Re. Wide Vs Narrow Tires - I rest my case

That car sounds gross :nauseated_face:

It’s laughably ugly, but I guess that the owner thinks it’s beautiful. Or, maybe he’s colorblind.

Well, someone likes it. At least none of us has to drive it.

1 Like

As the saying goes, there is an a$$ for every seat… lol

2 Likes

It’s not my car, it’s a screen grab from the Vogue website. I’d never spend that kind of money on tires that look like that!

Sure! Why not try for 300!

Doing my part!

1 Like

Sure, the soft ride of 80+ aspect bias ply tires at 28 PSI can’t be beat.

Different construction altogether, required lower pressures to carry the same gross plus 10 percent.

In the early 70s, I remember talking with a sales guy from a tire store in a nearby town. He told me about a new kind of tire they just got in. They were Seiberling brand radials.

At that point, I wasn’t aware of radial tires, even though I was a teenager working in a gas station.

If I recall correctly, most of our customers didn’t switch to radials unless their car came with radials from the factory.

Americans are creatures of habit.

Most European carmakers had adopted radials before the Beatles came along.

I my opinion and based on memory. Getting people to replace their bias ply tires with radials came from Michelin providing a 40000 mile tread wear warranty on new tires in the late sixties.
I can’t remember when or if I switched to radials if not OEM.
I did switch to Michelins on my truck to see if I get more tread wear
than I did from the Wranglers. Traction, ride, and handling seem no different.

My first radial tires were the original design Michelin-X, which were OEM equipment on my '74 Volvo. The improvement in traction and ride quality was amazing, but the biggest surprise was their tread life. I got rid of that POS when the tires had 76k of wear on them, and I estimated that they probably had another 20k of life left on them.

Everything about that Volvo was awful–with the exception of the 4-wheel disc brakes and the Michelin-X tires.

Back to the earlier topic of unusual color combos on cars…
I wonder if this 1953 Imperial still exists.

1 Like

I would take that car . . . but in green

The ironic part of that car is that an English monarch wouldn’t ride in it, due to it being the wrong color. The body of all “royal” cars is Royal Claret (a dark maroon color) and the roof is always painted black.

I honestly am not that interested in the royal family and feel they’re probably MORE dysfunctional than most . . . if even half of what’s said has any grain of truth to it

That said, the only royals I have ANY respect for are the ones who served in combat

1 Like

That’s probably true, and would also be true for most families in which the self-entitled offspring inherit millions of dollars/pounds/francs/lira/euros. Extreme wealth–especially when it wasn’t earned by the recipient–often has a corrosive effect on one’s morals and how one views both his own power and the position of all of the peons who he/she considers to be beneath him/her.

As Lord Acton wrote a couple of hundred years ago, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. It was true in Acton’s time, and it is true today.

3 Likes

They also offered an entertaining driving experience when picking up a groove in the pavement at highway+ speeds.

And rampant inbreeding eliminates the suppresses the ability to perceive it!

And jug ears, narrow set eyes and a weak chin… :rofl:

At least Lady Di added a bit bleach to that polluted gene pool

Aahhhh… So Wikipedia is misleading us!

All fakes, all liars, witch hunt! :rofl::rofl: