[Chrysler300] Re: 300F Tire questions - again!

["hemiviper588" <hemiviper588@xxxxxxxxx>]

--Go to Previous message | Go to Next message | Back to MessagesMark as Unread | Print  ReplyReply AllMove...Inbox1961 Imperial Lebaro...60 300F61 Chrysler 300G66 Dart69 Daytona71 ChargerA Bodys OnlyCar stuffCar StuffChina Info FlightCraigs ListEbay Ad ExamplesEbay BoughtEbay soldFair ImagePasswordsSRT Contacts
 I recently purchased a set of Lester 950X14 bias ply tires for my 300F. I had the "road force variation" measured on each tire ($20.00 each) to make sure the tires remain round under a 1,200 LB load, which simulates actual road conditions. The tires tested very well showing only a 12-15 lb variation after being adjusted (by rotating the tire on the rim to optimize the best overall roundness of each tire and rim assembly) A tire showing over 25lb RFV is deemed to be scrap, and should be replaced. Remember that just because a tire  balances OK does NOT mean that it is round. Only by measuring the RFV (road force variation) will prove it out. By the  way, most tire shops can measure the RFV for you...it is not often advertised or well known. Of course, all of the above is being done AFTER measuring the wheels to
insure that they are round within spec as well.I am very happy with the smooth ride on my 300F, it drives like it should!  

Bill Adams



- In Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, lettercars@... wrote:
>
> Tony, Noel and All:
> Gil Cunningham here.  I sure wish I could report all was well with my  
> Universal AC tires, but, unfortunately such is not the case.  As Tony  
> mentioned, while up in PA at the meet I stopped by the Universal Tire place in  
> Hershey because their tires I had mounted and balanced here in Tallahassee did  
> not ride as smooth as I felt they should.  There were far more "vibration"  
> areas than with the 30 something year old B.F. Goodrich Silvertowns that I 
> had  used to attend four meets.  (Given to me by member Terry McTaggart!)   Of 
> course, those were bias ply tires---if that should matter.  I must state  
> that the Universal people were extremely willing and anxious to help.  No  
> complaints in that department at this time.  They ended up changing out 3  of 
> the 4 new tires (1000+ miles on them), mostly because the sidewalls did not  
> look right. (raised areas, both radially and circumferentially.  .I  
> personally watched all zero out on the balancer.  They even took the  precaution 
> to put the two which showed a little run-out on the  rear.  I worked along 
> with them.
> On the way back to our hotel, I did feel there was definite  improvement, 
> especially at highway speeds.  On the way back to  Florida, however, it 
> became increasingly evident that the vibration, if  anything, was worse in the 
> mid-speed ranges, and was most noticeable and  annoying when the road was 
> smoothest!  Definitely unacceptable, and far  worse than that SET of radial 
> tires I bought for the 300H at Discount Tire  many years ago for $95.00 (Plus 
> tax, of course!)  That is not a  typo---$95.00!!  They have served very well 
> while driving to many meets and  hardly look worn.
> Anyway, that is my story.  I called Universal after we arrived home  and 
> explained the situation, but did not ask for anything specific, and nothing  
> was offered.  I have not driven the car since, so don't know if some  
> miraculous "healing" has taken place while it has been resting.  Ha.   I guess I 
> will give it another test drive and then write Universal a  letter.  What to 
> ask for?  Coker replacements?  Afraid of them  yet.  My B.F.G.s are long gone 
> (worn out anyway).  Maybe another  balance?  Go back to bias?  Don't know.
> So no, I can't recommend Universal ACs  I am sorry to say.  They  do look 
> great.   Makes me wish the car was a trailer queen--- then I  wouldn't care.  
> 300ly, Gil
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 8/11/2009 8:04:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
> awrdoc@... writes:
> 
> There  are well over 100 sets of Coker 235/75R14 on our cars today. 
> Generally, they  require alot of lead to balance. They have not been any of the 
> other problems  that have been associated with other size Coler tires. 
> 
> The ride and  steering on mr "F" conv have been great at all 
> speeds. My  only problem recently was after having the tires rotated front to 
> back. Radial  pull occurred and had to swap the right to the left to have the 
> car track  straight again. 
> 
> The American Classic tire is not the same. Actually  it's tread is oh 
> so 70's Michelin and exremelt handsome.  
> 
> I personally had to get the 100 pre sell orders in order to get Coker  to 
> make this size. With that said, I would prefer the looks of the AC tire as  
> my next choice. 
> 
> Hope Gil Cunningham chimes on on this discussion since  he recently put a 
> set of AC on his "F" conv and drove from  FL to PA and back. He 
> reported some vibration at high speeds and had a couple  of tires swapped out 
> at an AC dealer in Hershey PA. 
> 
> Hope Gil will  report whether or not the AC are performing well and if he 
> would recommend  them. 
> 
> Tony
> 
> cpaviper@... wrote: 
> >     
> > After reading the Club emails over the past few years discussing  tires - 
>  I'm still trying to zero in on what to buy for our F Coupe.  
> > Re Coker, I'm still hearing issues - just about every Coker-related  
> message talks to problems with balancing, and that they've hopefullly  resolved 
> their structural integrity issues. Re American Classics, their  website 
> gives no info - just refers to Coker, Universal, Lucas as  distributors. 
> Comparing the Coker and American Classic P235/75R14s, the load  capacities, tread 
> widths, section widths and overall diameters are identical -  only Co ker 
> catalog's UTQG (Uniform Tire Quality Grade) ratings differ between  the 2 
> "brands " (American Classic's 540BB rating is apparently better than  Coker's 
> 400BB rating)  and the Coker tire price is a few bucks more.  Sounds like we're 
> still unclear whether American Classic and Co ker are  one and the same 
> tire - the tread patterns in the catalog photos appear  identical. 
> > I called Diamond Back this morning and spoke with one of  their sales 
> reps, Jim. He advised that there's no current maker of a quality  P235/75R14 
> tire today - could be a dig against Coker? He did say that they're  working on 
> a 75 series 14" radial that will approximate the tire size we're  all 
> looking for. They just received their first test version of it, are were  not at 
> all pleased - he estimates that any such tire won't be ready to market  
> until next summer [2010] or later. 
> > He did offer up the following  suggestion, and I'm wondering if any of 
> you have tried this. Diamond  Back sells a European Metric tire that's also 
> used on vans and light  trucks, and that he says works very well in automotive 
> applications. He says  handling and road noise are very good. The tire's 
> height is 27.3", vs Coker's  27.87"; tread width of 6.3" is the same as 
> Coker's; cross-section of 8.5" is  3/4" narrower than Coker's 9.25"; it's a 6-ply 
> tire rated at 2464# vs Coker's  1930#, is manufactured by Federal, and it 
> replaces 225/75R14 - is described on  Page 6 of their 2009 catalog. The tire 
> does come in a 2 1/2" wide  whitewalls. 
> > Is anyone out there running these tires? Or had any  experience with 
> them? 
> > And there's also the continuing debate re  installing new rims. Diamond 
> Back's website quotes the 12/6/07 Old Cars Weekly  article that we saw on our 
> Club website a few months back, and says the claim  is bogus, that there's 
> no alloy difference, and no markings on rims to  indicate use with bias or 
> radial tires. DB's argument in fact states that  radials absorb more impact 
> and are therefore less stressful on rims than are  bias ply tires. Any new 
> thoughts on this, as we're still running the  original 1960 rims on the F? 
> > Th anks for your input, and apologies  for again bringing up an old topic 
> ! 
> > Noel Hastalis 
> > Burr  Ridge, IL  
> > And there's also the continuing debate re installing  new rims. Diamond 
> Back's website quotes the 12/6/07 Old Cars Weekly article  that we saw on our 
> Club website a few months back, and says the claim is  bogus, that there's 
> no alloy difference, and no markings on rims to indicate  use with bias or 
> radial tires. DB's argument in fact states that radials  absorb more impact 
> and are therefore less stressful on rims than are bias ply  tires. Any new 
> thoughts on this, as we're still running the original 1960  rims on the F? 
> > Th anks for your input, and apologies for again  bringing up an old topic 
> ! 
> > Noel Hastalis 
> > Burr Ridge,  IL  
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]  
> >       
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> To send a message  to this group, send an email to:
> Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> For  list server instructions, go to  
> http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm
> 
> For archives go to  http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/Yahoo! Groups 
> Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




------------------------------------

To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm

For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:Chrysler300-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:Chrysler300-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/