| I know that Steve Mieritz was on radials in Peru - CSP has been 
the main reason that I've considered trying biasplys, but after 
Steve's showing, I dunno.  
>From what (non scientific) research I've done, the radials seem to 
be faster on concrete(significantly), about the same on asphalt, 
and slower than the BPs on crappy asphalt/low grip/damp conditions. 
Feel is another story.  I've not really given the biasplys a fair 
shake, but I've spoken with a good number of people who have, and 
so far, most would agree with the above, I believe.  Names omitted 
to avoid putting words in their mouth.
Steve won CSP by .9, though - pretty convincing(OTOH, Kevin beat me 
by 1.2, same car, same tires, so who knows...).  *He* seemed to 
like them, though:).
Iain Mannix
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Linnhoff, Eric wrote:
> Hmm, I wonder what percentages of CSP uses the radials versus the bias ply
> Hoosiers?
> 
> Just curious.  It's mostly a matter of personal preferences and what feels
> good to each driver, right?  Other than the facts that bias ply tires are
> intolerant of too-narrow wheels but don't need a lot of neg camber and the
> radials need some negative camber to work but will work on narrower wheels.
> 
> So why choose one caracass construction over the other?
> 
> Eric Linnhoff in KC
> 1998 Dodge Neon R/T
> #69 DS    #13 TLS
> eric10mm@qni.com
> 
> "I ask sir, who is the militia? It is the whole people...To disarm the
> people, that is the best and most effective way to enslave them..." -
> George Mason
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 225/45-13 on the first three cars, Pilson's car has 225/50-13, 
> Mark Sommer's car has 225/45-13 biasplys(everyone else is 
> using radials).
> 
 |