looking for specs of old tires (not conversion data)

Joined
Jan 21, 2022
Messages
9
I'm looking for a table of the old alpha-numeric tire codes used in the 1970s that gives the actual dimensions (section width, section height, and/or overall diameter) in inches/mm and load rating for each size. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A CONVERSION CHART that cross-references old designations to the nearest modern size. PLEASE DON'T REPLY WITH A CONVERSION CHART.

From Wikipedia:
"Starting in 1972 tires were specified by load rating, using a letter code. In practice, a higher load rating tire was also a wider tire. In this system a tire had a letter, optionally followed by "R" for radial tires, followed by the aspect ratio, a dash and the diameter – C78-15 or CR78-15 for bias and radial, respectively. Each diameter of rim had a separate sequence of load ratings; thus, a C78-14 and a C78-15 are not the same width. An aspect ratio of 78% was typical for letter-sized tires, although 70% was also common and lower profiles down to 50% were occasionally seen."

The leading letter in this style of code is usually referred to as the "load rating" and is followed by the two-digit aspect ratio. The number after the dash is the rim diameter. This system explicitly gives the aspect ratio, but there is no width or height given in the code that the aspect ratio can be applied to. Although the first letter is referred to as the "load rating" it seems to imply that it also indicates the width of the tire. For example G78-15 and H78-15 do not convert to the same size modern P-code tire, so that first letter obviously holds more information than just the load capability.

I'm looking for a chart that translates the letters to physical measurements of the section height/width. Something a tire shop in 1975 probably had in their literature. Don't care about the nearest modern approximation. Just want raw dimensions. Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.turbinecar.com/tires.htm

This lists a lot of dimensions on old tires.
Thank you so much!!!
All I could find in my own searching was conversion charts. The specs for the alpha-numeric codes I wanted are in charts 10 through 15 on the page you linked to. (All the charts with "bias ply" in the heading.) The additional info about the intended rim width for each tire size is also great to have. Thanks again.
 
I'm looking for a table of the old alpha-numeric tire codes used in the 1970s that gives the actual dimensions (section width, section height, and/or overall diameter) in inches/mm and load rating for each size. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A CONVERSION CHART that cross-references old designations to the nearest modern size. PLEASE DON'T REPLY WITH A CONVERSION CHART.

From Wikipedia:
"Starting in 1972 tires were specified by load rating, using a letter code. In practice, a higher load rating tire was also a wider tire. In this system a tire had a letter, optionally followed by "R" for radial tires, followed by the aspect ratio, a dash and the diameter – C78-15 or CR78-15 for bias and radial, respectively. Each diameter of rim had a separate sequence of load ratings; thus, a C78-14 and a C78-15 are not the same width. An aspect ratio of 78% was typical for letter-sized tires, although 70% was also common and lower profiles down to 50% were occasionally seen."

The leading letter in this style of code is usually referred to as the "load rating" and is followed by the two-digit aspect ratio. The number after the dash is the rim diameter. This system explicitly gives the aspect ratio, but there is no width or height given in the code that the aspect ratio can be applied to. Although the first letter is referred to as the "load rating" it seems to imply that it also indicates the width of the tire. For example G78-15 and H78-15 do not convert to the same size modern P-code tire, so that first letter obviously holds more information than just the load capability.

I'm looking for a chart that translates the letters to physical measurements of the section height/width. Something a tire shop in 1975 probably had in their literature. Don't care about the nearest modern approximation. Just want raw dimensions. Thanks!

So I gotta ask. Why?
 
Coker Tire sells tires in the various size schemes, including those before letter size, when a tire that was a "6.50x19" was a 6.5" section width on a 19" wheel. If there is a particular alphanumeric size you're interested in, they have it, and when you select a tire, all the dimensions will be given.

https://cokertire.com/tire-size
Thanks. Coker was actually the first place I tried. I'm sure they have that info on file, but it doesn't seem to be published on their website. I sent them an e-mail, and they promptly told me to pound sand. :(

Barry's Tire Tech: 1970 TRA Pages

You'll have to dig through the pages, but it's there. Try starting on page 1-07.
This is awesome! That's the type of in-depth info I'm after. This Barry guy is a boss.
I found the dimensions for the particular tires I'm dealing with on page 1-10, and the load limit info on 1-05. Thank you!

So I gotta ask. Why?
Ha! It seemed more important to me a few days ago than it does now! I guess I just wanted to know the true dimensions of the OEM tire for the truck I'm working on so I can tell if I can actually trust the conversion charts, and so I'll know how much a modern substitute deviates from the original. Having the load information is good too, just to be sure I don't fool myself into getting tires that don't have adequate performance.
 
Thanks. Coker was actually the first place I tried. I'm sure they have that info on file, but it doesn't seem to be published on their website. I sent them an e-mail, and they promptly told me to pound sand. :(


This is awesome! That's the type of in-depth info I'm after. This Barry guy is a boss.
I found the dimensions for the particular tires I'm dealing with on page 1-10, and the load limit info on 1-05. Thank you!


Ha! It seemed more important to me a few days ago than it does now! I guess I just wanted to know the true dimensions of the OEM tire for the truck I'm working on so I can tell if I can actually trust the conversion charts, and so I'll know how much a modern substitute deviates from the original. Having the load information is good too, just to be sure I don't fool myself into getting tires that don't have adequate performance.
If you weren’t aware - @CapriRacer is the site owner and expert on Barry’s Tire Tech.

I have learned a lot about tires from his site and his activity here.

He is a huge asset to the BITOG community.

Sorry about Coker. I’m shopping for 4 6.50x19 tires, and I appreciate knowing how they failed to help you. I don’t need to buy them right away but I do need them.
 
If you weren’t aware - @CapriRacer is the site owner and expert on Barry’s Tire Tech.

I have learned a lot about tires from his site and his activity here.

He is a huge asset to the BITOG community.

Sorry about Coker. I’m shopping for 4 6.50x19 tires, and I appreciate knowing how they failed to help you. I don’t need to buy them right away but I do need them.
I suspected CapriRacer and Barry might be the same person, but I wasn't certain. Good to know the forum has a resident tire guru.

I wouldn't necessarily let my experience with Coker scare you away. I'm sure if I were a little more persistent, I could have gotten in touch with one of their tech people who might have been able to help me. My inquiry probably got sent to an underling who just processes orders and returns. I'm sure they've got that info on hand, but for whatever reason the rep I got didn't feel like transferring me to someone who could help.

They're a tire store, not an encyclopedia, so I don't fault them too much. I'd still consider Coker if I ever need retro tires for a vintage project.
 
Back
Top Bottom