MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Softskin Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 16-04-14, 14:29
Matt Austin Matt Austin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Junee New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 113
Default

Seven tyres. Anyone want to go in together? I'd be keen for two.

Cheers,
Matt


Quote:
Originally Posted by gjamo View Post
__________________
1942 International K5 3-ton truck ARN 43362
1940 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff-car
1941 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff car
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 03-05-14, 23:08
Matt Austin Matt Austin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Junee New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 113
Default

Please pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference between 10.50-18 tyres and 1100-18 tyres? The decimal point and number of digits has confused me. I'm still very much a neophyte at all this!

Cheers,
Matt
__________________
1942 International K5 3-ton truck ARN 43362
1940 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff-car
1941 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff car
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 04-05-14, 07:25
Tony Wheeler's Avatar
Tony Wheeler Tony Wheeler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Yarra Junction VIC
Posts: 953
Default

Strictly speaking the decimal point should be present when written, but we often drop it like we do in speech. Same thing happens with gun calibre, eg. 303, 350, 762, etc.

10.50 and 11.00 are so close as to be considered the same, eg. 10.50 x 20 and 11.00 x 20 were both CMP spec.
__________________
One of the original Australian CMP hunters.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-05-14, 00:04
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

To explain a little further. The first group of numbers i.e. 10.50 refers to the nominal width of the tyre in inches. In this case ten and a half.
Around WW2 this would also give a good idea of the height of the tyre as most of them seem to have a 100 percent aspect ratio. By that I mean the distance from the inner diameter of the bead to the tread surface would also be close to ten and a half inches.
None of this relates to the rim width which would probably be around seven inches across the inside of the flanges.
The second group of numbers relate to wheel diameter. A 10.50-18 tyre would go on an eighteen inch wheel so the hole in the middle of the tyre would be 18 inches across.
By this reckoning a 7.50-20 tyre would be about 35 inches in overall diameter. 7.5"+20"+7.5"=35" and this works out pretty close although there is some variation between brands. Some makers back then actually gave the tyre outside diameter as part of its identity i.e. 7x34 although that wasn't general practise and fell by the wayside.

David

The foregoing is only my observation and open to correction or addition.
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!

Last edited by motto; 09-05-14 at 00:13.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-05-14, 00:32
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 5,534
Default

David, For many years I was of the belief that the first number was the height of the side wall, ie 9.00 x 16 meaning an overall height 9+16+9 (total of 34 inches)
I was later told on this forum that the 9.00 was the foot print (width) and that it had nothing to do with the sidewall height.
As you have explained with the 100 percent aspect ratio, I was still right.

I do know that when the 70 series radials came out, that the size given (say 185 x 70 x 13) that the 185 related to the width, and that the height of the side wall was 70 % of the width.
I am not 100% convinced which is correct for the early cross plies.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.I. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-05-14, 01:05
Richard Farrant's Avatar
Richard Farrant Richard Farrant is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kent, England
Posts: 3,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Eades View Post
David, For many years I was of the belief that the first number was the height of the side wall, ie 9.00 x 16 meaning an overall height 9+16+9 (total of 34 inches)
I was later told on this forum that the 9.00 was the foot print (width) and that it had nothing to do with the sidewall height.
As you have explained with the 100 percent aspect ratio, I was still right.

I do know that when the 70 series radials came out, that the size given (say 185 x 70 x 13) that the 185 related to the width, and that the height of the side wall was 70 % of the width.
I am not 100% convinced which is correct for the early cross plies.
Think there were a few anomalies such as the 9.25-16 tyres as used on Humber 4x4 vehicles. Unavailable nowadays and replaced by 9.00-16 with is in fact larger diameter than a 9.25 !
Incidentally, on tyre sizes, the old crossply such as 11.00-20 has the "-" dash between tyre and rim size, but only uses the "x" cross on the older designations that used rim and overall diameters, eg 7x34
__________________
Richard

1943 Bedford QLD lorry - 1941 BSA WM20 m/cycle - 1943 Daimler Scout Car Mk2
Member of MVT, IMPS, MVG of NSW, KVE and AMVCS
KVE President & KVE News Editor
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-05-14, 01:12
Grant Bowker Grant Bowker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by motto View Post
Some makers back then actually gave the tyre outside diameter as part of its identity i.e. 7x34 although that wasn't general practise and fell by the wayside.
I don't have a source to quote but am quite sure the 7x34 size designation was for a separate series of tires, sometimes referred to as "high pressure" tires. I think the "high pressure" was in comparison to "balloon" tires that were supposed to be lower pressure and thus give a more comfortable ride. For the "high pressure" tires the 7 referred to section width (and approximately height) and 34 was the overall diameter which would go back to a 20 inch rim.
Until they started putting belts on tires (either bias or radial) all tires were close to 100% aspect ratio as there was little to stop the tire from taking on the shape that would give maximum volume for minimum circumference - cylindrical. once the use of belts started, the belt limited the diameter of the tire which in turn permitted the tire to be wider than it is tall. Think of the long skinny balloons clowns manipulate into other objects for the amusement of the crowd. (animals, hats, swords etc.) (Actually, a sphere has more volume per surface area - but is awkward to use as a tire.)
Here I am, finally getting some use from the calculus courses I failed so often at university.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-05-14, 03:44
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

The modern tyre designations as you illustrate Lynn follow a different format. I believe the first group of numbers is the nominal width in millimetres i.e. 185 or 205 etc. The carry over is that they still give the wheel diameter in inches.

Perhaps the reason for the 9.25 designation Richard was to differentiate the Humber tyre from something similar and was not meant to be a true indicator of size.

Grant, you've rung a bell with your mention of high pressure tyres. I think they were what my Dad referred to as 'hardwalls'. Dad grew up in the 1920s, was a vehicle enthusiast all his life and was familiar with all the old stuff. He passed away a couple of years ago at the age of 93. I sure do miss him.

David
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-05-14, 04:20
Grant Bowker Grant Bowker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,285
Default

Rim widths for pneumatic tires on CMP were 6" for both 16 (including the tapered beads used on HUP (that were another user of 9.25-16 tires)) and 20 inch rims.
9.00-16 pneumatic cross country tires had diameters from 34.8 to 35.7 inches while 10.25 had diameters from 41.4 to 42.3 inches. In general highway tread tires had slightly smaller diameters than cross country and runflat were at the small end of the range for pneumatics of the same nominal size.
The above is from the AEDB design record.
I don't have any listing for Canadian manufactured military vehicles of the period using high pressure series tires but did find a reference to a trailer used by Canadians that was manufactured by Taskers that used them.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-05-14, 03:44
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

Thinking on that 9.25-16 tyre size (which I had never heard of before now). Maybe they inadvertently put a couple of numerals in the wrong place and it should have been 9.00-16.25
Now that would have saved a lot of confusion and would be damn close to reality.

David
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-05-14, 04:33
Grant Bowker Grant Bowker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,285
Default

I have doubts about that suggestion David.
By observation, it is considerably easier to mount modern 16 inch tires on 16 inch HUP rims than on "real" CMP 16 inch rims. If HUP rims were sized at 16.25 I don't think you would have an easy time at all getting a 16 tire onto them if it were even possible.
Original war dated 9.25-16 tires have been seen, still with original sidewall markings.
I have seen several different printed sources refer to 9.25x16 but don't recall ever seeing a reference to a 9.00-16.25 tire (they could exist but I haven't ever noticed them). The AEDB Design Record makes several references to tires 9.00-16 and 9.25-16. In all cases the 9.25-16 is listed as smaller outside diameter than 9.00-16 within category of tire (cross country pneumatic, highway pneumatic, runflat). It seems unlikely that if they were really referring to 9.00-16.25 tires they would consistently, 100% of the time, refer to them as 9.25-16 - not getting it right even once by accident.
For cars and trucks, I don't believe I've ever seen a rim diameter other than full or half inch. Tractors use a sizing system I've never taken the trouble to understand (city boy) but they don't seem to me to be a simple extension of car and truck sizing.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-05-14, 05:09
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

My suggestion of tyre designation 9.00-16.25 was based on the assumption that the HUP and the Humber 4x4 used the same wheel diameter as other WW2 British designed military vehicles with 16" wheels. These were about 1/4" larger in diameter than 16" American wheels.
Strangely enough the post war Ferret Scout Car used the smaller American wheel diameter. The run flat tyres for these were marked 'To fit 6.50 H Rims' if I remember correctly.
There are those who think the difference in wheel diameter is insignificant but I have tried putting tyres made for British rims on a Dodge WC and they were definitely a sloppy fit. Conversely, I know of at least one fellow that had his Blitz wheels machined to a smaller diameter to take American tyres. He was happy with the remaining thickness.

David
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-05-14, 09:07
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 5,534
Default

David, I am sure others know more than I, but as you have probably noticed, the majority of wartime 900 x 16 tyres had on them "for British wheels only" or "for 6"rims only" or " for American wheels only"
One wheel has a "flat" base, and the other, a "tapered" base.
Obviously the two allies couldn't agree on a common standard (like they did with the inch)
I had a Dodge 6x6 at one stage, and from the process of measuring up rolling circumferances of the 20 plus various 900 x 16s, I found few to be the same. As an example, the standard British Dunlop track grips were quite a bit smaller than the same make run flats. (The runflats were post war and should have been on a Ferret)
I also had British Avon, Michelin, Blackhawk chiefs, Yokohama (1960-70s)along with a mix of Goodyears, and other names forgotten, including sand tyres made in the Federal Republik of Suid Afrika. Obviously some were worn more than others, but as I recall the circumference varied a max of about 8 1/2". A lot in for 1 turn of the wheel!
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.I. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-05-14, 10:59
motto motto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Woodend,Victoria,Australia
Posts: 1,068
Default

You're perfectly correct Lynn, tyres of the same nominal size from different makers can vary significantly in outside diameter. As you and Grant point out this also applies to different types of tyres (run flat, cross country etc) from the same maker.
However, it's the diameter of the hole in the middle that I was rambling on about. The topic that has been covered previously I know but there are those more recent victims of the OD bug that have yet to encounter this 16" wheel/tyre anomaly.
Bead angle aside, tyres made for wartime British 16" wheels are oversize enough to be quite loose on an American wheel as I proved again a couple of years ago when I inadvertently purchased the wrong ones.
I know that in the past some people have welded steel plates to the wheel bead area to centralise British tyres on Dodge WC wheels otherwise they could end up quite eccentric. I myself have in times gone by bonded rubber strips to the tyre bead for the same purpose.
Very little of this has to do with 18" tyres so once again I'm guilty of hijack. It just seems to happen in conversation.

Cheers

David
__________________
Hell no! I'm not that old!
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-05-14, 11:28
Lynn Eades Lynn Eades is offline
Bluebell
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tauranga, New Zealand
Posts: 5,534
Default

David, You are right to bring the subject up again. And yes, I digressed
On highjacking. Show me a thread that hasn't been.
__________________
Bluebell

Carrier Armoured O.P. No1 Mk3 W. T84991
Carrier Bren No2.Mk.I. NewZealand Railways. NZR.6.
Dodge WC55. 37mm Gun Motor Carriage M6
Jeep Mb #135668
So many questions....
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 24-09-14, 13:17
Matt Austin Matt Austin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Junee New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 113
Default

Some fascinating information here, thanks folks.

How would these go?

http://www.cokertire.com/1100-18-mil...dukw-tire.html

Cheers,
Matt
__________________
1942 International K5 3-ton truck ARN 43362
1940 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff-car
1941 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff car
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 24-09-14, 13:55
jack neville jack neville is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: leopold, victoria
Posts: 1,019
Default

See if you order them. There is a few US tyre sites that list them but they might not actually be available to buy.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 25-09-14, 01:45
lynx42 lynx42 is offline
Rick Cove
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paynesville, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by motto View Post
Thinking on that 9.25-16 tyre size (which I had never heard of before now). Maybe they inadvertently put a couple of numerals in the wrong place and it should have been 9.00-16.25
Now that would have saved a lot of confusion and would be damn close to reality.

David
No David, They didn't. The Ford Lynx Scout Car should run 9.25 x 16 tyres and I have 5 here taken off my Lynx and a spare.

Click image for larger version

Name:	Lynx continues 195.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	95.5 KB
ID:	68029

Click image for larger version

Name:	Lynx continues 203.jpg
Views:	4
Size:	83.0 KB
ID:	68030

I have now fitted 9.00 x 16 tyres and they are quite a bit higher than the 9.25 x 16s I took off.

Regards Rick.
__________________
1916 Albion A10
1942 White Scoutcar
1940 Chev Staff Car
1940 F30S Cab11
1940 Chev WA LRDG "Te Hai"
1941 F60L Cab12
1943 Ford Lynx
1942 Bren Gun Carrier VR no.2250
Humber FV1601A
Saracen Mk1(?)
25pdr. 1940 Weir No.266
25pdr. Australian Short No.185 (?)
KVE Member.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 25-03-15, 08:17
Matt Austin Matt Austin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Junee New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 113
Default

Just thought I'd bump this thread to see if anyone had any recent experience with 10.50x18 or 1100x18 tyres in Australia.

The other option is changing to use 20" rims. Are 20" CMP-type rims and tyres available in Australia?

Cheers,
Matt
__________________
1942 International K5 3-ton truck ARN 43362
1940 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff-car
1941 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff car
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 25-03-15, 09:59
Keith Webb's Avatar
Keith Webb Keith Webb is offline
Film maker, CMP addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Macleod, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 8,216
Default 20" CMP type rims

You shouldn't have much trouble getting 20" rims, but you might just have to buy a CMP to get them A lot of people use the 12.00-20 tyres which might look a bit big on your Inter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Austin View Post
Just thought I'd bump this thread to see if anyone had any recent experience with 10.50x18 or 1100x18 tyres in Australia.

The other option is changing to use 20" rims. Are 20" CMP-type rims and tyres available in Australia?

Cheers,
Matt
__________________
Film maker

42 FGT No8 (Aust) remains
42 FGT No9 (Aust)
42 F15
Keith Webb
Macleod, Victoria Australia
Also Canadian Military Pattern Vehicles group on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/groups/canadianmilitarypattern
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 25-03-15, 11:33
hrpearce's Avatar
hrpearce hrpearce is offline
WO8 C15A 142736
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Batlow Road near the Cow & Calf
Posts: 1,958
Default

Matt's Inter is 6 stud CMP rims are 8 stud.
__________________
Robert Pearce.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 25-03-15, 12:49
Matt Austin Matt Austin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Junee New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 113
Default

Thanks, gents.

I was wondering about the possibility of modifying the Inter to accept 8-stud wheels. I'm not overly familiar with such things, however.

I'm really just exploring the options.

Cheers,
Matt
__________________
1942 International K5 3-ton truck ARN 43362
1940 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff-car
1941 Holden-bodied Chevrolet staff car
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 25-03-15, 15:54
cletrac (RIP)'s Avatar
cletrac (RIP) cletrac (RIP) is offline
David Pope
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Eston, Sask, Canada
Posts: 2,251
Default

I'm pretty sure Hummer tires use a 16.5" rim. Most of them are 12.50 x 16.5.
__________________
1940 Cab 11 C8 Wireless with 1A2 box & 11 set
1940 Cab 11 C8 cab and chassis
1940 Cab 11 C15 with 2A1 & Motley mount & Lewis gun
1940 Cab 11 F15A w/ Chev rear ends
1941 Cab 12 F15A
1942-44 Cab 13 F15A x 5
1942 cab 13 F15A with 2B1 box
1943 cab 13 F15A with 2H1 box
1943 Cab 13 C8A HUP
1944 Cab 13 C15A with 2C1 box
1943 Cletrac M2 High Speed Tractor
MkII Bren gun carrier chassis x 2
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 14:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016