60s Cad owners that insist on WIDE WWs

[Maynard Krebs]

The subject line is typical of the problem, IMO.

What I cannot fathom is WHY do owners of old(er) cars not check out the whitewall width FROM SHOWROOM BROCHURES of the model year in question??   It's not rocket science.

Why do so many make the error of assuming that what 'looks' right, is often a common error?

And, sure; radial tires make a car feel a lot different.   The common error is blaming radials for faulty steering or suspension components.   The old 'saw' about early-to-mid 60s cars not having suspensions 'tuned' for radials....is a pile of hooey.   If the car is properly maintained, without steering or suspension faults, then a 60s car that came with bias-plys (or, bias-belteds) WILL, in fact, be just fine with radials----and often better.   I do concede, however, that radials reduce the need for assistance from the power steering system, which makes the steering a bit too 'light' or 'touchy'.   It's because bias-plys have more rolling and steering resistance than radials do, thus the earlier cars were designed for a bit more power
steering 'assistance'.   However, driver-adjusting technique an habits overcome this slight 'problem'.   

Much of my personal experience with this was from owning a '66 Lincoln 4-dr. convert for 12 years, driving it a total of 98K miles.   It did not come with radials when new; yet it functioned perfectly with quality P23575R-15 Michelin radials.   Bias-plys "wander", necessitating CONSTANT steering corrections...which become rather tiresome.

And, finally, why do folks generally only think of Coker for 'old car tires' ?   There ARE other suppliers.   But, frankly, any old car that can be fitted with modern radials is infinitely better, IMO.   The modern radials is a greatly superior product AND at LESS cost, from both per mile AND are cheaper than so-called
'vintage' or 'replica' tires, which are generally over-priced.   There is far more to consider than just "looks".   For example, a modern radial, either a P215/70R-15 or a P215/75R-15, on a '64 hardtop sedan DeVille [originally a 8.00 x 15 or 8.20 x 15] is, in every way, a far superior tire than any modern-day 'replica'.   And, yes, both Uniroyal Tiger Paw AWP and the Cooper GLE is available with a nice 3/4" whitewall in size P215/70R-15.   I have had good experience with the UniRoyals [now owned by Michelin].   While whitewalls are getting scarcer, they are still available.   And, for those with really heavy 'boats', Cooper still offers their 'Trendsetter' in a whitewall...all the way up to P235/75R-15.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

There are those people that WANT the original Cross Ply Tyres.

They want originality, and don't care about road-handling.

These guys aren't going to be driving their cars at any speed that could render an old tyre to destruction, and probably only want them to drive on and off the trailer.

And then there are the people that have two sets of rims, one set with Cross Plies and the other set with Radials fitted.

Bruce.

[Maynard Krebs]

Even when driving gently, a radial will run smoother and 'track' straighter....without the need to constantly adjust the steering wheel----all of which contributes greatly to driver fatigue.   This remains true for cars that are leisurely-driven.

Yup; there are some guys who refuse halogen sealed beams, too.   I wonder if they want the original factory air in their original tires on their trailer queens.   Ugh: boring.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

Such is life.

The world is made up of many different people, and nobody can cater to everyone.

Bruce.

[Barry M Wheeler #2189]

I put a set of Cooper Trendsetters on my 1981 Seville and they work well. Whitewall width might be a littler narrower than original, but for under three hundred dollars, I have modern, safe tires with a reasonably correct look. I was somewhat amazed when "shopping" to find I had a choice, (besides the "collector" tires) of two.

Remember the old Cooper slogan? "Super-dooper, four ply Cooper?"

[Jon S]

I think my dad first purchased Radials for the 1958 in 1975 after getting tired out of replacing the U S Royal Safety 8 and 800's every 2 years or 16,000 miles.  I remember him commenting on how much better the Radials handled and he was sold on them.  Those tires still looked great 32 years later, but the car received a new set of Coker Wide White B F Goodrich Silvertowns in 2007 and they look, ride and drive beautifully!

I prefer the look/stance of the Bias Plys, but would never revert back.  JMHO

[Dan LeBlanc]

I had radials on the 61 when I bought it. For Hershey 2013, I put on a set of bias ply tires with the correct WW width and it completely changed the look of the car for the better. It sits right. I put the radials back on last fall, made one trip with them, and took them back off. Yes, the car handled a little better but I felt like I was sitting on the road. The car was way too low with them.

I also find the ride quality much better on the bias ply tires.

After driving 1500mi round trip to Lake George and back for the GN, I was convinced that bias ply tires are not as evil as everyone thinks they are. For my driving style, the bias are more than adequate.

[rwchatham CLC 21892]

Some people prefer the original look and some prefer radials. Some like original thread patterns and some do not mind a more modern footprint. Same with the whitewalls, why would it bother anyone that some people use a larger than factory ? That it does not match what is shown in the factory manual ? I am sure the Uniroyals do not look anything like the ones shown on a factory car but yet you use them because you wanted them.  There are numerous reasons why people pick one or the other but why should it matter to anyone else what someone chooses to use on there car. For me bias ply is the way to go !

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

The subject line is typical of the problem, IMO...

I do concede, however, that radials reduce the need for assistance from the power steering system, which makes the steering a bit too 'light' or 'touchy'.   It's because bias-plys have more rolling and steering resistance than radials do...

Much of my personal experience with this was from owning a '66 Lincoln 4-dr. convert for 12 years, driving it a total of 98K miles.   It did not come with radials when new; yet it functioned perfectly with quality P23575R-15 Michelin radials.   Bias-plys "wander", necessitating CONSTANT steering corrections...which become rather tiresome...

And, finally, why do folks generally only think of Coker for 'old car tires' ?

Why do you see this as a "problem?" Many people choose different tire constructions and styles according to individual applications, priorities and preferences.

The statement that radials reduce the need for assistance from the power steering system is incorrect. Much more effort is required with radials than bias tires because of the greater surface area contact between the tires and the road with radial tires because radials are wider.

Anyone who has ever driven a car that does not have power steering with radials as opposed to bias tires will know exactly what I mean.

Wider tires also have greater rolling resistance, all other things equal.

[Greg Powers]

We talk tires all the time. As you have stated whitewalls in general are becoming scarce in regular production radial tires. Michelin nonlonger builds any whitewalls, a real tragedy since the late model Cadillacs and Lincolns came with the narrow whitewall Symmetry tires and there is no replacement whitewall in regular production. The 235/70r15 that was original equipment on the 1993-1996 Fleetwood Broughams is no longer available in regular production whitewalls. So as far as the original tires on pre-radial Cadillacs, I do think that you should try to duplicate the whitewall size even in a radial. Personally I chose to run bias ply reproduction tires on all of my Cadillacs except for my 1963 Series 62 Convertible. I use this car as a driver and never plan to have it judged at any event. Really the choice is up to the owner with full knowledge that if they are planning to have their car judged by the  Cadillac and LaSalle Club it will receive a deduction. (In AACA judging it will receive an even larger deduction)  If there is any doubt as to what is correct, there is plenty of literature and often an authenticity manual to give you guidance. - Greg     

[Ken Perry]

Why are my modern tires leaving blue stains on the ground ? Why are my modern tires bleeding dark colors into my white walls ? What did they do to the rubber? The rubber is way different !!! I have been seeing this for a few years on lots of tires. Ken Perry

[64\/54Cadillacking]

The look of a bias ply on a 50's-60's Cadillac definitely adds to the styling and it does give the correct ride height due to the tall side wall.

Plus the bias-plys ride much softer and are smoother feeling compared to Radials even though Radials handle better. I remember some years back when I got 2 front flat tires on my 61 Lincoln, I purchased 2 new WW Radials for it and the ride got worse! You could feel every little bump and crack in the road. I hated it. So I saved up enough money and bought a pair of 3 Inch WW bias ply Denman Classics to match the rears when they were still around, and not only did the Lincoln sit much better, but it also rode much smoother and the same bumps weren't felt with the bias plys.

I understand bias-plys drawbacks, but if you're aren't driving your classic Caddy everyday, and don't go on the freeway much, bias-plys are the way to go to keep the original look and ride characteristics.

[Maynard Krebs]

Driving on bias-plys is like trying to play piano with gloves on, IMO.

When I had bias-plies on a '65 Imperial, the car was all over the place, necessitating constant corrections via the steering wheel . . and "nibbled" all the time.   It felt like carving a roast beef...with a butter knife.   I put radials on, and voila, the car tracked straight, steady, and much more smoothly.   Radials are far more precise, causing bias-plys to seem crude by comparison.   OK; it's opinion.   I hereby "drop it".

But, as far as whitewalls go, I think that wide whitewalls on a Sixties Cad that came with narrow whitewalls.....makes the 60s car look poor.   Such a move is in poor taste, as well as non-authentic.   Maybe it's cause I'm old enough to remember what they looked like when new!   I would much rather see blackwalls on a nice '60s Cadillac than to see the wide, 'fat' whitewalls----which proclaim various things, none of which seem desirable.

[rwchatham CLC 21892]

When I had bias-plies on a '65 Imperial, the car was all over the place, necessitating constant
But, as far as whitewalls go, I think that wide whitewalls on a Sixties Cad that came with narrow whitewalls.....makes the 60s car look poor.   Such a move is in poor taste, as well as non-authentic.   Maybe it's cause I'm old enough to remember what they looked like when new!   I would much rather see blackwalls on a nice '60s Cadillac than to see the wide, 'fat' whitewalls----which proclaim various things, none of which seem desirable.
[/quote]


Ok now I am curious, what are the various undesirable things wide whites proclaim ?

[INTMD8]

   Such a move is in poor taste, as well as non-authentic.   

Could the same not be said for installing radials in place of bias ply's?  Sorry, this thread is just full of contradictions.

I'm not a fan of WWW's on 60's cars myself but your first post says

"WHY do owners of old(er) cars not check out the whitewall width FROM SHOWROOM BROCHURES of the model year in question??   It's not rocket science."

Well, I'm fairly certain the showroom brochures pictured bias plys so that's what you should have if authenticity is so important to you.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Could the same not be said for installing radials in place of bias ply's?  Sorry, this thread is just full of contradictions.

I'm not a fan of WWW's on 60's cars myself but your first post says

"WHY do owners of old(er) cars not check out the whitewall width FROM SHOWROOM BROCHURES of the model year in question??   It's not rocket science."

Well, I'm fairly certain the showroom brochures pictured bias plys so that's what you should have if authenticity is so important to you.

I was thinking the same thing myself. 

[Dan LeBlanc]

Jim and Eric - you guys hit this nail right on the head. 

You can't have radials on a 60's Cadillac AND be authentic as radials did not appear on production Cadillacs mid-way through either the 1972 or 1973 model year.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Maybe someone should start a new thread, "60s Cad owners who insist on RADIALS". 

[Walter Youshock]

Yeah.  What's wrong with cadillac owners who want their car to look and drive, and handle authentically?  Or don't want to lose 5 points PER TIRE at Hershey?

You lnow, the roads were a lot newer 50 years ago, too.  I have zero problem with bias tires on good roads.  Lately, even my other cars want to drive themselves off the washboards we have for roads.

[Maynard Krebs]

OK, gentlemen; many of you have made good points & good sense.   I believe that I "muddied the waters" by speaking of two or three things at the same time.

In no particular order:  1.  Modern tires are always superior than vintage or replica tires....better in the sense of better performing
and cheaper initially and per mile.   I suppose that the problem is that no 'modern' tire manufacturer makes bias-ply tires anymore.
Yet, IF radials were the rule in the mid-1960s like they became by the mid-1970s, the manufacturers would have installed radials---not bias-plys.   Same with halogen sealed beams versus non-halogen sealed beams . . though some like the T-3s.   Does it mean that FM converters are a no-no?

2.   The few whitewall radials available today do have whitewall widths that are far closer to what was on new '65 or '66 Cads
(albeit double or triple stripes).   If guys WANT to put really wide whitewalls on whatever year Cad they have, they should not be ignorant...and know that it's 'incorrect'.   Such does send "the wrong message" to the general public, IMO, FWIW.

3.   At least Cad never used smaller-than-a-15" rim.   How would you like to own a '57 or '58 Imperial, or a '58 - '63 Lincoln that needed / need  9.50 x 14?   At least there is still some modern tires made that will properly fit any Post-War Cadillac.   BTW, I had Universal/Lester brand new 9.50 x 14 bias-plys on my '62 Lincoln, and they were awful.   I have driven on such tires, and therefore know from experience that they're clearly inferior.

4.   The point that 60s showroom brochures showed bias-ply tires on said Cads....causes me to ask now, "Would blackwall tires, in
any type construction, be considered 'incorrect'?"   Since whitewalls are totally going out of fashion, the day will soon come when 50s, 60s, or 70s Cadillac owners will have to choose between over-priced 'replica' tires OR purchase modern tires in a blackwall.   The issue of whether a tire has a whitewall is really a separate (though 'related') issue from bias-ply versus radial.

If I, personally, eventually had to choose between a grossly too-wide whitewall 'replica' or 'vintage' tire VERSUS a modern blackwall, and nothing else was available, I'll buy the blackwall every time.   And make mine a radial.   Some like black coffee; some like cream in it.   One thing's for sure:  new tires made for used cars today are significantly better than any 'replica' tire.

I'll never forget seeing a 1934 Packard at an old car show with European Michelin blackwall radials on it!   How's that for 'sacrilege' ?   Does that not "speak volumes"?   LOL   

I see no problem with upgrading to superior equipment, be they halogen sealed beams, radials, multi-weight or synthetic lubricants.   Oh, the same goes for dual-master cylinders, too.   This is another example whereby Cadillac [and Rambler!] was way ahead of the other car makes in the 1960s.   But, seriously, would anyone justly complain if an owner of, say, a '56 Cadillac equipped it with a dual master cylinder?

And, what about an owner of, say, the same '56 Cadillac, installing seat belts in the car?   See, there comes a point for which worthy upgrades must trump PURE authenticity.   This applies to tires, as well:  higher-performing safety levels rank higher than 'looks'.   The cars are made to be driven---not be 'a trailer queen'.