to have a bad law repealed is to enforce it.  Which -- sad to say -- means that every judged 65 Riviera should get hit with a mandatory 8 point deduction right off the bat*.  If reports are to be believed, none of them can possibly have the correct tires, so a fair application of the rules by a knowledgeable judge would seem to leave no choice.

 

* Note: the judging rules seem to say that the burden of proof is on the owner.  The owner can contest the deduction, but he must be able to prove that they're bias-ply tires. 

[JZRIV]

15 hours ago, KongaMan said:

The way to have a bad law repealed is to enforce it.  Which -- sad to say -- means that every judged 65 Riviera should get hit with a mandatory 8 point deduction right off the bat*.  If reports are to be believed, none of them can possibly have the correct tires, so a fair application of the rules by a knowledgeable judge would seem to leave no choice.

Based on the below rule from the BCA judging manual. If a 65 Riv owner purchased the closest tire size up or down from stock in a bias ply they would not receive any deduction for size or type.

 

Copied from the manual page 13:

A non-authentic type tire must

also receive a deduction for non-authentic tire size.

If neither the standard nor alternate tire size is

currently being reproduced, the next closest tire size

up or down may be substituted without a deduction.

A non-authentic tire size includes an obviously

incorrect (more than 1/2-inch variation from factory)

whitewall width. One point is deducted for each

non-authentically sized tire.

 

Edited June 6, 2018 by JZRIV (see edit history)