VCCA Home Forums TECHNICAL - GENERAL Mechanical - Engine, Trans, etc Bias vs Radial tires

Not sure which board is most appropriate for a tire question. I'm still months (years?) away from being ready for tires, but I'm curious. What is the difference driving on bias vs radial tires? In other words, do radials corner better, track better, or?

Obviously radials are "better," but what does that really mean?

I am a fan of bias tires. Especially on an older model. I do have radials on my Corvair.
I bought a set of radials and ran them on a long trip on both my 1950 and 1957. They will cover-up loose steering gears and front suspension parts. They actually made my cars ride harder (at 30 pounds pressure),didn't look "natural" and made more thumping noises on bumps. After that test I bought new sets of bias for both vars.
Never had them on the '39 and they probably would have done more that car as the steering and front end are a little bit loose.

you won't be driving your 1941 over 60 MPH as a rule. The 6.00X16 are adquate for the brakes on a 1941 and its top heavy enough that you will not be taking corners "on two wheels".

Obviously, opinions vary widely, and that's a good thing.

That said, IMHO, biased tires tend to follow every nook and cranny in the road which, in my view, create a very dangerous, on-going situation. It is a constant battle to keep the car where you want it in the road. They want to drive your car for you. Also, they have very little traction on wet roads. I grew up on biased tires and, looking back, I don't know how I lived through it.

Radials have a strong tendency to go where they are pointed, with little or no tendency to "follow the road". Dry traction greatly is improved and wet traction is far superior to biased ply. I firmly believe, if a car is in good repair, adding radials is the single, most dramatic improvement for the driving and safe handling of an antique car that can be made. Adding radial tires is the very first thing I do when I aquire a vintage car. Of course, some early cars don't lend themselves to radials.(I've never owned one older than '34.)

Example: Restored '48 F**d convertible - on I 75 toward Knoxville, there was a "rutted" place (pavement not broken) in one lane about a half block long. At 65 mph, with biased WSW tires, it was all I could do to keep the car within one lane. I went back thru there the next year at 65, in the same car with radial tires. It went thru that bad pavement with one finger on the steering wheel and that F**d never bobbled! Why would I lie???

Bear in mind, I drive whatever I have a lot - several thousand miles a year. Most don't do this.

All that being said, "to each his own". I ain't trying to "convert" anyone. It's any man's car and any man's money.

Back in the early 60's I drove a 1937 Dodge to high school with 6.00X16 bias tires. Traction on rain or light snow was really bad. My car now, a 48 Fleetmaster, has fat radials on it, and, I'm not about to put stock bias ply tires on it.


Regards:
Oldengineer

I am about to put my third set of bias plys on my 60 Impala, it drives the way it was meant to drive. for some reason the rear two wear out pretty fast

Rain? Snow? Guys if your driving your 40 and 50+ year cars in the snow it seems to me like you bigger problems then deciding what tires to use.

I agree with Gene the cars just don't look right with radials. Sort like a putting a bikini on a 55 + year old woman.

If I got make it ride like a new car, and drive like a new car, then I might as well just take a new car. Thats why they call it "Vintage Motoring"

I know several women who are over 55 and they look absolutely stunning in a bikini!

At any rate, I also prefer bias tires on the older vehicles. That is what they came with when new and they should retain that same appearance today.

I agree they look more period correct, however my 51 handles better with the radials. At least while traveling down the road, parking it is a different story.

I also think road surface conditions can influence our opinions on bias vs radial. On a couple of six cyl. tours (possibly Virginia or West Virginia) the roads looked like they were paved the day before we got there. In New Hampshire some of the cracks in the roads resemble the grand canyon. Seems that "Stimulus money" didn't get too far from Washington!!!

John,

"for some reason the rear two wear out pretty fast"

You don't recon that the 348/350 under the hood wired to your heavy right foot gots anything to do with it??

I always put bias tires on the older vehicles. They look "more right," and they give the authentic driving feel to the car. I have driven a '53 several thousand miles in the past few years with bias tires. While many say that the bias tires "follow the road" I guess I just don't get too many of those roads. Driving on usually two lane roads from Ohio to Georgia to Canada to Illinois to New York and more, it really has never been a problem at all. Also many thousands of miles in a '33 (and we could go back 40 years to the fact that everything I drove had bias tires and it was no big deal - that's all there was). Just steer it and pay a modicum of attention to what you are doing. Sure, if there's a pronounced "rut" in the road, it might want to try and follow it a little, but that's what the steering wheel is for, after all - so that YOU get to decide where it will go. Not to mention, a radial almost never fits in the spare tire well correctly.

Na... mine is only a 340HP, come to think of it is a safe bet. I'm done with that now I blew up the main gear in my T-10 two years ago, the second time in 20 years I damaged the gear box. getting too expensive. The driveshaft and the gear box are the weak links on 58-64 set-up. I also tore up my fair share of hanger bearings in that thing over the years

But while we are talking tires, you guys do know that the old lead banana wieghts used for wheel balanceing are a thing of the past. I went to a tire shop in Florida to get the tires (Bias ply) mounted on my 53, all they had were these ugly plastic things. In NY the dive shops are buying them up from the tire shops, they need the lead for their weight belts

Hi Paul,

Try doing an ADVANCE SEARCH using the word RADIAL and all FORUMS. I have found I get the best search results using only one word in a search of our chat sites.. It will bring up past discussion on this topic. It seems like every 6 months we go through an expensive discussion of the topic. A friend has even cautioned me on rim failure from using a biased designed 70 year old rim with a radial tire on it. Other discussion has pointed out tube stem problems using radials (tube movement). I would make an extensive search of all our forums to see the experiences people have had. You may want to pickup a newer set of 15" rims with the bolt pattern of your 16" rims. They may accommodate the radials much better. The same friend also commented on whether the mechanical parts in our original suspensions would fail sooner because of the extra stress radials might be placing on their parts!!!


I have had my best suspension results from replacing my leaking shocks. That was after I had replaced all my old suspension parts (king pins, link pins, inner shafts, sway bar links, tie rod ends, etc.) and rebuilt my steering box and pitman arm. I also put a set of used biased tires that are in good condition on the car and made sure the front end was correctly aligned. I am now satisfied with how my car handles, but only, occasionally, drive it over 50 MPH.

Good luck, Mike

It is true that radials put more pressure on wheels - because of the much better traction of the radials. Also true that most wheels intended for radials are of stronger construction that those intended for bias ply.

I would never put a tube in a radial tire. Radials flex too much for tube use. If a rim leaks tubless, get one that doesn't leak.

When factories began to ship new cars with radials, most shipped some cars with 'em and some cars with bias ply. At first, I didn't like radials. I offered to buy a new Bonneville IF they would swap the radials for biased from another car. The dealer lost the sale because he wouldn't swap the tires and wheels.

I doubt one would experience rim failure from running radials on a rim that came with biased. Not many drive their prized antique nearly hard enough to damage a rim due to increased traction. I put radials on the original biased tire rims on a '66 Mustang GT (and drove it very hardseveral years) without any problem. I put 40,000 hard driven miles on a '67 Comet V/8 on the same basis with no rim problems. If redials would ruin a rim, I should have ruined some on one of these 2 cars.

This is all really very simply - - "to each his own" will likely solve most of this debate peacefully.

Yes, I would find it pretty hard to think that radial tires would "damage" an older rim...I would imagine bias tires would be harder on the rim...and front end parts...I think radials are safer...But, what's next...? Disc brakes, too...?

Your right about that wet weather comment...I avoid wet streets like the plague...

Thank you all for the interesting responses. And thanks for your suggestion Mike. I did see the older posts about the radials breaking the rims, etc., but I was interested in the driving experience with bias tires. The only bias tires I drive are on my tractors. :)

Has anyone on here ever experienced breaking a rim only because of the use of a radial tire? I would appreciate knowing about it if it is true.

Perhaps someone hit something that damaged a rim that just happened to have a radial tire on it(?).

As far as driving experiences, the best way I could put it is that the bias plys make you become more aware of the cars limitations, which to me is a good thing. I will say they wear out faster (not just the rear tires as pointed out in an earlier post) about 10,000 miles and there was not much tread left. They are not the greatist in the rain, but then again neither are my wipers, so slowing down is a good thing to do. As far as handleing, none of these cars are road coarse cars so it is good to slow down. As far as stopping fast they are probably are not as good as radials, but then again my brakes are good for what they are but not as good as a newer car. So it is a good idea not to be driving on somebody's bumper to begin with. As far as snow, the question is what are you doing out in snow with an antique car in the first place. Everything is realitive, if you drive the car the way it was meant to be driven when it was new your odds of encountering a problem are a lot less

The '67 Barracuda fastback I drove in high school had 70 series Tiger Paw bias ply tires and I drove the holy heck out of that car and rat raced a particular Mustang coupe on a regular basis through some very curvey streets. I had drove that car on the highway at over 110 mph and never seemed to have any handling problems. Stopping on snowy roads could have been better. I guess you just get used to what you've got. When 50 series tires came out they were a big improvement in traction.

The only time I had a rim split with radial tires was on a '69 Caprice Wagon. Seems that someone put a regular passenger car wheel on the wagon instead of the wider wagon wheel. The split happened and lost air like a blowout. Once we put the wider wheel (with same tire) on never had another problem. Have used radials on bias ply era vehicles numerous times. Don't give it another thought unless the wheel chucks wheel covers.

Steve6
You are correct about parking these ol' cars with radials. The larger "contact patch" and better traction make 'em harder to steer when sitting still. Just moving the car a bit with the clutch helps a bunch.

A wider tire foot print actually decreases traction as far as starting or stopping is snow and ice is concerned. There are fewer pounds per square inch of the foot print which is equal to less weight on the tire. Ask anyone in this part of the country how helpless a car is with extra wide tires, radial or bias.

Gene, you are right about snow and ice, as usual. But then, I ain't gonna get the '41 out in those conditions. If I was, it would be a perfect time since we are snowed in at present (and it's gonna be 11F again for the 3rd night in a row)!

I'm sure tired of winter!

I can't even think of the last time I used my wipers, turned on the heater, or drove one of them in the rain, even a sun shower
I know driving in the snow did not influence my decision on what tires to use or not use

I wonder how receptive the collector car insurance companies would be in a claim due to damage while driving in a snowstorm?
Might as well have a bottle of booze on the front seat as well

I drove the 1939 in snow one time. It was returning to Colorado Springs from Cripple Creek in 1976. We used the old Gold Camp road and ran into rain and as the elevation increased it turned into snow.
The next day was the tour to the top of Pikes Peak. Had to wait till they plowed the roads at the higher elevations so we could get to the top.
This was the 15th Anniversary meet in 1976.
All of my cars have been driven in rain storm on various tours we traveled to. Never had a bias tire problem in well over 100,000 miles I drove the old cars - or in the many hundreds of thousands miles I drove cars (from 1949 and up) til the advent of radials.
Don't get me wrong. Radials do have advantages but bias suit old cars perfectly well.

The '41 never leaves the garage in the rain or if I think it is gonna rain. But it has rained while I was out in it. Hard to avoid in this area. It ain't gonna see any snow!