Probably nothing else aggrevates as much as the mentality that dictates that only OEM spec'd tire sizes are appropriate fitment on a concours contender.

As I sit here and peck at my keyboard , I'm looking at the July 1975 Road & Track road test summary which states, among other interesting data about a 914/4 2.0, that its stopping distance from 80 mph is 285 feet.
Todays' cars.....Cayman.................203 ft
V-6 Camry.............223 ft
VW Rabbit..............234 ft
Honda Fit ...............236 ft
Chevy Trailblazer....222 ft
Nissan Maxima........232 ft

Someone tell me why we are required, under penalty of point loss in some classes in PCA, to have what amounts to "rim protectors" on our cars when the fitment of 175, 185, or 195 spec rubber will not only enhance the appearance (subjective, of course) of our cars but the handling and braking capabilities as well. Todays' tire tread patterns, size selection and compound composition permit us not only better transient and lateral steering responses and handling, but improved braking distances as well. Why would we trade away even 10 feet of braking distance and the safety margains that go with that for OEM spec tires?
Don't tell me to bring a set of 155/15s just for fitment at a concours either, that's ludicrous. If the friggin' tire fits in the wheel wells w/o rubbing or "working" the fenders, they ought to be allowed w/o penalty.

You can trust that I'm not removing my 195s for any concours.

(Rant, over)

Paul

Man, this topic really ruins your Post Toasties!

I'm just about in agreement with you, just haven't 100% made up my mind about putting ancient technology on my car. I would note that thought the tread & sidewall construction of the "retro" tires is unchanged, the compounds have changed. I think that feature would reduce the stopping distances some, though I don't know how significantly.

Apparently, PCA wants to play by the big-time events standards for tires. I can see the point. I mean, you would expect something classic, say a 65 GTO, to have period correct tires for show purposes, not a radial tire. But, if the guy with the GTO wants to show up at a concours with contemporary sticky tires, he'd get killed in the judging for it (probably) - but that's HIS choice.

I'm still uncertain what tires I'll put on, but I'm leaning heavily towards safety & handling. If I go with contemporary tires, I'll do it knowing that I'm giving something up to a competitor with period correct tires. I'll just have to try to make up for it in other areas.
Pat

the optional 185/70-15 tires should be acceptable yes? would they be required to be mounted on year/model correct wheels on year correct cars? specific manufacturers?

k

If it was a legitimate option for your car I would think so, but the wheels have to be the right ones (yes to all your questions) & the tires have to be period correct as well. No Kuhmo or Falkens around in the 70s. You might also have to prove that the car came w/ that option, as I can prove LEs are supposed to have HR rated tires.

I thought only 911s came with 185/70's.

Not to pick nits here, but I put 175 Falkens on my 914 in 1974. Nice handling tires, but only good for 12 K miles on an autocrosser. Long gone!
Pat

Just thought abut this.

Is this topic part of the "challenge". If so, you know that my posts are not part of the total. LMK
Pat

[/i]

The dude showing up with a $7+ million Ferrari GTO probably is not going to drive his car very far to an Eye-tallyon Concoor Modenessa Elegancia Flavia. He prolly has a bunch of toadies and roadies to tote around spares for him that are no doubt worth more than our individual lil' 914s. Same goes for our big brother 904s that I'm sure have concours/show boots and several sets of tires for the "Historics". Road trip in a Figoni & Falaschi Talbot, I don't think so! A 914s' contemporaries such as a Ferrari Daytona, a 911, or late American "muscle" were not quite as hamstrung by being so "under-tired" as a 914. The mid-engine dynamics are so very much improved with a bigger contact patch, lower sidewall aspect, better compound and an improved tread pattern. If a person were to embrace the handling characteristics of, say my OE spec 155s, why not go all out and lower the rear tire pressures about 10 psi and [i]really[i] get some "period" handling?

Kimshi !

Well who was around & who was not in 1970-76?

I know "Avanti" was around & believe they are no longer. I know Khumo was not around. Pirelli, Goodyear, Michelin, Dunlop, BF Goodrich, Bridgestone, Firestone, Verdestine... all around in the 70s. Only Verdestine makes a 165/80 that's HR rated today. Anyone else have tire info?

There's always Coker if you are willing to open the old Visa card.

http://store.coker.com/search.php?mode=sea...bstring=165HR15

You can add Continental and UniRoyal to your list of early '70s tire manufacturers. My '70/4s original Michelin 155 ZXs were replaced with UniRoyal 175/70s based on a tire comparison test in either R&T or C&D done in the mid-70s. Just that upgrade improved things measurably. About 5 years ago, I put BF Goodrich 195/60s on. Once again, the upgrade was noticable. Now I realize that some of what I'm noticing is the result of new tires, with improved tread patterns and stickier compounds. But the lower profile and wider contact patch also improve steering response and road adhesion.

I'd bet that if I re-equipped my 914 with 155s, the confidence that I have in the cars' handling and braking performance would be compromised.

Paul

And, open it BIG! Nope, made my decision - I won't got to retro. I absolutley will NOT put my life at risk(as much as I love concours) for period "correct" tires. And, I just might like to do a little autocrossing.

So, all competitors shold be aware - you have a leg up. I'll be riding on 195 Yokos for next year's Parade. I'll give up some points & make some up in othe areas. Decision made!
Pat

How about two sets of wheels? One for show and one for go??

Been there, and it worked pretty well. Have a set of beautiful chromes that I kept some Yokos on for regular driving & autocrosses. For serious showing, my painted steels have 28 year old 175 CN36's, with less than 5 thousand miles - they are now unsafe, but pretty! And, the unoriginal size will get me just as big a deduct as if I put on the Yokos.

It was OK to have a separate set of concours tires then, because the expense wasn't significant and the concours tires were actually good handling/braking tires.

But I've wasted them because they are now too old to use safely.

I checked Coker out & was flabbergasted! Michelins XAS's(which I have always hated) will cost me $1200, not including shipping & installation. Plus, these are tube-type tires. So, I'm in at least $1500, for tires I hate, for handling/braking that sucks, and will rot away from non-use probably fairly quickly.

Nope, not going that route again. I'll just take a gig for safety & utility.

Pat

Yoouu'lll beeee soorrrry.... <snicker>

Current PCA rules/regs seem to be "forcing" me to buy Verdesteins- they're the only 165 that's H rated, period. I'm still committed, since they're new & on the car, to the OEM gambit- Dunlop SPs': H rated, modernized design of the old series.


"So what if they're 195s'... they don't make 165s' any more!"

165 R 15
185 R 14
185/70 R 15
195/70 R 14

Andy

Ok, mister snicker guy, how about this.....I'm also thinking about refitting my "Porsche accessory" chrome wheels to boot! Yep, I have documentaion for them.

Probably won't, but may. I'm so pi__ed off about these stoopid, irrational rules that I may just make a statement! Yep, it'll probably cost me a win if I do it, but the tires will definitely be contemporay/safe tires. That decision is done.
Pat
ps - get better!