Point deduction for disc brakes?

[Scot Minesinger]

George,

The problem with bias ply tires is that today they are only made for the classic car hobby, not for high speed day in and day out use like they were back in the 1960's.  The quality for high speed use is poor.  I had bias ply tires on my 1965 Thunderbird, and after switching to radials in 1980 it was night and day.  I would never drive on bias ply tires except in a parking lot on and off the trailer.  Yes back in 1965 bias ply tires in good repair were the best known safe way of driving, but now the bias ply tires are not as good as they were in 1965.  The argument for drum brakes is different because they stop near as well as disk brakes, but they fade and are not as smooth - perfectly fine for non heavy traffic not in the rain use.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

I don't know about any significant construction differences between repro biases and those from the day. I can say that I must've logged a good 10,000 to 20,000 miles on bias tires - much of that mileage on highways  at speeds up to 80 mph (traffic & road conditions permitting of course) and know many others that have done the same. One friend often drives his '62 with biases to GNs halfway across the US and there are many other CLCers who do the same every year. 

Very simply - one should stick with the tires they are most comfortable with. Some of the dire concerns & warnings held in certain quarters regarding the safety of bias tires is just plain nonsense IMO.   

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

I don't know about any significant construction differences between repro biases and those from the day. I can say that I must've logged a good 10,000 to 20,000 miles on bias tires - much of that mileage on highways  at speeds up to 80 mph (traffic & road conditions permitting of course) and know many others that have done the same. One friend often drives his '62 with biases to GNs halfway across the US and there are many other CLCers who do the same every year. 

Very simply - one should stick with the tires they are most comfortable with. Some of the dire concerns & warnings held in certain quarters regarding the safety of bias tires is just plain nonsense IMO.

Eric I'll see your "just plain nonsense" and raise you one.

When I had the Coker bias ply's on The Ark the car was DANGEROUS to drive. It would literally change lanes by itself if I hit a slight bump on the highway (60mph and I'm a Scotti Graduate, I can go faster)... steering corrections were constant... cornering made the car feel like it was going to roll over... it wobbled during braking... they were incredibly noisy... I can't imagine those tires in the rain. And 'yes' I experimented with different inflations too. When I went to Coker via email with my concerns they offered me any tire in their catalogue as a replacement, they had nothing I wanted. They never at any time doubted the phenomena's I was experiencing. When I sent those emails to Summit Racing (who I bought the Cokers from) they immediately issued me 4 UPS return labels and fully credited my credit card.

Thank God for the Diamond Back (Toyo) radials. Radials are safer, period. Keep the bias ply's on your 100 point trailer queens, if you're actually going to 'drive' the car, put on radials. Unless you don't exceed 30mph on a dry sunny day, you're probably OK. You purport doing 80mph on bias ply's safely, mhm...

\m/
Laurie

["Cadillac Kid" Greg Surfas 15364]

I was really hung up on the pursuit of perfection until I learned that "There will always be a man with a bigger arm, a faster horse and a fatter wallet".  IMHO judging tends to be the venue of those that haven't read the above.
Greg Surfas

[gkhashem]

I will agree the radials handle better but this excessive fear is just over the top. I do not drive my cars as a daily driver and have driven a bias tire car 300 miles in one day on the highway with no issues.

But if you insist on driving everyday having radials is understandable. But I drive my older cars about 500-700 miles a year after the sorting out period. Which is after 12-18 months.

I think a bigger issue is non anti-lock brakes, how many of you always remember to pump the brakes in an emergency stops. I forget sometimes and in the  day I was excellent at it.

Now if you want to talk safety that to me is a bigger issue the habit of pumping the brakes is  25 years in the rear window.

Also as far as changing lanes yes the car will pull but I never had the car jump a lane. Maybe we have good roads here in NH and the only time the car pulls is on back roads with ruts in them from winter damage. So maybe your roads really stink.

Frankly I have driven my 1959 CDV 75 MPH and the car traveled straight and stopped fine. This claim about driving 30 MPH is silly. I also have a 1959 Oldsmobile and that has bias tires on it too. No problems with that car also. Another issue may be your suspension and bushings are all shot and the car has issues to begin with.

[Jason Edge]

I have been driving my 1964 Coupe de Ville on bias ply tires and drum brakes for 22 years, often with one finger as seen in this video: https://youtu.be/DxJs3xu8rNQ

I drive my 64 CDV with bias ply on everything from Interstates to downtown roads with ruts and pot holes, and have zero issues. Where people with bias ply might have a bit of a safety issues are with loose, worn out front ends. I replaced every bit of my suspension on my 64 CDV from ball joints, idler arm, tie rods, tie strut bushings, etc., and can take my index finger and drive my car anywhere with 1 finger!

Here is the deal .... worn out front ends exaggerate a bias ply tire's tendency to track grooves in the road, and often people install radials to compensate from loose, worn out front ends and suspension. Many of the complaints I have encountered over the year regarding bias ply handling were usually on cars with 50+ year old worn out suspension and front end components. So the tires wander and the car doesn't handle well.  Wonder why?  I know when I replaced all of my front end and suspension items right after buying my 64 CDV, it drove 1000% better.

In the end, what you do with your Cadillac is your business.  Just do whatever you want to do that makes you enjoy your Cadillac or LaSalle.  There will be others that will also share your enthusiasm for whatever you decide. Will you please everyone? No! So what! It's your car. Drive it. Enjoy it!

- Want to add disc brakes, ABS brakes, radial tires, air bags, roll bars, fine by me.

- Want to replace that chrome bumper with one of those new plastic honey comb bumpers and turn it into a modern "bumper car" so you feel safer... go for it! 

- Want to restore to original, as delivered new from the factory? You have my admiration.

- Want to turn your ride into a cool resto-mod with an LS series power plant? I want to ride in it on a long back road where we can really feel the power.

- Want to preserve your car exactly the way it is so we have a reference to what the cars were truly like from the factory? Your car will be our ultimate point of reference!   

- Want to bring it to a GN? Cool? Enter it for display only? Nice. Want to enter it for judging? Fantastic? It will be a learning experience. I have found judging very rewarding.

So do whatever makes you happy.  But before you jump to assumptions do your homework.  If drivability and safety is your goal, realize a good driving, braking and handling car requires more than just a set of new radial tires and some slick front disc brakes.

[Mike Josephic CLC #3877]

Jason makes some excellent points.

One of the major contributors to what's known
as "tramlining" or your car tending to follow
pavement grooves is an issue with front end
alignment.  Another is improper tire balance.

It goes without saying that on a 40-50 year old
front end components like shocks, steering
damper, stabilizer links & bushings and other
suspension parts should be considered normal
replacement items.  When these are at the end
of their useful life, handling suffers greatly.

For example, I replace OEM shocks after 25,000
miles or so -- I don't wait for them to start leaking.
I always upgrade to a better design, usually a gas
type.

These things are critical, regardless of what type of
tire you drive on.

Mike

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

This was one of the most pleasing things about The Ark's initial autopsy by my mechanic: all of the front end had been "done" very recently. The alignment was checked when the Cokers were mounted, it was perfect. Tires were correctly balanced, etc. It was later we discovered all the work that had been done on the motor and tranny. Someone spent a LOT of money of this car before I bought it.

\m/
Laurie

[cadillacmike68]

What was the name of that horse in Animal Farm - Boxer?? We're killing him again...

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

So maybe your roads really stink.

I live in "DON'T KILL THE JOB" Massachusetts, what's your next question? LOL!
The only decent asphalt in this state is at Logan.

\m/
Laurie

[gkhashem]

I have been driving my 1964 Coupe de Ville on bias ply tires and drum brakes for 22 years, often with one finger as seen in this video: https://youtu.be/DxJs3xu8rNQ

I drive my 64 CDV with bias ply on everything from Interstates to downtown roads with ruts and pot holes, and have zero issues. Where people with bias ply might have a bit of a safety issues are with loose, worn out front ends. I replaced every bit of my suspension on my 64 CDV from ball joints, idler arm, tie rods, tie strut bushings, etc., and can take my index finger and drive my car anywhere with 1 finger!

You get close to that with a 35000 mile car or less, except maybe for some dried out cracked rubber bushings. Which you should really change. But if you're driving a 80K+  plus mileage car that's 50+ years old. You get a poor driving car unless you fix it. Which reinforces my experience buying cars. Very few people do what Jason has done. They use band aids, which is fine but at least make an intelligent comment based on some common sense on the issue and not assume all cars with bias tires are dangerous death traps.

Get behind the wheel of a car that has been fixed or a low low mileage car and see the difference between worn out and old and like new and tight.

I have a 1984 Oldsmobile 88 which had 22,500 miles in it. The mechanic took it for a test drive and while not a Cadillac he was amazed at how tight the car was. Like a new car. My 1978 Coupe Deville with 26,300 miles drives the part too. While radial tire cars they handle great due to the low mileage not just the tires.

[Scot Minesinger]

I have replaced all he rubber bushings front and rear on my 1970 Cadillacs along with the ball joints, springs, shocks, steering components and even the body to frame bushings.  My 1970 Cadillacs are in excellent repair, we can drive to KY without any preparation, which I plan to do next June 2019. 

Yes you can drive on bias ply tires, but they are not near as safe as radials nor do they provide as enjoyable driving experience as radials.  Drum break I'm fine with.  Bias plys no. 

You read a lot of "I don't drive on the highway..not in heavy traffic..and etc that equates to basically not driving my classic in modern traffic.  You will not read that from me because I drive on radials and can manage modern traffic in a 1970 Cadillac with authority.  Just drove the 1970 Caddy DVC 40 miles in DC traffic last night after dark - amazingly wonderful!

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

For once I would like to see concrete data indicating where bias tires increase the probability of accident loss as opposed to radial tires. To date, not a shred of evidence has been offered supporting the claim, nor do any insurance carriers offer discounts nor assess premiums on policies based on tire construction on insured vehicles that I'm aware of.

Any statistically significant disparity in vehicle safety would absolutely be known to those in the business of assessing risk. If such a disparity does exist, those ignorant of it would not last very long. If anyone doubts this, compare the cost of liability-only insurance for a young driver with a poor driving record as opposed to that for a mature driver with a clean record.

I submit the single greatest factor to vehicle safety is how it is operated. Far more accidents occur due to human error than mechanical - probably by a factor in the thousands. All things equal, it's fair to say a given car is probably marginally safer with radials than biases. But by the same token, it's equally true that a modern car is marginally safer than an older one. By the same rationale, some would argue ANY car more than x years old is unsafe. The question of "safety" is thus relative; it is not black and white.

In any case, it is a fact that the accident loss rate for vintage cars is a very small percentage of that for modern cars- even after annual miles driven is factored in. This is because they are usually driven with respect with the vehicles' mechanical limitations and oftentimes even beyond, while many so-called "safer" cars are driven much more carelessly on average. The modicum of increased safety due to radials cannot begin override safety due to the way the car is operated! It would be akin to ordering three triple cheeseburgers and large order of fries at McDonalds, then worrying about whether to have a regular Coke or Diet Coke.

In the final analysis, this whole argument of tire-dependent safety is pure nonsense when viewed from the proper perspective and this is further underscored by a complete lack of data supporting it.

[Jon S]

Eric -

Totally agree with the above, but the Radials do make our cars ride and handle better.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Eric -

Totally agree with the above, but the Radials do make our cars ride and handle better.

John...I do agree that handling is improved; not so much with ride quality which I generally find to be harsher with radials- especially when suspension was originally tuned for biases.

[Scot Minesinger]

Eric,

Directions when you buy a framing hammer do not read "Don't hit yourself in the head".  Some things are obvious.  Read the studies back when radials came out and into common use back in the late 1960's and early 1970's.  That will provide you with all the evidence you need.  If Bias plys are so great they would be in use today.  They are original to cars manufactured back in the early 1970's and earlier.  The majority of factories stopped making them over three decades ago and they are only made today for show cars.

As for the "suspension tuned for bias plys", no way most any 1960's car will ride and drive safer and better with radials.

Of course the driver is the most important factor, soon it will not be when they have self driving cars - Tings change. 

Radials are way better than bias plys, especially from a safety perspective.

[Eric DeVirgilis CLC# 8621]

Scot...you haven't been paying attention to a thing I've been saying. And my response to Jon had nothing to do with whether a car will ride or drive "more safely". It had to do with ride quality. So that's twice in a row.

And yes - an increase in ride harshness is attributable to radial tires installed on vehicles with suspension systems originally designed for bias tires as well as the potential for wheel damage to occur. Here's SEMA's white paper on the subject if you're interested.

https://www.sema.org/files/attachments/WTC-2011-05-Bias-vs-Radial-Tire-Wheel-Fitment.pdf

[Cape Cod Fleetwood]

In any case, it is a fact that the accident loss rate for vintage cars is a very small percentage of that for modern cars- even after annual miles driven is factored in.

In other news, horse drawn carriages have a lower accident loss rate than all other vehicles currently on the road combined.

A vintage car by definition was made between 1919 and 1930. 6.6m cars were registered in 1919. 23m were registered in 1930. Paradoxically 269m vehicles were registered in 2016. Assuming all the vehicles registered in 1930 are still on the road (which would be insane), there are over 10x as many modern cars on the road as there are vintage. And I'll go out on a limb and assume whatever number of 1919-1930 cars that are still rolling are NOT rolling in the rain or snowstorms and are instead regulated to sunny days between 50-90 degrees with less than 70% relative humidity.

In closing I agree with Eric's comment above. Simply because there aren't enough of them on the road compared to modern cars to move the meter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage_car

https://www.statista.com/statistics/183505/number-of-vehicles-in-the-united-states-since-1990/

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/summary95/mv200.pdf

\m/
Laurie

[Dan LeBlanc]

Mike touched on an excellent point that everyone else seems to have glanced over and that's alignment.

Having a front end technician in your rolodex who understands steering geometry is priceless.  I had an alignment done on the 61 and spent 3 hours talking to the guy all about what he was doing.  The car had the radials on it at the time but because they were out of round, I put the bias ply tires back on it (was planning to use them for show only at that point).

What I learned was that no matter what tire I had on the car, he was going to align it the same way.  His explanation was that GM at the time had so much negative caster in the front end (from factory and in the factory service manual for field repairs) to give the light fingertip steering sensation, that directional stability was greatly compromised.  This led to tramlining.  Toe in was increased to help a bit but that contributed to shorter tire life.

Here's what he aligned to:

LH camber 0.07 degrees
RH camber -0.02 degrees

This variation from left to right was to compensate for crowning of the roads

LH caster 0.95 degrees
RH caster 1.08 degrees

Toe 5/64" both sides

I drove home on the radial tires that night and while the steering felt slightly heavier, the car had a much more connected to the road feel.  In corners, the car felt like it was on rails.  Handled every bit as well as a modern car.  That weekend, I put the bias ply tires back on.  From that point onward, the car handled as well as it did on the radial tires BEFORE the alignment.  Steering was straight (you could take your hands off the wheel at 70mph), and tramlining was almost non existent.

I still prefer radials because I can eek out a little better gas mileage and they're quieter in my opinion.  I also find they're less likely to lock up in a panic stop situation helping to retain control.  I never felt unsafe on bias ply tires however.  That included a 1500 mile round trip to the Grand National in Lake George over all kinds of different roads.

As far as the drum brakes are concerned, they were always fine for me.  I had to do some emergency braking in the 61 on the driving tour part of the Lake George Grand National to avoid hitting an animal (not the skunk that Mike Cascio hit with my car the night before judging).  All four wheels locked up and the car stayed in a straight line.  I was impressed.  We got a little brake fade in the mountains in NH on the way home, but I should've used a lower gear to assist during the descent, so, that was my fault, not the car's

[Scot Minesinger]

The only use for radials is to impress a judge at GN and earn a $10 plaque, or make Eric happy. 

Otherwise radial tires are in every way superior.  If you post a blurb about how great they are and back it up with statistics (which can justify anything crazy you want - just look at politics), it will not convince me.  I have driven both bias ply and radials - no comparison, radials are the way to go. 

The post was on drum brakes and they should be fine.  Disk brakes should suffer a point deduction, but it may not be noticed at a car show.

Next we can debate worthless tower hose clamps vs. infinitely superior stainless steel worm gear type.  The real issue is that hose sizes today are too big.  It used to be that hose sizes fit over the metal connection real tight and almost did not need a clamp.  Worm gear activated st st hose clamps deal with too large of a hose much better than crappy non-reuseable made for show only tower clamps.