Part 2 of my tires saga (see part 1 here ... ).

Armed with all your good advice (thank you, thank you), I went back to Big O with my dukes up. Told the manager the story and the problem, and unbelievably, he said "We want you to be happy. Which tires do you want to replace them with?" After recovering from this unexpected good service, I mentioned the Yokohama Avid Touring that some of you recommended. He then suggested that perhaps I should go back to the 185R14 size that I had originally, because these have stiffer side walls, and that perhaps the bad handling I am experiencing is because the sidewalls are softer. This is the first thing my volvo mechanic said, as well, when I mentioned the problem to him. The Big O man offered the following in a 185R14:
Bridgestone 603V, these have a 'D' load rating
Yokohama Y356 with a C rating.
He said that these are designed for VW Vanagons, but that he has put them on Volvo 245s before as well. I told him I wanted to think about because I don't want to make the same mistake twice.

I did some research on tirerack.com, and I can't find out much about these models of Bridgestone or Yokohama tires--even on the manufacturer web sites. He showed me the bridgestones, and they weigh a ton. They are marked as Light Truck tires. Sure look sturdy. But I'm a bit worried that no one seems to use them.

I'm inclined to go with the Yokos, or perhaps with my original choice, the Michelin Harmony, although these are more expensive. These options would get me out of the hard to find 185R14 size and into the p-metric 195 75R14 size. Both are rated 92S. The Big O guy said that these would be similar to the Big O Aspen tires that he originally sold me (which thanks to Kane's link I discovered are manufactured by Cooper), but my gut says he is wrong, and the Aspen's are simply inferior tires.

I'll make my decision over the weekend, but since these tire choices seem to be such a religious issue, I thought I'd try one last post for advice.
--
Steve Rappaport '87 245, '88 244

I got the Yoko Avid Touring tires and they seem much better. I think I could use new shocks in the rear. Thanks for the advice.
--
Steve Rappaport '87 245, '88 244

The 185r14 was also 'the' Mercedes sedan tire size in the 70's and 80's, so it will continue to be made for a while.

I still think that the problem you described has less to do with tires than the front-end alignment, especially since you mentioned 'pulling.'

Before you make a final decision on tires, look carefully at the wear ratings. Extremely high wear ratings (substantially over 400) are achieved with hard rubber compounds which have relatively poor traction, especially in the wet.

With 400K miles between 2 245's, I've used OEM Michelins (ugh), Goodyear Eagle GT, Continental (wore out in a flash), Toyo and Yokohama in the 14-inch sizes. The Yokohamas gave the best aggregate ride, traction and wear for my money (specifically, Avid T4 in 205/70-14).

Cool ... I know I wouldn't have expected it - a place these days that actually offers some level (if still not a lot) of customer sastifaction resolutions.

A 185R14 will not have a stiffer sidewall, as its profile is higher than that of a 195/75/14. Results seem mixed as whether it's a 78 or 82 profile ... with a diameter of 25.6", it calculates to about a 80-profile.

You will get better handling out of a touring class tire, so still look into that class of tires first in the 195/75/14 size. I would not consider the truck tire.

-- Kane
--
Blossom II - '91 745Ti/M46 ... Bubbles - '74 144GL/BW35 ... Buttercup - '86 245GL/AW70 ... The Wayback Machine - '64 P220/M40

According to this site, the stiffer side wall required by the Vanagon is the primary reason many of the 185R14s are still manufactured. Most models of this size that exist have a reinforced sidewall, which apparently is very stiff, and this gives them the C or D load rating.
--
Steve Rappaport '87 245, '88 244