I have an almost brand new set of four WWW radial tires. The size is 195/75R16. I tried searching online for the bias ply size that would equal the radial size, but was unsuccessful. Does anyone know the bias ply size equivalent for this radial tire or point me in the right direction?
I'm trying to figure out if the tires will work on my Panel truck or the Airflow. The Airflow currently has 7.00-16 tires and the Panel has 6.00-16 tires.
I can tell you that you're very close to the original 6.00 x 16 size that came with our trucks. Coker told me last fall that a 6.00 x 16 is basically equivalent to a 195/80/16. Call them or Diamondback and they can give you the exact size conversion for that tire.
You could also just hold them up next to your Airflow and Panel tires and see how they compare with each other. You should be able to get a feel for the overall size, especially height. I'd be curious to know what you find.
Called Coker and they couldn't really help. Called Diamondback and was told pretty much what Doc stated. It's closer to the 6.00-16 size.
The tires were on a 40 Ford previously. I was thinking about selling the tires, but I guess I'll hold onto to them since the 52 will need the tires replaced soon, or I may find two more 16" wheels (already have two) and put them on the 51.
Trucks used what corresponds today to an 85-series tire (profile). I have some 16" truck rims with LT215/85-16 that are just about an exact match to the old bias ply 7.00-16's. By modern standards they look really tall and skinny (they are over 30" tall). IMO the WWW's are going to look short and skinny on your panel, a larger diameter filling the wheel wells really helps with the "look" (not to mention gearing). If you want the panel sitting lower, they'd be OK.
The truck in my avatar has LT 215/85/16's on it. They look kind of full in my fender wells, but I'm satisfied. Open my gallery (not much there) and take a look. I actually posted a picture of my spare (doing me a lot of good in my shop and not up under the truck) last night in another thread. They're much taller than you think. The picture is kind of angled down, so it's hard to tell.