Alfa Romeo Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
1977 Spider 49-State
Joined
·
235 Posts
Hi

These are back in stock


That is a fresh batch of the original Cinturato CA67.
I bought my CA67 tires last year. Extremely pleased. They look proper but they make the car so much more playful and direct. Appreciate your videos and perspective as well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
618 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I bought my CA67 tires last year. Extremely pleased. They look proper but they make the car so much more playful and direct. Appreciate your videos and perspective as well.
Thank you for that.

I often feel i am fighting a one man battle encouraging people to put the thinner tyres back on these non powersteering cars. I think people forget the joy of a light progressive handling rear wheel drive car. the numbness of todays dull cars that do everything for you i think take away peoples understanding of being that involved in the drive of a car.

I can honestly say, though i get a lot of flack for constantly banging on about as a road car a classic Alfa handles so much better on its proper tyre size; i don't think anyone who has gone back to the right size ever regrets it. I think they always sing the praises of its "playful and direct" handling, and how much more enjoyable it is to drive. like flares fat tyres are a phase and a mistake that shouldn't be encouraged. (Mini Skirts are still fine though).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
Do you find that there is a significant difference between the original 165/80 14s and 185/70 14s? I have mostly run 185s on my 69 spider but years ago had a set of Kleber 165s that were wonderful but wore out very quickly.
 

·
Registered
1977 Spider 49-State
Joined
·
235 Posts
Thank you for that.

I often feel i am fighting a one man battle encouraging people to put the thinner tyres back on these non powersteering cars. I think people forget the joy of a light progressive handling rear wheel drive car. the numbness of todays dull cars that do everything for you i think take away peoples understanding of being that involved in the drive of a car.

I can honestly say, though i get a lot of flack for constantly banging on about as a road car a classic Alfa handles so much better on its proper tyre size; i don't think anyone who has gone back to the right size ever regrets it. I think they always sing the praises of its "playful and direct" handling, and how much more enjoyable it is to drive. like flares fat tyres are a phase and a mistake that shouldn't be encouraged. (Mini Skirts are still fine though).

No shortage of owners who install a 205-series tire believing they have re-engineered the car to a new ethereal standard that was hitherto unattainable prior to their fettling. The car was designed specifically utilizing the CA67 Pirelli tire. The rounded shoulders have gobs of appeal, aesthetically and practically speaking. For the most authentic and pleasurable driving experience that Alfa Romeo had wanted to create, there is no other way to go. Alfa Romeo knew more than the Armchair Fangios. Agreed, keep fighting that fight, Dougal!!!

Simply, many Alfa owners are off-put by the price of the CA67. To each their own. Owning an Alfa, Ferrari, Maserati, etc I feel requires a certain responsibility of ownership. Cheapness should not be an excuse, but very often is.

Probably one of the most polarizing examples of tire resentment is the Michelin TRX. Another excellent Longstone video reviews the nuances of the tire. A set for my Ferrari Mondial will cost me approximately $2,500, but I will never consider swapping out rims for other tire options, despite significant cost savings. The TRX is the defacto tire for the Ferrari Mondial and other classic high performance vehicles. Critics speak from their purses rather than any meaningful experiences or credentials.


1686257
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
On the next Giulia that I will finish in a little (too ...) time, I will certainly mount some Cinturato 155HR15.
I really appreciate the tightness of the Avon CR6 ZZ to the same extent, there is no comparison in performance. Unfortunately, in purely road use they become a bit limiting ... and then they are too heavy!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
618 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited by Moderator)
Do you find that there is a significant difference between the original 165/80 14s and 185/70 14s? I have mostly run 185s on my 69 spider but years ago had a set of Kleber 165s that were wonderful but wore out very quickly.
Now to be fair this does sound like a shameless sales pitch, but it is true honest.

The suitability of a tyres carcass structure to the chassis it is going to be fitted on is also important.

So though your Kleber tyre was a 165R14, fitting a proper 165HR14 Pirlli Cinturato CA67 will handle much better thana 165R14 Kleber that was built to perform in a different enviroment than on a classic Alfa.

This right carcass for the right car becomes much more poinient when you start moving on to wider low profile tyres.

The 185/70VR14 Pirelli Cinturato CN36 or 185/70VR14 Michelin XVS will perform miles better than a modern tyre with the same dimention 185/70R14, because it has a suitable carcass.

But really keep the right size on your car, and fit a proper period carcass.

But really with your car just fit this
Vertebrate Light Font Mammal Organism
 

·
Push hard and live
Joined
·
11,548 Posts
The 78 Spider owners manual lists both CA67 and CN36 as original fitment, noting the former for steel and the latter for alloy wheels.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
618 Posts
Hmm! I'm not sure that is totally clear.

i think 165HR14 CA67 is original equipment.

However 185/70VR14 CN36 was an optional extra, that wasn't what Alfa chose to fit and recomended. It was what Alfa offered if you wanted a snazzier looking wheel and tyre. But its only fashion.

It is just the same today when you buy a new car. it will come with 15" or 16" wheels, however they will allow you to utterly ruin the ride of your new car by fitting 18" - 20" wheels. And the ride is dreadful. However the handling deficiencies with modern cars and wide tyres are not so defined because the handling is completely different. Swaths of advers camber that comes on when/if the car rolls under cornering forces, huge amounts of caster that is overcome by very clever powersteering, but it is there to self centre the steering and over come the tracking caused by wider tyres. and all designed to keep that wide tyre foot print in contact with the road. Not like what would happen on your car when it leans under cornering forces. on a modern wiude tyre it lifts the inside face off the road. see figure above

Another interesting point is that early Alfa got rave reviews for its handling, but what about the very later cars of the late 70s that had 185/70R14 tyres on. did they get such good reviews for their handling?

There is no doubt that if you are going to go wider the CN36 or XAS are far better than any other 185/70R14 as a road tyre. but 165 is still a nicer road tyre on your cars if you are going to drive it properly. If you just want to accelerate in a straight line and stop in a straight line, then maybe fatter is better, but not for handling.

No doubt the CN36 is cheap as chips though
 

·
Registered
1977 Spider 49-State
Joined
·
235 Posts
I'm not even sure the CA67 was a common offering in the late 1970's (at least in the States), hence maybe the Alfa Romeo push to include the CN36 as an option? Looking through a couple of issues from Car &Driver and Road &Track from 1977, tire sellers didn't have the CA67 listed (though the Michelin XAS was there). CN36 was there too.

Could also be the CN36 is an easier tire to live with for cruising as well as for use on our larger highway roads at speed, hence the OEM offering. Maybe a compromise on handling but ideal for other reasons. By the late 70's, it wasn't just jubilant enthusiasts buying foreign cars. Ordinary consumers have a say.

When I see these ridiculous oversized rims and tires, then why not put 20" rims with 335-series on a Ford Model T? Gotta love that grip, right? A car is suppose to have just enough tire designed for it's application and no more.

When I fly around a turn on my CA67s, I'll be damnned, it feels just like Dougal's picture. It's a weird sensation and forces you to have more trust in the car than your initial sense may lead you to believe. I never realized the visual but those pictures make perfect sense now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Thank you for that.

I often feel i am fighting a one man battle encouraging people to put the thinner tyres back on these non powersteering cars. I think people forget the joy of a light progressive handling rear wheel drive car. the numbness of todays dull cars that do everything for you i think take away peoples understanding of being that involved in the drive of a car.

I can honestly say, though i get a lot of flack for constantly banging on about as a road car a classic Alfa handles so much better on its proper tyre size; i don't think anyone who has gone back to the right size ever regrets it. I think they always sing the praises of its "playful and direct" handling, and how much more enjoyable it is to drive. like flares fat tyres are a phase and a mistake that shouldn't be encouraged. (Mini Skirts are still fine though).
Good timing of your post. It's about time to replace the old budget tires on my Spider from the PO, and I didn't really know where to start. I just had a good browse through your website, and I'm sold on going with either the CN36 or CA67s. I had no idea period correct tires were even an option.

Just curious though - what do you mean by progressive handling?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,356 Posts
In the 1970s, CN36 was available as a 165HR14 and other 82 profile sizes. I bought a set for my Lotus Elan in 1982. The CA67 tread was marketed as the CN54 with steel belting, and this was replaced by the P3 later in the 1970s.

I do not remember the CA67 being fitted to 2000s; the last one I saw was the original, brand new spare in my 1971 1750 GTV. The 2000 GTVs sent here were all originally fitted with 165 Michelin XAS if you were lucky or some British Goodyear G800S if you weren't.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,356 Posts
Progressive handling... here is my view on it.

People fit wider tires to get a "larger contact patch". But load on a tire acts a bit like a body floating on water: load deflects the tire up to an equilibrium point depending on tire construction and air pressure. A wider tire such as a 185/70R14 typically has a load index of 88; a 165R14 has an index of 84. Everything else being equal, a 185/70 will deflect less under the same load as a 165 would, because of its higher load capacity. It follows that the 185/70 will provide a wider but shorter contact patch than the 165.

When a tire is rolling, the deflection causes a geometric phenomenon: the uniform angular speed of the tire vs the non uniform radius over the deflected contact patch make the surface of the tire slide just before entering and exiting the contact patch. As the cornering and acceleration forces build up, the sliding area becomes larger and the static or "sticking" area becomes shorter until the forces become just too much and the whole contact patch starts to slide.

As the 165 has a longer contact patch, you can feel more of a progression during this transition towards sliding.
1686398
 

·
Registered
1977 Spider 49-State
Joined
·
235 Posts
In the 1970s, CN36 was available as a 165HR14 and other 82 profile sizes. I bought a set for my Lotus Elan in 1982. The CA67 tread was marketed as the CN54 with steel belting, and this was replaced by the P3 later in the 1970s.

I do not remember the CA67 being fitted to 2000s; the last one I saw was the original, brand new spare in my 1971 1750 GTV. The 2000 GTVs sent here were all originally fitted with 165 Michelin XAS if you were lucky or some British Goodyear G800S if you weren't.
I went back and checked my 1977 magazines and couldn't find CA67 165HR14 as an option. Didn't the Elan have 13" rims? I did see CA67 165HR13 as an option. Also saw the P3 as a 165SR13 and 165SR14. There happened to be a photo of the CA54 (also available in 165SR13 and 165SR14) and at first glance, looks almost identical to the CA67. I was fooled. But after comparing to the CA67, the tread pattern is different enough, especially on the shoulders.

My 1977 Spider came with what I believe to be the original spare tire, a "Made In France" Michelin XAS 165HR14. Does that mean my Spider started off on the right foot in life? :unsure:
 

·
Registered
1977 Spider 49-State
Joined
·
235 Posts
Progressive handling... here is my view on it.

People fit wider tires to get a "larger contact patch". But load on a tire acts a bit like a body floating on water: load deflects the tire up to an equilibrium point depending on tire construction and air pressure. A wider tire such as a 185/70R14 typically has a load index of 88; a 165R14 has an index of 84. Everything else being equal, a 185/70 will deflect less under the same load as a 165 would, because of its higher load capacity. It follows that the 185/70 will provide a wider but shorter contact patch than the 165.

When a tire is rolling, the deflection causes a geometric phenomenon: the uniform angular speed of the tire vs the non uniform radius over the deflected contact patch make the surface of the tire slide just before entering and exiting the contact patch. As the cornering and acceleration forces build up, the sliding area becomes larger and the static or "sticking" area becomes shorter until the forces become just too much and the whole contact patch starts to slide.

As the 165 has a longer contact patch, you can feel more of a progression during this transition towards sliding.
View attachment 1686398

Wow man, that's deep (as the bong is being passed around).

You mentioned air pressure too. CA67 is 24 front/26 rear. Guessing those lower pressure probably help play into the deflection/progressive aspect needed to take advantage of the CA67 tire design? Most tire shops/owners are inflating anywhere from 32 to 40. Could only imagine what that would do to things. Incidentally, the XAS is listed at 21 front. Would love to see R&D video footage of that deflection in a corner.

When I had my wheels balanced, the installer didn't believe me on the tire pressures. Same with the alignment guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Actually the logic about load index is not correct.
The contact patch is a direct relation of load on the tire and the pressure in it. The sidewalls do not carry significant load. The air is doing it. The tire is basically a balloon to keep the air inside. The tire with higher load index can use higher pressure for more load capacity. Or load index can be higher by having a bigger air volume (bigger tire). But with the same pressure the contact area is still the same.

The logic that a wide tire has a shorter contact area is totally correct. This is a desired effect as a long contact patch means the tire has to deform a lot wasting energy and grip.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
618 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
I would suggest sticking with XAS or CA67.


The Vredestein isn’t a classic tyre.

the XAS was invented to make the Citroen DS cruise at high speed with less wandering. They did wonders for my Daimler V8 saloon, and I have the next evolution the XVS on my Silver Shadow. That needs all the help it can get to keep the steering a bit more precise.

however my Lotus Elite like driving far too fast in the wiggly bits, so I have 155-15 Cinturato CA67. And it is fantastic.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top