Coker 16" radials...who's runnin'em

Need some feedback on who might be running Coker 16" radial tires. Coker sells these with tubes. If you are running them are you using tubes or not? JimA and I talked about this today and we are both questioning if you need tubes with brand new rims? I could understand it if they were going on old rims, but new rims? Help please the feedback is appreciated.

 

I bit the bullet and sprung for a full set of the Coker Classic 16" radials with tubes for my Deuce coo-pay, and I couldn't be happier with the performance....they have changed my whole attitude toward driving.........I can go faster, handle better AND, more importantly.......they ride nice and smoooooooooooth........I can find nothing about them that I'd consider negative........plus, they look very much like Bias Ply tawrs.......

I am running them on '40 Ford 16 x 4" on the front and 16 x 5 Early Lincoln wheels on the back..........they look great and drive great.......

CB

 

Good to hear cuznbrucie, I'm gonna run them on the '41 panel soon.

 

Thanks for the feedback CB.

 

what size front and rear radials are you running on your car CB? ive been considering possibly getting fronts for long trips

 

Thanks Brucie, the set I got are yet to be tested, but I feel better now.

 

Fronts are 5.50 x 16" and rears are 7.50 x 16"




Don't have a good shot of the rears but they look very good........

CB

 

You'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner,, X38 !!

CB

 

CB,
Looks great. I love the car and the tires don't take away from the look of the car at all.

 

I run the 5.60 and 7.50 WW tubeless no problem.

 

I wish their 15's looked that nice!

Instead they are really nice whitewalls on some $27 Wal-mart tires from 1992, which is how the tread and sidewalls look!

 

Diamondback tires also has 16" radials. Check them out at www.dbtires.com

I have a pair of their performance wide whites and am very happy with them.

Pat

 

The reason Rich is asking if anyone has run into any issues is because he DRIVES THE HELL out of his cars and he's actually on a trip right now to Pleasanton from way up in Washington (alone- no trailers in a '32 Roadster that has already wore out one set of tires in LESS than 3 months on the road!).
On this trip with his new Cokers he has already lost one rear tire and tube after an initial tube failure- then the replaced tube took out itself AND the tire. Now hes running one oddball rear and the fronts hop around from 60-80mph. They were balanced right before the trip- and it's a new car with new wheels and tires that had no issues with another set of front tires before these.
Any ideas or theories about the new radials with tubes is appreciated. I didn't see the need with new safety beaded rims, but that's what Coker recommends to use with their radials.

 

Thanks Jim. I am bringing this BTT to see if there is any more info out there before I mount up the new tire tomorrow.

GassersGarage,
What kind of rims are they on? How many miles have you put on them? How fast do you normally travel.

Thanks againfor the info guys

 

I can see no need to run a tube if 1 the tire is marked "Tubeless and 2 it is not a spoked wheel with adjustable spoke nipples in the rim well.
For what it is worth I have
a. run tubeless tires on 16 " Ford wires, Halibrand's [real Mag] rivited center steel wheels.WITH OUT tubes.
b. done the same with radials.

 

Don't tell me you missed the tour today?!?!?!

 

I don't have a set, but I see a lot of them on cars in my travels and I ask about them often. Every single person I have talked to who runs them, loves them!

 

Mark (rodncustom), No, I didn't miss the tour, but I am running on a Les Schwab used tire. I should get my new tire from Coker tomorrow. I am just trying to decide to get rid of the tubes when I hit the tire shop tomorrow. I have a nasty front end balance problem that I need to work on tommorrow also. Al's "club house" was awesome. Talk to you soon.

Rich

 

I would like to use a set of these in the future too. I have a friend who has run a set since they first came out and he has had good luck with them. I know they stress that they should be run with the maximum recommended pressure. It seems to me that the tubes are trouble, both for balance issues, heat build up and the reliability of the tubes. If Corky see's this maybe he could comment on the stated requirement of running tubes. It would be interesting to hear the reasoning behind it. Maybe it's the dreaded liability issue of someone using an incompatable rim with this tire, so therefore the requirement of tubes for every application to protect themselves.

 

what are the tallest tires you can run with those??

 

I think 7.50 X 16. This is about 31" tall.

 

Damn, those look great! I'm afraid to look at how much they cost, though . . .

 

They're not too bad $ wise - better without tubes.

 

Wow! those are almost cool

 

I'm sure the tubes are an issue for the early wheels. If a guy has old rusty, leaky wheels, then tubes would help that. If a guy has brand new steel wheel, I wouldn't run the tubes. There's no reason.

 

they's good!

 

Hey Bill

Those look great!

Are you running tubes?

Mark

 

"Maybe it's the dreaded liability issue of someone using an incompatable rim with this tire, so therefore the requirement of tubes for every application to protect themselves."

Bingo..

There are all kinds of rims that one could mount a 16 inch radial on and many of them were designed before the advent of tubeless tires.

Corky<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

 

I had a hunch that's what it was. Thanks for making a great product and keeping us informed. You've got my business, I'm going to order a set for my next project.

 

I have a set on my recently-done roadster, 6.00/16 frt and 6.50/16 rear, mounted on '40 Ford wheels. I got 'em at Louisville three years ago and just now got to ride on them. My only complaint is (and I didn't notice this before I bought 'em) they are truck tires, load range C, and hev-vee. I'd probably like 'em more if they were load range B passenger car tires on my 2200-lb roadster, in the interest of lower unsprung weight, but after driving it I have to say they are very nice. Look great, too. After all, what did they know about unsprung weight in 1932? Good job, Corky.
Fearless