<VV>Tires

[Frank DuVal]

Yes, the last two digits are decimals of the whole inches. But I have 
seen cases, like Padgett, where the smaller number tire was wider than 
the larger number tire. Probably caused by which part of the tire was 
measured for the inch designation. Most of the inch by inch tires (6.00 
x 13, 7.60 x 14, etc.) are 84 ratio tires. Atlas Plycron comes to mind. 
I could use two more 9.00 x 14 tires if anyone has them! No, not for 
Corvair. :-D

Frank DuVal

Bruce Schug wrote:

>
> On Jan 9, 2006, at 10:22 AM, Padgett wrote:
>
>>
>> Actually "letter" sizes continued well into the 1980s before being 
>> replaced and were very analogous to the P-metric (which is different 
>> from pure metric) sizes. A-175, C-185, E-195, F-205, G-215, H-225, 
>> L-235 etc. and aspect ratios have not changed (yes, Virginia, there 
>> were B , D, and other sizes, just rarely seen). These were much 
>> easier to understand than the previous sizing where a 7.50 might be 
>> smaller than a 7.35  (last two digits were more aspect ratio related).
>
>
> I'm quite sure that the last two digits of the old "X.XX" sizes had 
> nothing at all to do with aspect ratios. The entire number was somehow 
> representative of a width dimension of the tire; probably the simply 
> cross section. Thus, I believe a 8.00-14 was 8" in cross section.
>
> Bruce
>
> Bruce W. Schug
> CORSA South Carolina
> Greenville, SC
> bwschug at charter.net
>
> CORSA member since 1981
>
> '67 Monza. "67AC140"
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights 
> are the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
> mailto:vv-help at corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America, 
> http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
> Change your options: 
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs 
> _______________________________________________
>