Bias Ply tires

[our51super]

When we purchased our first 'oldie', a 1957 Cadillac Coupe deVille, it had bias ply tires on it. They were really old bias ply tires and the car wandered on the road something fierce. I had to anticipate turns as well as crowns in the road and so on. I'm wondering what are new bias ply tires like? Would they make a car wander as much as that Cadillac did or was that just due to the fact that those tires were very, very old? I'm happy with what's on our car now (radial wide white walls) so I'm just asking this to educate myself.<P>Thank you in advance.

[Bill Stoneberg]

Crin,<BR>I drive my 47 all the time with about 2 year old Bias ply tires.<BR>No problems even at 60 - 70 mph. It is a bit more suseptible to getting in a groove then radials but not extremely so.<BR>I haven' tried mine with radials and probably wont. On the 50 the tires will be Bias too.

[Ron Green]

I also had a old set of bias on a mid 50's car and it was down right dangerous to drive. We used joke about the car being a Chris Craft boat. A few years back I order a new set of bias from Universal Tire in Hershey and man what a difference. The car goes where you point it and very little problems with the car trying to follow the road groves like Bill said. Maybe the new bias are made with a different material or just stronger from not being used?I found that if you keep the air at the maximum pressure they tend to work better.

[KAD36]

Hi Crin<P>I'll add my 2 cents, hopefully without rustling up the monster radial/bias thread to infinity...<P>I ran with 8 year old bias tires and an original suspension on my 55 for quite some time and got used to anticipating corners and curves based on road crown and grooved highways. No dry rot on the tires mind you, good tread, but I suspect the sidewalls were probably getting a little weak. Kinda funny turning the wheel left to make the car go right sometimes. Forced you to drive proactively, pay attention to the "lay of the road" and acquire a driving skill, and you could get the car to handle smooth. <P>You couldn't gently change lanes on a concrete highway, you had to dive bomb across the lane like an F4U Corsair so as not to pick up the center line goove. Rookies could never drive my Buick and keep it pointed straight.<P>Last fall I rebushed the whole front end, installed new king pins, tie rod ends,upper/lower and inner/outer shafts and pins, center link, idler arms, re-sprung the suspension so the car height was within factory tolerances, got a good alignment on it, put in new wheel bearings and properly adjusted them, and for cost purposes, put on a set of Coker L78-15 bias plys with 2 1/2 inch white walls.<P>What a difference. Car tracks straight, handles much better, very predictable. Still slight sensitivity to road crown and grooves but the difference is like night and day. No more shake and wobble switching lanes either. I have no trouble driving at 65 with it or heading down the wavy farm roads to my house.<P>No - its not as good as radials would be, I'm sure, but for the purposes I use my car for, I'm very satisfied with the performance.<P>In my situation, a tight front suspension, properly adjusted steering gear, an alignment to factory specifications and tires with adequate sidewall integrity resulted in a well handling car that is a pleasure to drive.<P>Hope this helps

[YellowLark]

There was a lengthy thread on this board about two years ago on this topic.<P>I recall that some owners seem to feel that unless you had a "correct" trailer queen or drove very little, that bias ply tires just weren't worth the risks.

[Dave@Moon]

As I recall, my last post on the thread from 2 years ago went roughly: "Why take any risk on your and your family's saftey for the sake of a couple of judging points?" I think somewhere in there on the matter of judging I said: "Tires are a safety-related wear item, they deserve to be treated differently." <P>Radials are better. Bias plys are antiquated. Under the best of circumstances the most you can do is minimize their inadequacies.<P>No running car is 100% authentic. The gas is different. The oil is different. The brake linings and clutch facings are different. Most of the gaskets and rubber components are of a different composition. Few, if any interior components are dyed using the exact same pigments. Many interior components cannot legally be produced using original materials. Any non-NOS mechanical component is likely made of differing materials and frequently of differing structure (but not appearance). <P>And forget trying to match the chemical or physical structure of the paint coating to <I>any</I> surface.<P>Personally I'm a stickler for authenticity to the best extent possible. I'm currently half-way through replacing the tubes in my Buick's radio, and I may have the last TR6 in Ohio without a Petronix kit in it. But when tire time comes for my Buick, it's wide-white radials for me. I'll live with the Bronze.

[Guest Shaffer]

My grandfathers 55 Buick, has bais-ply tires (also are wide white walls). I usually drive the car once a month and needless to say, it is very different. We usually just drive the car on the highway, so cornering is usually not a concern. The car is very smooth, as speeds of 75-80 are no problem (I drive the car at those speeds sometimes on the interstate (faster than what the car should be driven, but is necessary to keep with the flow of traffic on the highways around here) and it is very smooth and well controlled- even with the bais-ply tires- also keep in mind that they are new tires and not dry-rotted). Remember, even with radials, most 50s cars will handle differently than a 20 year old car, or even 30 years old for that matter. I think the WWW's make a 50s car look so much better. There is a more expensive alternative: They make WWW radials, but can be expensive. The main difference you will notice between has already been mentioned: On "crowns" you can feel a pulling effect and cornering will be a little more mushy. We never drive the car in the rain, so as far as wet weather control, I cannot comment.<p>[ 03-13-2002: Message edited by: Shaffer ]

[Dave@Moon]

There was a another thing said in the last discussion I was in on this subject, I think that one may have been on the AACA side. The only advantage of reporduction bias plys is the precise physical similarity the original equipment tires (lettering, tread pattern, etc.). They are made of materials that differ substantially from the originals in composition (usually for the better) and are rarely the product of the manufacturer named on the sidewall. <P>If it were legal to produce a radial construction tire from the reproduction/original molds used by Coker and others, so that perfectly servicable radials were available that exactly mimicked the external appearance of the old bias plys (i,e, B.F. Goodrich Silvertowns, etc.), who'd notice or care?

[Guest tin knocker]

I have enjoyed all the comments on tires and have been thinking of this for some time. I have been looking at radials for my 37 Special and am not satisfied with anything I've seen. To find anything in my size, 650-16, all that seems to be available are light truck tires that have agressive all weather tread designs. In addition they are reccomended for rims a minimum of 6" in width. I don't like the looks and wonder if they could be safely mounted on my rims which are 5" wide. I thought that surely someone would make a radial to resemble the older tires but so far my search has been fruitless. If anyone knows of a radial that fills the bill please post thier name, I'm sure many others would be interested too.

[NTX5467]

I feel that there is one key item that seems to be overlooked in these conversations--the condition of the rubber bushings in the front end. The car can be low mileage and such but the rubber ages like everything else--usually more time sensitive than mileage sensitive in this case. Remember that they have been supporting the car's weight for how many years??? They will take a "set" and such.<P>By nature, they are there for isolation purposes so there will always be some flex in them--period--unlike solid heim joints in race cars. When they flex, the direction of the wheel will be changed slightly. The toe-in adjustment is designed to accomodate that flex so that the tires run straight when the car is rolling down the road.<P>When those earlier cars were new, we didn't know any better but also were more keyed into the situations with grooved pavement and such. Plus, the tires were more substantial back then too.<P>Without getting into the "originality" issue, let's focus on the "performance" issue or the tires and the vehicle mix. My suggestion would be to make sure the bushings in the front end AND rear end suspensions are reasonably fresh before I condemned the tires for the handling issues. In many cases, Buicks had limp shock absorbers from the factory so a good set of quality HD shocks would make a significant difference in how the car behaved back then and now also--a bouncing tire can't control the vehicle like it would if it was in better contact with the ground all of the time. <P>Plus make sure the tire pressure is toward the higher end of the scale--personally, I used to use 30frt/28rr on my cars to balance the weight bias toward the front of the vehicle. This should accomodate the "high speeed +4lbs" orientation plus sharpen the steering response with more air in the front. That one little deal can make any car handle better. With the newer P-metric 35lbs inflation tires, it might need to be 32frt/30rr. Not to mention making the tires last longer and use more of the tread width to control the car.<P>Don't forget to check the adjustments of the steering gear box--on the input side and also the more common lash adjustment. Then there are the various couplings (rag joints) in the steering column/gearbox interfaces. I highly suspect that if you keep the gear gox and steering column issues under control, plus the steering linkage in the suspension, it can maximize your driving pleasure and comfort.<P>Regardless of which type of tires are on the vehicle, these issues need to be investigated and repaired as necessary. It could well be that radials will mask some of these issues due to their lower rolling resistance and such. That a radial has a stiffer tread than a bias ply means that it rolls "over" an object instead of the tread "wrapping around" an object, but that can be compensated for somewhat by the higher inflation pressures I mentioned, especially on the bias ply tires.<P>Just some thoughts on the "performance" issues of the tire/vehicle interface. <P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467

[Guest sintid58]

Unlike most of the experts who say bias plys are as good or better than radials I have used both on two different cars. I would never even consider bias tires on a car that I am going to drive any distance at all. On my 58 when I do get ready to show it at Buick meets I will get another set of wheels put a set of bias tires on them and put them on at the show. The way bias ply tires ride handle and their lack of resistance to flats makes them unsafe and unreliable at any speed and I wouldn't put my families safety at risk by using them.

[rocketraider]

One important thing to consider- the handling and roadholding characteristics of radial tires are very different than bias ply or even bias-belted. Simply put, they grip the road harder and stress wheels more than non-radials. I'm wary of putting radial tires on a wheel not designed for them. There are cases of wheel failure with catastrophic results. I believe most wheels made from mid 60s on are designed for use with radial tires, GM used to stamp an R in the rim near the valve stem hole.<P>That said, I have radials on everything, but the oldest is a 1964 Oldsmobile. And two things I said would never happen, happened when I put the radials on it. One, that it would never have radial tires. Two, it would never have japanese tires. And the day they went on (had to buy 'em because a hard-headed state inspection mechanic who also worked on tire sales commission wouldn't pass my perfectly serviceable bias-plys because one wear bar was showing on one tire) the only tire to be found in this city that would fit (225-75R<B>14</B>) were Yokohamas. I bought 'em to get the car out of there legally, and went right straight to DMV and put antique plates on the car to get out of the annual state inspection bs.<p>[ 03-14-2002: Message edited by: rocketraider ]

[old-tank]

Some observations on tires: I agree with Ken and Bill that bias ply tires handle well if the tires and suspension are in good shape. I have used radials on a 55 and although the stability was slightly better the tires P225-75R15 were too wide and rubbed on the frame and inner fenders; also the diameter was smaller than the bias ply 7.60-15 and the speedometer/odometer was not accurate. They were also heavier, increasing the unsprung weight and making the ride rougher. To me the radials were noisier. 55's have no rubber bushings in the suspension except for the sway bar and panard bar. Not all bias ply are created equal but I have recieved good service from Coker's BFG tires...some of which are 15 years old and still look good.<BR>After 5 years steel belted radials WILL start belt separation no matter how few or many miles: this is OK for a daily driver that is driven 20,000 miles a year but most of our collector cars will be driven 5,000 miles or less a year. How safe is a new looking set of 6 year old radials with 15,000 miles and separating belts? Even the vendors of WWW radials do not specifically recommend these tires for use on old cars and are sold as is: you are on your own if they rub, come of the rim or even if they cannot be balanced.<BR>I limit the cruising speed of my 55's to 70 mph, keep the following distance at 4 car lenghts and take corners slower than with my modern cars and trucks..in other words drive <BR>to the capabilities of the car. Enjoy your Buick no matter what kind of tires!<BR>Willie

[Dave@Moon]

Old-Tank,<P>That's the first time I've ever heard radials described as giving a <I>rougher</I> ride. My experience, and the experience I hear frequently, is that they are inherently more compliant and aid in the cushioning if the ride. <P>I find it hard to believe that the difference in unsprung weight was noticable in a car with 4 cast iron brake drums, a torque tube and a Panhard bar. Are there any special modifications to your car that made this more apparant?

[NEW1966]

I have a set of "Red Wall" Coker Tires on my<BR>66 Buick (bias ply). They look great. They are dangerous as hell. 20K actual miles on the car when I purchased them new. I have to fight the wheel the whole time I am driving.<BR>One lane to the other. NEVER AGAIN. I hope this helps someone else. Greg....NEW1966

[The Old Guy]

I have worn out three sets of bias tires on my 40 Buick and I have driven my 37 and 57 many miles on radials, and in all fairness,I like driving the radial tired cars better. Bias tires also do not have the quality that the radials have. I sent two of the bias tires back ,as they were out of round. I have never had that problem with a radial.

[Guest sintid58]

I am very surprised also about the harseher ride with radials. My 1970 GSX ride and handling improved unbeleivably when I put on radials after owner and driving the car <BR>for 20 years with bias ply tires. On my 1958 that came with very good bias plys tires the ride and handling also improved greatly.

[Guest tin knocker]

The Old Guy--Did you use your original rims with radials on your 37, and what size and make tire did you use? I imagine that tubes are required.

[The Old Guy]

I probably should not have mentioned the 37 on this BB ,as it not original ,and is riding on the 15X7 road wheels from a GS I also have a 25,000 mile original 63 225 that rides MUCH better on radials. I drive LOTS of miles in my Buicks and in the interest of both safety and comfort ,I will choose radials anytime

[Guest]

two comments on "originality":<BR>Radials have been around since the mid-50's, but were not used as American OEM tires until later. So they are period correct in that sense.<P>Bias and radial tires do look different - it has to do with their sidewall construction.<P>On performance - many of the comments on this post point out that worn suspensions cause wander as much or more than tires. On equal suspensions, radials grip better by keeping the contact patch on the ground better. This may increase steering effort on manual steering cars at low speed

[NTX5467]

In the earlier version radials (from the middle 1960s), there were definite issues with ride/impact harshness in the 40mph range. This was more prevalent with unit body construction cars than with body on frame cars. But, above and below that speed range, radials were noticeably smoother in all aspects than bias ply or belted bias ply tires. With those earlier radials, when you leaned on an unmounted tire, only the side walls would give with the tread remaining reasonably stiff. I had a set of Pirelli P77s that, when a nail was removed, would regain their original round shape.<P>When the current radials (with the max inflation pressure of 35psi for fuel economy considerations--instead of the previous 32psi) the ride harshness at higher inflation pressures was addressed. Other than about 5 lbs being taken out of the tires' weight with that redesign, the newer versions consume even less power as they roll. Plus, if you lean on an unmounted radial of this "new breed", it'll collapse just as an older bias ply will--even with the radial belt and all of that. So, the strength in the tire is in the air inside the tire instead of its internal architecture (as in the older versions).<P>In many cases, a quality bias ply tire would last only about 30,000 miles or less back then. Belted bias ply tires were a little better. Radials were best while offering enhanced performance. BUT, as I became aware of many years ago, the more a radial wears and its tread becomes thinner, the more you'll "feel the belt" in the way it rides. Conversely, a bias ply tire can wear past a bald tread if you get brave enough.<P>As for durability, I haven't heard of the "five year rule" regarding radial tread separations. I've got one car with BFG Advantage T/As that are now over 14 yrs old with no separation problems. These are the older fabric belt radials in the now antique P245/70R-14 (i.e., H70-14 size equivalent) and are 6 ply rated. Still lots of tread and no ozone cracks. I am going to convert the car to 15" wheels so that I can purchase new tires for it. When I bought those tires from Coker, they were NOS then.<P>A lot of the choice of radials or not radials depends on which "game" you're going to play with the car. Whether strictly "show" or strictly "driver" or a combination thereof. In any case, everyone has their own orientations on which tires work best for them.<P>As for correctly sizing from the old sizes, there's a good chart at <A HREF="http://www.tirerack.com" TARGET=_blank>www.tirerack.com</A> for just that. I believe there's also a chart in the Coker Tire website too. Key points are diameter (sometimes listed as "revs/mile" and can affect speedometer calibration), correct rim width range, and load capacity. All of the websites of the major tire companies have this information in them (plus this information is in the <A HREF="http://www.tirerack.com" TARGET=_blank>www.tirerack.com</A> site for all of the tires they sell--click on "specs" when you pull up the particular tire). Cosmetics can come into play too (with respect to how the tire fills the wheel well area). <P>Wallace Wade (of Wallace Wade Tire Co in Dallas) told us that older wheels were not up to the unique stresses of radial tires and could split. He claims to have seen that happen. Therefore, he advocates that only bias ply tires be put on the older vehicles for that reason. I recall seeing these situations on heavy duty truck wheels in the 1970s, but not with car wheels from the middle 1960s.<P>Personally, I feel that any tire purchase should balanace it's expected longevity, mileage per year, reliability, performance, and price. Not to mention particular brand preferences.<P>I advocate that everyone be an informed shopper.<P>Enjoy!<BR>NTX5467