Tiger spotted

[AW111]

Saw this at the supermarket today:

[sim16v]

Very nice!

The wheels look over sized, so I wonder if the car has been played with under the bonnet...

[TooMany2cvs]

sim16v said:

The wheels look over sized, so I wonder if the car has been played with under the bonnet...

TBF, I'm not sure I'd fancy even standard 60s relatively asthmatic levels of v8 power on 13" crossplies given a choice...

[HealeyV8]

sim16v said:

Very nice!

The wheels look over sized, so I wonder if the car has been played with under the bonnet...

Probably not, standard 13" wheels of this period are really difficult to get decent tyres for now, so lots of owners switch to 15" or 16" so the modern tyre choice is greater. I would change my wheels on the Jensen Healey but I can't stand minilite (or copies) and with a 4x 4" stud pattern there isn't much else to choose from. Would love 70's style Wolfrace slot mags.

[aeropilot]

HealeyV8 said:

sim16v said:

Very nice!

The wheels look over sized, so I wonder if the car has been played with under the bonnet...

Probably not, standard 13" wheels of this period are really difficult to get decent tyres for now, so lots of owners switch to 15" or 16" so the modern tyre choice is greater.

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

I remember back in the mid 80's when still owning/driving AVO Escorts, Mk2 RS Escorts, Lotus-Cortina's etc.,etc and we all went over to running the (then) latest tech 185/60 low profile (or even 205/60 on wider rims in some cases) 'cos.....its better innit.....

A good mate got the chance of an offer from a guy unconnected with the owners club of a pretty much all original late Custom Pack Mexico, only 2 owners from new, original panels and paint (rusty front wings/faded paint) and still on 70's period 175/70 tyres etc, and OEM spec suspension. Not mods that we all did back in the day by then.
We went haves with a view to a quick respray and flip to make a few hundred quid each.
I ran it around for a week to make sure it was all OK first before it went into the body shop, and oh my, what a revelation, what a lovely thing it was to drive, having never been shunted, rallied or 'Barried' in the name of 'improving it'.
I should have given my mate his half of the deal, and kept it, and kept it all original, should have let that one go....and it proved to me that actually manufacturers actually do know better than 'we' do about making cars!!

That Tigger needs 13" rims and period style OEM size radials and it would be perfect, and a hoot to drive

[TooMany2cvs]

aeropilot said:

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

You won't get as much grip as a modern car on the same rubber, obviously. But you will definitely get more grip than 13" crossplies.

Whether more grip actually makes for better handling is, of course, moot.

[aeropilot]

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

You won't get as much grip as a modern car on the same rubber, obviously. But you will definitely get more grip than 13" crossplies.

There are period size and style radials in OEM size available from classic tyre suppliers, no need to run crossplies on a Tigger.

[TooMany2cvs]

aeropilot said:

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

You won't get as much grip as a modern car on the same rubber, obviously. But you will definitely get more grip than 13" crossplies.

There are period size and style radials in OEM size available from classic tyre suppliers, no need to run crossplies on a Tigger.

Sure, but crossplies would have been original-fit (google suggests 6.00x13, so the equivalent of 165/80 or 175/80), so you're already modifying... so why not go up a bit further, to something like 185/70 14?

[aeropilot]

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

You won't get as much grip as a modern car on the same rubber, obviously. But you will definitely get more grip than 13" crossplies.

There are period size and style radials in OEM size available from classic tyre suppliers, no need to run crossplies on a Tigger.

Sure, but crossplies would have been original-fit (google suggests 6.00x13, so the equivalent of 165/80 or 175/80), so you're already modifying... so why not go up a bit further, to something like 185/70 14?

Alternative to 165/80 would be 175/70 (same as on Escort Twin Cam/Mex etc and Mk2 Lotus-Cortina of the period) so don't see 185/70x14 working - would rub, would like you'd need 185/60x14 - but again, too little sidewall height for suspension of that period. In my experience of cars of that period (rwd with primitive suspensions etc) rubber band tyres make the car horrible to drive. Suspension gets shagged out a lot quicker as well, as it was never designed to work with the grip levels associated with modern low profile tyres.
Less grip is more

[TooMany2cvs]

aeropilot said:

Less grip is more

<points back up a bit>

TooMany2cvs said:

Whether more grip actually makes for better handling is, of course, moot.

There is, of course, several elements to grip... Few people would argue against more braking grip - and not many against more traction. So we're really just talking about lateral grip.

[AW111]

TooMany2cvs said:

Sure, but crossplies would have been original-fit (google suggests 6.00x13, so the equivalent of 165/80 or 175/80), so you're already modifying... so why not go up a bit further, to something like 185/70 14?

Don't forget crossplies are a lot more tolerant of camber change than radials.
Not a problem on the live rear, but maybe not ideal on the front.

[Yertis]

It's ride too isn't it. Biggest revelation for me was driving a Makkinen EvoVII (I think) for half an hour. Now on paper that was a lot faster the the Quattro 20v I was running at the time and I'm sure for short bursts it would be. But I could drive the Quattro all day, whereas after half an hour in the Evo I felt shattered.

[aeropilot]

Yertis said:

It's ride too isn't it.

Yep, but that's also tied in with the handling.

Stiffer sidewall rubber band tyres and heavier wheels with have a big negative impact on the handling of a car that the suspension engineers of the day just wouldn't have allowed for.
I've driven enough 60's/70's era cars that have been 'improved' with modern wheels tyres/polybushes/stiff springs and all the other crap people 'think' improve the car, and 9/10 times they have the opposite effect, largely because there are now so few OEM spec cars left to actually compare with, and missing the fact that, they are not modern cars, and won't ever drive like a modern car.
Yes, some very mild minor tweeks can be made, but people get far too carried away and ruin cars of that period.
People were doing back in the 1980's though, so its not a new thing at all.

[Cledus Snow]

Maybe it needs larger wheels to fit over bigger brakes?

[mybrainhurts]

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

TooMany2cvs said:

aeropilot said:

The trouble is, the chassis tech is 1960's, putting modern low profile rubber on old tech chassis doesn't make a better car.

You won't get as much grip as a modern car on the same rubber, obviously. But you will definitely get more grip than 13" crossplies.

There are period size and style radials in OEM size available from classic tyre suppliers, no need to run crossplies on a Tigger.

Sure, but crossplies would have been original-fit (google suggests 6.00x13, so the equivalent of 165/80 or 175/80), so you're already modifying... so why not go up a bit further, to something like 185/70 14?

Radials were well established when the Tiger was current. One of my colleagues ran one.

[aeropilot]

Cledus Snow said:

Maybe it needs larger wheels to fit over bigger brakes?

Very possible.

[Yertis]

aeropilot said:

Yep, but that's also tied in with the handling.

Stiffer sidewall rubber band tyres and heavier wheels with have a big negative impact on the handling of a car that the suspension engineers of the day just wouldn't have allowed for.
I've driven enough 60's/70's era cars that have been 'improved' with modern wheels tyres/polybushes/stiff springs and all the other crap people 'think' improve the car, and 9/10 times they have the opposite effect, largely because there are now so few OEM spec cars left to actually compare with, and missing the fact that, they are not modern cars, and won't ever drive like a modern car.
Yes, some very mild minor tweeks can be made, but people get far too carried away and ruin cars of that period.
People were doing back in the 1980's though, so its not a new thing at all.

Completely agree. Bought a set of 5.5J wheels for my GT6 with "low profile" 60 section tyres on (I was 24 so be charitable) it it was horrible. But on 70 section – lovely. (Although I think the originals are on 80 section or something like that.)

That said, I can justify everything I've done to my TR6 because an original unsorted TR6 is a handful at best, and not in a fun way.

[Ardennes92]

I run an Alpine and can honestly say that moving to 14" alloys from the 13" steels improved the ride no end, probably due to the reduction in unsprung weight, although period minilites could have been made of magnesium (but would probably suffering due to age now). Consensus within the owners club tends towards adjustable front shocks as the "roots bob" can then be negated

[TooMany2cvs]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I'd guess the plates saying "VICTORIA" on them are a clue.

[AW111]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Australia : Melbourne eastern suburbs.

I noticed there was a cd in the glove compartment : Get your ya-ya's out.
Reasonably period correct