Jump to content

53 Roady

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 53 Roady

  1. No problem with the car fully jacked up. It might be a problem with a bumper jack but I,m not going to trust my bumper or my life to one of them. I know that 2.25 or even 2,15 might be closer to the width of the original 8.oo-15s but the 2.35s are taller and as close as we can get to the correct overall diameter. I had the spokes off my Olds on it with 2,25-70 series and it drove OK but looked modernized. Pat
  2. I really don't know what they are but I included them because they are on my Diamondback invoice. The tires are DBII on a Toyo base. The standard ww was 3. They did not charge extra to adjust to 2.75, a choice I made based on the guidance of Al and Tank. Pat
  3. They are 235/75/15/11/100 ordered to be as close to the 8.00-15 originals as possible. Pat
  4. I want to thank you all and especially Tim, Tank, and Al. The Toyos were ordered with 2 and 3/4 whitewalls. 2 and 1/2 inches are revealed when mounted. I think they look just right and they balanced well and drive well. Pat
  5. I am a notorious second guesser with a large dose of Scot, but with your help I finally decided. I ordered a set of 2 and 3/4 whitewall DB II tires due in 2 weeks. I'll get them on the car and post pics and you can decide how we did. Thanks again Pat
  6. Wow. That's counter intuitive. So the 3" tires you like mounted are about 2 and 3/4? Thanks for the help. Pat
  7. Al, I know what you think of the Portawalls but I'm leaning toward a set of the DBIIs. I have a nice set of the wire wheel hubcaps. Given this would you choose a 2 5/8th whitewall? Thanks, Pat
  8. What is the range of whitewall widths appropriate for the 53 Roady? Tim's 3and 1/2s above look right but vulnerable on a driver. Will 3s look right as well? Thanks Pat
  9. The Roady came with 4 225-75-15 tires from 1989, one of which has given up. The spare is an old Goodyear bias 8.00 15. I understand that the beautiful black convert above has 235-75-15s. The Buick Facts For Salesmen book says 8.00-15. Some references equate 225 -15s with 800-15s while others equate the 235s. This is probably because it matters whether you look at fatness or diameter. 800-15s are about 29.5 inches in diameter while the 235 radials are 29 but the 225s are 1.4 inches less at only 28.1.
  10. Thanks Matt. The Coker American Classics I was looking at from Summit were 8.20 equivalent which I think is 235R75-15. I saw a set on a 58 Chevy and the pie crust sidewall looked good. I asked other guys at the car show --some had both Diamondback and Coker. Some praised the DB whitewalls for staying whiter. One fella had to send Cokers back to get balance. It is complicated. Pat
  11. Are any of you happily running on Coker American Classics? Thanks Pat
  12. I am leaning toward a set of 8.20-15 Coker American Classics from Summit. Any comments are appreciated. Pat
  13. Well fellas I asked for advice didn't I? Thank you all for your thoughtful responses. Here's where I'm at. I drove the Roady up the interstate to a car show. I was doing 70 but the SUVs were swerving around me on both sides at 85. So I'm going for the radials as a survival strategy. I have run radials on my 57 Olds all over the country including high speed and wash board dirt roads for 30 years with no wheel problems. The Diamondbacks on the 53 above sure look nice. Are they modified from a completed tire? DB says a new "Auburn" model is due out. Is it scratch built or modified? It looks like Coker sells the Coker Classic which has rounded radial style shoulders and an American Classic with pie crust bias ply looking shoulders. Does going to the bias look negate the handling advantages of the radial? Thanks again Pat
  14. I am seeing some adds for bias look radials at very high prices versus more reasonable "nostalgia" radials. I'm thinking 8.00 -15 equivalent. Any suggestions and or endorsements of one of the 2 suppliers? The car is a driver with a nice set of the spoke hubcaps so I want it to look nice. Thanks Pat
  15. That's great that you got it fixed! And those issues inside the gearbox weren't going to go away. If you made it through this mess with the same mechanic, then he is a keeper! Most would have bailed out when the problems seemed that intractable. Congratulations Pat
  16. And avoid the full synthetics, right?
  17. I am sorry for the need to remove. One thing to check: After the trans is on the bench bolt it to the bell housing like you had it in the car. Then grab the snout where the throwout bearing slides and see how loose it is. Page 4-3 of my 52 book mentions a spring washer between the throwout sleeve and the outer race of the trans main drive gear bearing. I think somebody here used gaskets to shim this area where I used the Ford snout. Anyway if it wiggles a lot it can be your problem. Also is your pilot bearing in the crank present and healthy. The book shows a ball bearing but many cars use bronze bushings which get wallowed out and loose. Good luck Pat
  18. A little heat on the socket only to swell it. Then when it's about halfway cooled off the penetrating oil where you want it to separate. Then the 3# hammer. Good luck. Pat
  19. My first car was a 57 Buick...the one that got away. 30 years ago I see this 57 Olds for sale. Three back windows..looks like a Buick...but it's got an open driveshaft! I had it made until last year when my dear brother gave my wife a 53 Buick. Some days the irony is inescapable. Pat
  20. I put silver anti-seize compound (about $10 for a ten year supply} on most everything so that an older weaker me can get it apart. Pat
  21. I once saw a forum piece about a bolt on kit that added telescopic shocks on the front of a Buick without modifying the original set up. But where did I see that?.... Pat
  • Create New...