When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I bought my 60 completely restored three years ago. It had two year old Cokers that looked like they had zero miles on them. I've put 2,000 miles on the car and got really tired of the harsh ride, so I replaced them with Diamond Back 2s, which are Toyos.
Completely different ride. Smooth, quiet, and handles better (noticeably better, even though I don't push it around).
The Cokers looked good, but unless you have a trailer queen (not judging, just sayin), spring for the DBs.
BTW, DB was a pleasure to do business with, tires arrived early, nicely wrapped in clear plastic.
Diamondback gets overwhelming responses as superior, all year every year. I hate that since Coker is a local company and they do a lot to promote the hobby around here, but for driven cars it's true.
Probably a way to rationalize it is to give Coker credit for making tires for very and very obscure early cars- which often aren't driven and when they are don't reach high speeds or have performance demands as a big criteria.
Diamondback gets overwhelming responses as superior, all year every year. I hate that since Coker is a local company and they do a lot to promote the hobby around here, but for driven cars it's true.
Probably a way to rationalize it is to give Coker credit for making tires for very and very obscure early cars- which often aren't driven and when they are don't reach high speeds or have performance demands as a big criteria.
The difference in driving was night and day. The look equally good. If you don't drive the car...
I bought my 60 completely restored three years ago. It had two year old Cokers that looked like they had zero miles on them. I've put 2,000 miles on the car and got really tired of the harsh ride, so I replaced them with Diamond Back 2s, which are Toyos.
Completely different ride. Smooth, quiet, and handles better (noticeably better, even though I don't push it around).
The Cokers looked good, but unless you have a trailer queen (not judging, just sayin), spring for the DBs.
BTW, DB was a pleasure to do business with, tires arrived early, nicely wrapped in clear plastic.
Yes, BUT you are comparing apples to oranges. Bias belted non radial 50 year old tire technology to modern day radial tire technology. I have custom made wide white wall Cooper radials on my 57 and they are a world apart from what I replaced as in the old bias belted BF Goodrich repo tires.
Yes, BUT you are comparing apples to oranges. Bias belted non radial 50 year old tire technology to modern day radial tire technology. I have custom made wide white wall Cooper radials on my 57 and they are a world apart from what I replaced as in the old bias belted BF Goodrich repo tires.
You can only compare appearance. There is no comparison when it comes to performance.
We only use Coker's for rollers in the shop, the only thing they are safe for using.
Ok, I replaced my original bias ply tires for Coker Classics years ago and that is the only replacement tires I have ever run on my '60. Over the 27 years I've owned my car I've never had a problem with these tires and the ride difference is like they say above, night and day difference from the ones that came on the car orginally.
To say Cokers are not safe without posting some supporting evidence is not doing a company justification for their endless commitment to helping keep numerous classics on the road. Are you saying that all those people out there who purchased Coker replacements are driving on unsafe tires? That sound like libel to me. I read the company actually purchased many of the old tire molds so that purists could get the tires they needed to restore their classic. Not sure if Diamond Back has done any of that.
All I can state is based on my own experience. I have put thousands of miles on several sets of Coker tires and have never had any issues. I am probably due for another replacement set, but only due to age, not tread runout, etc. Last year when I traveled across country in all sorts of driving conditions, including hours thru the scorching desert, those tires got me there and back without stranding me on the side of the road. The tires I currently have maintain plenty of tread depth, but many would recommend replacement due to the age of the rubber material.
I am sold on Cokers and would recommend them to anyone without hesitation.
I sold my 65 with 13 year old Coker redlines on it. Never had any issue of any kind. Replaced wide white bias tires on my 60 a year ago with Coker radial wide whites, again no problems. Based on a lot of opinions here, I spoke with Diamondback about replacing the 1965 tires with Michelin based tires, but they no longer could get 205-75-15 from Michelin. Then last year decided to replace the 1960 tires, called Diamondback about the 205-75-15 Toyo based tires and they told me there was a 3 week minimum back order. Called Coker, received tires at Discount Tire the next day.
Ok, I replaced my original bias ply tires for Coker Classics years ago and that is the only replacement tires I have ever run on my '60. Over the 27 years I've owned my car I've never had a problem with these tires and the ride difference is like they say above, night and day difference from the ones that came on the car orginally.
To say Cokers are not safe without posting some supporting evidence is not doing a company justification for their endless commitment to helping keep numerous classics on the road. Are you saying that all those people out there who purchased Coker replacements are driving on unsafe tires? That sound like libel to me. I read the company actually purchased many of the old tire molds so that purists could get the tires they needed to restore their classic. Not sure if Diamond Back has done any of that.
All I can state is based on my own experience. I have put thousands of miles on several sets of Coker tires and have never had any issues. I am probably due for another replacement set, but only due to age, not tread runout, etc. Last year when I traveled across country in all sorts of driving conditions, including hours thru the scorching desert, those tires got me there and back without stranding me on the side of the road. The tires I currently have maintain plenty of tread depth, but many would recommend replacement due to the age of the rubber material.
I am sold on Cokers and would recommend them to anyone without hesitation.
Ted
As a retired LEO and driving instructor, I would suggest you try a high speed lane change maneuver and post your findings.
I've had both - whitewalls DBs on the '61 and Coker redlines on the '67 Chevelle and I don't baby my cars. Both handled well and were NOT dangerous IMO. I just didn't like the Coker's "look"...there were scalloped places in the exterior sidewalls that just looked weird to me. Hard to capture in pictures though.
Last edited by Frankie the Fink; 09-26-2017 at 08:26 AM.
Diamondback gets overwhelming responses as superior, all year every year. I hate that since Coker is a local company and they do a lot to promote the hobby around here, but for driven cars it's true.
Probably a way to rationalize it is to give Coker credit for making tires for very and very obscure early cars- which often aren't driven and when they are don't reach high speeds or have performance demands as a big criteria.
They fill a niche that benefits a wide range of car enthusiasts and particularly for 50s era and pre-war vehicles. Diamondback is a better option for our cars but Coker doesn't deserve some of the more damming comments that are made about them. I have a set of Coker redline radials on a GTX that are about 15 years old. They don't ride well but look good, haven't given me any problems and I'll probably get rid of them for something from Diamondback one of these days - in part because Diamond appears to actually be slightly less expensive.
Last edited by DansYellow66; 09-26-2017 at 01:18 PM.
Here's a different question... I much prefer Diamond Back and have had several sets, and would choose them again for the classic applications, like the vintage wide whites like I put on my '58 or the red lines I put on my '69.
But what about applications such as a simple white wall radial for my '63? I don't think it's necessary to go through a classic repro tire company to buy tires like this, is it? Would it be true to say buying nice, premium radials with a white wall similar to stock is a better choice? In quality and price?
I am looking now at the alternatives, but I've had a set of Coker radials on my 57 for 18 years - no problems whatever, no cracks anywhere, and whitewalls white as snow. They don't get a lot of miles, but they've been perfect.
09-22-2017, 04:34 PM
Coker vs. Diamond Back
You can only compare appearance. There is no comparison when it comes to performance.
