Lol – did you think what a can a worms you opened with this topic? I’ve tossed in my 2 cents…well more since I posted a couple times here. To say the obvious, it drills down to what preferences one has to another. Some are old car purists wanting their ride to be exactly as it was and certainly all fine and to be appreciated. In my case, I had the urge to resto-mod mine without concern about originality, though from a distance, with mine, it still looks pretty stock aside from the tires/wheels. (Magnums weren’t out yet in ’63.) With today’s tech and availability of parts enhancing old cars, plus getting used to the handling/safety with new cars, I wanted to create this with mine. So added radials, front disks, dual brake reservoir (for logical reasons), sway bar, FFII steering, electronic ignition, a tad larger wheel size, ’65 housing/axles to drop the old tapered from the era, etc. and etc. What I got was pert near what I hoped for. Car is a blast to drive – truly like night & day from what it was. Things I shoulda done that I didn’t, at least yet, if I don’t drop over first? That’s another post and another lol. Hell, what I created is a car I put $40 grand into I’d be lucky to sell for $20k. But it’s what I wanted…for me…like a bunch a other guys on the forum building their dream machines.
The Forgotten World Of Bias Ply
- Thread starter MoparGuy68
- Start date
I can't disagree with anything in your post, you have just about described my 62 Dart 330 build.
MoparGuy68
Well-Known Member
My intent wasn’t for this to become a bias ply versus radial, which is a better all around tire for vintage muscle cars thread. I get that the radial ride feels better and that they don’t follow ruts in the road, based upon what others say as I have never driven a car with bias ply tires in my life that I’m aware of. Though I have ridden in my father’s 1971 Buick LeSabre, as a child, when it still had its original bias ply tires on it. I know I rode in other cars that had bias ply tires on them back in the mid-70s.
I linked to the article, to discuss whether or not anyone agrees with the author that bias ply tires are a better choice for a car that spends more time sitting in a garage than out on the road.
In addition agreeing or disagreeing that a steel belted radial blow out, on the road, has more potential for damaging the car, than a bias ply blow out (hard steel belt material flying around and striking the car).
And for both of these situations comparing 14 & 15 inch bias ply versus radial (which in this particular thread means comparing Kelsey Tire Goodyear Polyglas to cheap radial tires such as Cooper Cobra, BFG Radial T/A, Milestar Streetsteel).
I linked to the article, to discuss whether or not anyone agrees with the author that bias ply tires are a better choice for a car that spends more time sitting in a garage than out on the road.
In addition agreeing or disagreeing that a steel belted radial blow out, on the road, has more potential for damaging the car, than a bias ply blow out (hard steel belt material flying around and striking the car).
And for both of these situations comparing 14 & 15 inch bias ply versus radial (which in this particular thread means comparing Kelsey Tire Goodyear Polyglas to cheap radial tires such as Cooper Cobra, BFG Radial T/A, Milestar Streetsteel).
My bias ply red line 7.75 14 tires were on my GTX for 41 years. My Kelsey tire F60 15's have been on my Superbird since 2004 and driven as well as sitting. My BF Goodrich TA radials were on my Coronet R/T for 6 years before the first one blew sitting still. About a month later the second one blew. The other two of the matching set of 4 are still surviving now, and are about 10 years old.
Draw your own conclusions. I know mine. The two that blewou sitting still are only 2 of about 10 that have done the same thing. Also I have a 66 Satellite that has been sitting since 1990 with bias ply tires of unknown age and 3 of them hold air to this day, and the 4th will hold air for about a week when I pump it up. I hope this helps and answers your primary question.
Last edited:
MoparGuy68
Well-Known Member
How many miles per year on average do you put on your cars with the bias ply? As in the Superbird and the blue car (don’t remember if it is an R/T or Super Bee and I can’t look right now.). How many miles are on the Superbird‘s 2004 tires?
Your BFG Radial T/A experience makes me conclude that those tires are simply not made as well as they used to be. My 21 year old T/A are still intact. Rear tires are almost bald too. I had the front end of my car jacked up last spring continuously for three months with the 20-year-old nearly bald T/As supporting it in the rear. I was wondering if one or both of them were going to blow out during that time. But they did not.
The Superbird has about 4500 miles on the Polyglass Kelsey tires. I have a 67 GTX that is blue, but it has radials on it. My green GTX had the redline tires on it and up to about 5 years ago when the lower control arm bushings started faIling it got 5-6 hundred miles a year. It was parked since then until I did the necessary maintenance to make it road worthy again. It will again be in the rotation for miles each year, but they all sit a lot. The black 67 Hemi car has reproduction bias ply red lines on it, now about 8 years old. As it's basically just a show condition car, it only gets driven on the 5 mile loop that I use to exercise the cars about once every two weeks.
fc7_plumcrazy
Well-Known Member
I have purchased the first bias ply tires brandnew back in 1995. They are still used and work well 26 years later. They have been driven roughly 12.000 miles since. No cracking/dry rotting but the rears don't have much profile left.
I bought many cars wil old bias ply down to the original Polyglas GT from 1971 on a 1971 Chrarger RT.
I have NEVER had a bias ply tire giving up (blow up or even loose air till being a flat).
Currently have nine cars sitting on bias ply.
Carsten
I bought many cars wil old bias ply down to the original Polyglas GT from 1971 on a 1971 Chrarger RT.
I have NEVER had a bias ply tire giving up (blow up or even loose air till being a flat).
Currently have nine cars sitting on bias ply.
Carsten
YY1
Well-Known Member
Surprised I haven't heard the "real" issue with bias ply yet......
They have a disconcerting tendency to follow any lines in the pavement and can literally try to pull the wheel from your hands.
I've driven on brand new bias ply that did this, so it's not the age or wear.
I will agree that tire quality is not what it used to be. A few decades ago tires would last much longer whether on a vehicle or stored. Today, they seem to disintegrate (or "bust" the belts) in just a few years.
The handling characteristics (aside from the "hunting" described above) are generally-
Bias will grip the pavement and gradually reduce grip as resistance is applied.
Radial will grip and maintain an almost even grip until grip is released almost instantaneously as resistance is applied.
Translating to reality, a radial pushed hard into a corner will generally grip better but have a chance to break suddenly into an uncontrollable spin.
Bias will lose grip gradually and can be brought into and out of grip by reducing either speed or cornering angle.
I would NEVER drive a car with bias on the front and radial on the back (even though this is what is preached by "experts").
If you have any knowledge whatsoever of how to control a skid, radial on the front and bias on the back can be extremely satisfying to hard corner with. You can literally steer the rear end with the throttle.
They have a disconcerting tendency to follow any lines in the pavement and can literally try to pull the wheel from your hands.
I've driven on brand new bias ply that did this, so it's not the age or wear.
I will agree that tire quality is not what it used to be. A few decades ago tires would last much longer whether on a vehicle or stored. Today, they seem to disintegrate (or "bust" the belts) in just a few years.
The handling characteristics (aside from the "hunting" described above) are generally-
Bias will grip the pavement and gradually reduce grip as resistance is applied.
Radial will grip and maintain an almost even grip until grip is released almost instantaneously as resistance is applied.
Translating to reality, a radial pushed hard into a corner will generally grip better but have a chance to break suddenly into an uncontrollable spin.
Bias will lose grip gradually and can be brought into and out of grip by reducing either speed or cornering angle.
I would NEVER drive a car with bias on the front and radial on the back (even though this is what is preached by "experts").
If you have any knowledge whatsoever of how to control a skid, radial on the front and bias on the back can be extremely satisfying to hard corner with. You can literally steer the rear end with the throttle.
My green GTX drove perfectly fine with the bias ply red line tires. No pulling or riding the groves. My black GTX with reproduction red line tires had all the things you mentioned. I say had, because a trip to the alignment shop took care of that. Same guy has been aligning my cars for 40 years and his father before that. The specifications I don't know and have never asked.
furious70
Well-Known Member
Since this is all personal observation I'll throw out there on over 30 vehicles I've owned and actually driven miles over 30yrs, I've never had a radial 'blow up', and only ever had one go flat at all while driving.
MoparGuy68
Well-Known Member
This seems to be touted as the strongest reason NOT to put bias ply tires on your car. If my father were still alive, I would ask him about his experience driving cars with bias ply tires. He was 42 in 1970, so he would have driven a lot of miles on bias ply pre-1975. Unfortunately when he was alive we never discussed bias ply tires. My grandfather was born in the late 19th century. He would’ve driven on some of the earliest tires ever available. It would’ve been interesting to hear what they both had to say about them..
I am also supplementing the feedback I get here with my own research elsewhere on the Internet. I have attached some photos with comments from a now 73 year old man regarding the “real” issue. He made the comments nine years ago when he was 64, so perhaps his memory was still in decent condition then.
In summary his advice is to make certain the car is aligned using the OLD specification from back in 1971 or whatever year your car is from. I would think in addition to that, it would probably be beneficial to have someone performing the alignment that knows and is familiar with how to align cars for bias ply tires. I’m guessing that excludes 95+% of alignment shops in 2021?
67charger383
Well-Known Member
I've got NOS radial t/a's from the '70s and they are a completely different tire than modern ones. Different tread pattern and construction. They're more like polyglas's than modern radials.
I think old Chuck has been saying what I have been trying to get across. My alignment guy uses the old specifications as noted for bias ply tires.
Take your service manual spec's for alignment if you have bias ply tires. I to drove these cars when they were new.
- Local time
- 11:05 AM
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2015
- Messages
- 2,370
- Reaction score
- 2,511
- Location
- Moreno Valley, So California
The original T/A radial was NOT steel belted. The later " Michelin" owned models were/are. The original T/A radial had a 2 ply Rayon body with a 2 layer folded Rayon belt that equated to 4 tread belt plies. 6 plies total through the tread .
I was in the tire business in 1970 and ALL belted tires suffered from belt separations including fiberglass. Though not as much as the steel belted. A big part of the problem was caused by the manufacturers themselves. For you guys that can remember back then the tire commercials for the "new" steel belted radials would tell you that you no longer had to avoid "road hazards" like rocks, nails etc.. Just run them over because the "steel " belts would protect you. So people did just that and would run over everything. That would cause internal belt breaks and carcass bruising. End result, lots of tires replaced under warranty and bad stories about the new tires.
Naturally all this talk about bias ply tires not throwing the tread is correct because it was the bias/Belted tires that had belt separations. The standard bias ply tires just wore out.
And the guy talking about the radial tires gripping and then suddenly losing traction is rehashing the story that the American Tire industries told because of their resistance to the "new " technology radials coming from Europe in the seventies. That characteristic was found on the early 1950's-60's Michelin "X- Stop" radials that were the very first steel belted radials sold in America. Technology improved rapidly after that. Not a "problem" for over 40 years.
There are different qualities of any product. For the most part you get what you pay for.
I was in the tire business in 1970 and ALL belted tires suffered from belt separations including fiberglass. Though not as much as the steel belted. A big part of the problem was caused by the manufacturers themselves. For you guys that can remember back then the tire commercials for the "new" steel belted radials would tell you that you no longer had to avoid "road hazards" like rocks, nails etc.. Just run them over because the "steel " belts would protect you. So people did just that and would run over everything. That would cause internal belt breaks and carcass bruising. End result, lots of tires replaced under warranty and bad stories about the new tires.
Naturally all this talk about bias ply tires not throwing the tread is correct because it was the bias/Belted tires that had belt separations. The standard bias ply tires just wore out.
And the guy talking about the radial tires gripping and then suddenly losing traction is rehashing the story that the American Tire industries told because of their resistance to the "new " technology radials coming from Europe in the seventies. That characteristic was found on the early 1950's-60's Michelin "X- Stop" radials that were the very first steel belted radials sold in America. Technology improved rapidly after that. Not a "problem" for over 40 years.
There are different qualities of any product. For the most part you get what you pay for.
- Local time
- 11:05 AM
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 35,539
- Reaction score
- 125,196
- Location
- Granite Bay CA
The only person that would disagree with what I post is someone with equally poor writing skills as the guy that I quoted.
People....Nobody should bash a member for a few mistakes but when a person rants and rambles without using any punctuation, it looks like gibberish.
Nate S
Well-Known Member
Interesting. Still use them here.
Can't say off hand how many years they were banned here, but remember my dad having me yank out all the studs on the snow tires so we could still run them.
Nate S
Well-Known Member
I remember a friend having a white ‘68 charger with studded snows and we did so many burnouts the studs sprayed out of them. Put little dings and scratches everywhere.
gtx6970
Well-Known Member
Ive used the repop bias ply tires on the last 3 cars Ive built for myself. And I would put 3 or 4 thousand miles a year on my cars
I loved them . especially the look.
My challenger I would go back and forth between bias ply and radials, simply because I had to 2 sets of wheels and it was a ten minute job. And my radials set the rear tires was larger to help fill the wheel well for a different look
Now, That said...... Did radials ride and handle better? Absolutely.
But I would have NO problems driving one across country on bias ply tires .
I loved them . especially the look.
My challenger I would go back and forth between bias ply and radials, simply because I had to 2 sets of wheels and it was a ten minute job. And my radials set the rear tires was larger to help fill the wheel well for a different look
Now, That said...... Did radials ride and handle better? Absolutely.
But I would have NO problems driving one across country on bias ply tires .
Last edited:
There is no one kind fits all answer to the bias / radial discussion.
Apples & Oranges.
To me , someone who has used both kinds as daily drivers I will say the radial tire improves ride and last longer.
The bias tires have a stiffer side wall and if in good condition seem to want to roll under or fold less than radials without having to go to the rubber band 18 / 20 " donk. look some find cool.
The bias look correct if you have a nice original looking muscle car.
Each had their place,
Driving and general use give me radials , on a sweet original looking old car I like seeing bias.
Jmho.
Apples & Oranges.
To me , someone who has used both kinds as daily drivers I will say the radial tire improves ride and last longer.
The bias tires have a stiffer side wall and if in good condition seem to want to roll under or fold less than radials without having to go to the rubber band 18 / 20 " donk. look some find cool.
The bias look correct if you have a nice original looking muscle car.
Each had their place,
Driving and general use give me radials , on a sweet original looking old car I like seeing bias.
Jmho.
Similar threads
