And Now for Tires...

Now that the Dino is running again, I'm starting to think about new tires (now) and repainting (later).

The car has the Michelin XWX's on them. I assume they were replaced at least once, since the spare is practically bald, but the mounted rubber is OK.

Here's my question: Other than for a show, is there a better/safer replacement that looks acceptable? I would think that 33 years would have brought some advances in tire technology! I'd mount them on the original wheels, and keep the old ones in case of aesthetic emergencies...

As for the painting, any rec's for a AAA shop in the NY/Ct. area would be most welcome (it's a next winter thing)... Costs?

 

having 14 inch wheels makes finding a nice alternative (aesthetically speaking) hard. i would stick with the xwx's. they work well, ride well, and look correct

 

Ditto. Keep it original, please!

 

Aloha.....I put on some SUMITOMO HTR 200 205/14. If you want to drive your car and push it these tires are great on my 206 GT. They cost $50 each. What a difference they made...modern tire on vintage car...just my 2cw. Gregg Blue


http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Sumitomo&tireModel=HTR+200

 

Here's one very important fact to consider. Regardless of visible wear, tire manufacturers recommend replacing tires that are more than seven years old due to structural and material degradation. OLD TIRES CAN BE DANGEROUS, THOUGH THEY MIGHT LOOK FINE. DON'T TAKE A CHANCE ON THEM!

http://www.nbc6.net/automotive/7577238/detail.html

Michelin XWXs look great and are the OE fitment. The problem I have with them is that they now cost about 400 bucks a piece. I simply refuse to pay that much for a tire if an alternative is available.

The Sumitomos that Greg mentions are what I opted for. They're about 1/8th the cost of the XWXs, come in 205/70-14, and work very well.

Anyway, those are the two choices. It's up to you which to buy. Regardless, you should have a tire professional check the mfg. date codes on your tires ASAP. If they're more than 6 or 7 years old, get 'em the hell off the car!

 

I've rune XWX and Sumitomo.

Both are great tires, both give you more than you'll ever need in a tire.

Sumitomo = $50 but looks like a modern tire.

XWX = $400 but looks period correct. I'm digging for some pix, stand by...
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

There's nothing exotic about reading the tire manufacture date. The system is "week in year--year". So 2399 would be the 23rd week of 1999, 0705 is the 7th week of 2005.

I chose the Sumitomos also, and mine say MAR2905.

Look for the letters DOT followed by some other letters/numbers. After those will be a flat oval shape, perhaps with a ridge around it, with the date code as I described above.

It's the fact that tires "expire" regardless of use that made me choose the Sumitomos--if I could buy Michelins and drive them for 15 yrs it would be fine, but I'm not too big on springing for almost $2K every 7 years just because a tire looks more correct.

Jim

 

Regardless of what you choose, consider what you have. I am not suggesting running on them. DON'T!

I had the original tires on my Daytona and kept the speed to 70MPH until I blew two out the same day. Then I got new tires from the dealer and didn't realize that the nearly new 30 yr old tires might be valuable for a show car that is a trailer queen.

One was truly gone but I had four that held air. I was a newbee and didn't think that they may have had value. But they were real original, hard, brittle and slick. I still remember entering a roundabout and seeing a car to my left late slammed on the brakes. The car skidded real well. The look on the other driver was precious.

 

+1, excellent advice - check the date of your tires, you may have the new Michelin XWX's recently produced for classic cars - they use modern rubber compounds in the old molds. I bought a set from Coker when Fchat member/Coker distributor Jerry offered us all a significant discount.

Where's Jerry postings now? He is a good guy in my book!

 

I think they look fine. They look like tires. I'll check the date on my Michelins tomorrow, and if they're old, order new tires immediately. The car only has 12,000 miles, and most of that from its first 15 years.

Man, these cars are like those ancient puzzles. Every single thing has a backstory and a whole hagiography!

 

And the love only grows.
Not unlike another of my hobbies, collecting old US currency. The details, art and methods behind the surface pull you into the hobby in a similar manner.

 

Here's a shot of my car with the "Sumis"...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes the Sumi's look fine, but the XWX really look fantastic on the car. I went that way. Figure tires are good for seven years. About $1600 for a set of four, leave something ratty on as the spare, you're never gonna use it anyway.

Works out to $4.39 a week for tires.

Gas costs more than that.

I know we're used to getting tires for a "regular car" for much less, but this isn't a "regular car" now is it?

DM
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I must admit that I never thought of it that way. I do remember that the car used to go through XWXs on the rear at an unbelievable rate. That was back when they were $150 a piece. Frequent rotation would help, but I doubt that I would get 7 years, even at my current 200-300 miles per month.

I've had the Sumis for just about a year, and they do seem to be holding up better that the XWXs did. No question that the Michelins look better, it just comes down to how much value one puts on that.

It would be interesting to do a back-to-back track test of the two tires. We could bring in Corbani's with the 16" tires for comparison!

 

There's lots of numbers on the tires, but nothing that looks like a date code (unless the tires were manufactured in 1927. They're all 205/70 VR14 XWX, but some look older than others, and have different stampings (two don't have a DOT numnber, one says FXT9 the othe FHT9...

Time to order new tires. It'll depend on how long the Michelins take...

 

mike- i put GT eagles on my car...it came originally with them. I bought them at tire rack and a guy in stamford put em on. They work great,were cheap & look good. If you can hold off buying for a week or two ...you can check out my car & see how it drives.

 

US cars came with Eagles? An Italian in American shoes... very unusual!

I will definitely check 'em out! If you're bagging work any day during the week, let me know -- I'm going to be up & back to Westchester a lot. My wife has to work in NYC this weekend, so if I come, my son probably has to tag along.

I've pretty much decided to get the car painted this winter. The seller didn't lie about the paint being original, as far as I can tell, but 33 years is a lot of Cal & Nev. sun! Starting to research shops.

 

maybe going home early tomorrow...what time u thinking? I have 1 or 2 guys that you might want to consider for the paint. You have to be careful as some guys will try to kill you on the price. It is not a hard car to repaint(not much chrome & the interior engine bay etc all black)either...

 

Thanks for the kind words Scott. The way to read your DOT #'s is anything pre-2000, the last 3 digits (129 is the 12th week of x9) unfortunately there is now way to tell what decade it is from. After 2000 it will be the last 4 digits (4906 is the 49th week of 2006). If your tires don't have a DOT# the newest the tire could be would be 1968, hopefully they are not that old.

The FChat price is going to be $372.02 on these tires, and if you need me to I can get the production dates of a couple of them.

Jerry

 

I had Goodyear Eagles on my Dino for many years - I liked them a lot. When it came time to replace them, they were NLA in size 205/70-14.

It was back to Michelin XWX. Good, but not as good as Eagles.

I have another car that needs the same size tire: a '65 230SL. I switched it last year from Pirelli P4000 to the Sumitomos. (The P4000 was (you guessed it) NLA in 205/70-14). I was skeptical at the price, but the risk was low: 4 tires cost less than 1 XWX. At worst, I'd get a new spare.

The SL does well with the Sumitomos. The tires are predictable and hold the road well. I drive the car hard - it can handle it. The unexpected difference was the new lightness in the steering: it was as if I had power steering all of a sudden. The Sumi's have much less rolling resistance. I'm happy with them and would seriously consider them next time the tires on my Dino need to be replaced.

But of course, they'd be NLA by then.

 

Just replaced my XWX's (they've been on my Euro GT for 31 years! I'm no math prodigy, but I think that exceeds the commonly accepted time limit) with the Sumitomos recommended in this thread. When I backed away from the shop, my first reaction was that elves had sneaked in and installed power steering -- very responsive and precise power steering. The difference in rolling resistance is apparent and much appreciated. While the width of the tire is down four-tenths of an inch from the Michelins, I don't find the result esthetically displeasing. So. Thanks for the recommendation. It's brought this lurker out from the cyber-shadows.

 

HERE HERE!

Mark

 

see if you can make new your tires squeal while cornering..

have fun...gregg

 

I have been running Sumitomos for a couple of years on my Dino. I could not rationalize the cost of the Michelins. Because their side walls are so much less rigid than the Michelins, I have been running higher pressures, but have not arrived at an 'optimal' pressure setting yet.

For those of you running on Sumitomos, what tires pressures have you been running in the front and rear?

Robert

 

30F 34R Normal / Driver only

32F 36R Hard running and/or 2 persons on board