Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: First use date of Pirelli CN36 185 70 VR speed rating on longhoods before used in RS

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,759

    First use date of Pirelli CN36 185 70 VR speed rating on longhoods before used in RS

    This question in title came up in another thread

    Starting this as a separate thread At suggesting of others to avoid historical questions coming up among a thread about driving impressions of current CN 36 offering.

    This is a thread to get evidence one way or another on how it was with Pirelli tyre offerings on TES from circa 69 to 73

    As background it is understood generally that the Pirelli cinturato CN36 came out in late sixties —according to pirelli generic history 69 — no doubt it was in range of sizes for a range of Marques and models.

    This of course does not mean it was in the exact size and speed rating in 1969 required for the 911 TES on 6 inch rims. Or even if it was of right size and speed rating the factory adopted it for 911 over other Pirelli offerings in use at that point. That’s hopefully what will emerge. Im not sure if Porsche used lesser speed rating than VR at this time for lower top speed T but it seems VR was used in T E and S as well as by RS for model 73.

    From my Direct dealings with Pirelli recently asking questions about the reissue cn36 it is clear that due to the channels they use for niche classic vs core business the folks at Pirelli do not have the definitive history (hardly surprising for a big corporate it mirrors what we we see of Porsche AG lack of depth from “customer service” on their product of five decades ago).

    From my personal archives I’ve a few data points I’m happy to share here as a discussion starter, not exhaustive / conclusive.

    So far these do seem to point to the adoption of cn36 on 911 TES being no earlier than model year 72 (but other hard evidence coming forward from ESR community might change that initial impression):

    Here is what I have to kick off:
    1) road and track edition February 1972 features a 911E. It is the only thing from back in the day from a trustworthy source I’ve found so far that names a specific Pirelli product in use on that 911. The tyre at that point is a CN 72 .... interestingly not a CN36 that some here may have presumed was the Pirelli tyre for 911 by 72

    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 1026
Size:  117.8 KB

    A comment mentions the USA importer so it seems reasonable to assume car used is the representative spec they provided to prominent publication for a significant road test of a 911. Other tyre brands were used like Michelin and Dunlop but were others beyond the cn72 ( Like Cn36) also being used?


    2) the supplier is specifically Veith Pirelli a company Porsche bought in Germany in early 60s
    Name:  7BCA4886-D87D-403D-8524-BE393F684435.jpg
Views: 1010
Size:  110.1 KB
    Further digging in my reference papers suggests the 185/70VR15 CN36 may still have been in preparation at that point

    3) I happen to have a 22 July 1971 Veith Pirelli preiseliste among my collection of old references date so roughly coincident with the 71-72 model year switchover and maybe even production car being tested

    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 1026
Size:  120.5 KB

    4) the Veith Pirelli booklet shows at least two tyre types that might seem most relevant to 911 which I assume would require VR speed rating as per the E spec in the R&T test
    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 1009
Size:  73.7 KB

    5) assuming all Porsche 911 would require VR speed rating of 185/70 15 this is the entry in the Veith Pirelli price list Name:  image.jpg
Views: 996
Size:  76.5 KB

    6) there is a footnote *) against the Cn36 “in vorbereitunng” which I think ( subject to confirmation by native German speaker) means in preparation.

    7) taking these pieces of information together suggests that around the beginning of 72 model year the 911 had cn72 185/70 VR 15 because the CN 36 despite being around since late 60s was “in preparation” so not yet available for use at that time.

    8) by early October 1972 the 73 Carrera RS was launched in Paris. While I could provide a lot of evidence it is a well known fact that the model drew attention to the use of Pirelli CN36 specifically because of a small historical first for a roadcar: use of different size 6&7 15 rims front and rear with different sized tyres. 185 70 VR 15 front and 215 60 VR rears. In addition to the front to rear axle difference the 60 then low profile was a new innovation on roadcar. Pirelli for a while were the only available source of this RS combo until Dunlop caught up and some RS got that brand. Since this is well known I won’t provide photo evidence as it is probably redundant on ESR.

    9) the Pirelli tyres used on the RS through production and until December 1974 in the G Series 2.7 Mfi were tube type and man made (nylon or rayon or whatever man made radial belts) but Porsche is known to have switched to steel belt tubeless cn36 in December 1974. I actually have an early tube type non steel cn36 in my original RS parts stash and can check the material if it becomes relevant; but certainly not steel belt or tubeless at first!

    A few questions:

    a) is what evidence is there from factory or verifiable in period sources that the TES series production cars got CN 36 185 70 VR 15 tyres before the RS used them Around autumn 72? If so when did they supersede the cn72 that was evidently the German made Pirelli on the R&T road-test example?
    b) are there other examples of the CN 72 variant being the tyre the Pirelli factory used beyond that one R&T verified example?

    Probably best to leave Michelin Dunlop etc other makes to one side; not sure if this particular thread should go back to Pirelli before the cn 36 even existed 69?

    I don’t have an axe to grind because fortunately I know exactly the factory tyres on my car in December 1972. Compared to some parts the factory tyre fit Evolutions is maybe less well documented here. One of strengths is when ESR works to establish facts rather than accepting vague presumptions. Of course exceptions etc apply to confuse but often sufficient patterns emerge so maybe it’ll become clear if CN tyre was used significantly (or not) before it appeared on 73 RS.

    I don’t know but based on the above points showing CN 72 verifiably in use Feb 72 my hunch is maybe not. Maybe cn71 like seen on that Roadtest E was used for Most longhoods as Pirelli offering. At least until RS with its mismatched sets arrived a bit after summer shutdown. Maybe the Veith Pirelli “in preparation” footnote soon became production ready and the CN 36 did see significant use spring and summer of 72? Let’s see if there is info to shed some light.

    Suggested to kick this off if it clarifies some of the assumptions and inferences that were potentially confusing on the other thread. Up to folks with TES to use thread to get better understanding of Pirelli on 911 — or not.

    While I prefer to see what the evidence says somehow with the “in preparation “ footnote comment on that relevant VR size spec it seems more likely time needed to complete development and ramp up and consume any cn72 in extended supply chain; possibly begin to see CN36 use scale up at start of model year 73. Unless that footnote comment is completely wrong and the R&T cn72 example in my magazine is a total anomaly can’t see the Cn36 being the Pirelli tyre type referenced on a 911 MY 70 kardex. I have a Porsche rare engineering publication published around 72 that shows CN36 at Porsche undergoing a rig test but without a specific date doesn’t pinpoint. Other photos in the book generally are around 72 however. Odd exceptions like all things Porsche not withstanding! I’m guessing we see the CN 36 become a popular offering for MY 73 and more commonplace tyre on TES by springtime 73. Be interesting — open to be proved wrong inferring too much on the initial evidence presented above as as starter.
    Steve
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by 911MRP; 05-31-2020 at 06:23 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Posts
    5,440
    Mike Fitton # 2071
    2018 911S Carrera White
    2012 991 Platinum Silver ( Gone)
    1971 911T Targa Bahia Red (Gone to France)
    1995 911 Carrera Polar Silver (Gone)

    No Affiliation with City of Chicago!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,759
    ^^^ So another Veith Pirelli Cinturato 72 on a 71 911. Not a cinturato CN36! Assuming that DOT184 is the date code it decodes as 18th week of the 4th year of decade so 74 (or 84) because neither the dot date coding and the 1964 car wasn’t around in 1964. Later moved to four digits. I’d say 74 seems more likley given the veith Pirelli branding. If that is the code then suggests not original but possibly an early change that has survived.

    From what I see in the links it seems that on balance of information so far the (Veith) cinturato 72 was the Pirelli tyre used on the 911 around 71 72 so the word “Pirelli” written on a kardex does not signify the type used by factory was a CN36. In fact seems more likely referring to the Veith Pirelli cinturato 72s that are up here for that 71 72 era. Kardex not available for MY 73 I’m told.

    The earliest verifiable reference to a cn36 on TES rather than RS I’ve found is on a RHD T in a UK road-test published in spring 1973. A car on UK was built well into the model year 73.Name:  ACB70001-8BC8-4991-BA82-420EDC8B5AD1.jpg
Views: 879
Size:  82.0 KB

    Not conclusive yet but so far but taken together still suggests the CN36 was Pirelli offering that superseded the cinturato 72 around the time of RS. Early days new evidence might change that.
    Steve
    PS Not exactly relevant as it is bigger than a 185 /70 15 but for reference here is one of my 215/60 VR15 cn36 German. Important to note it is a tube type. Dot 404 date Being last week sept so before December 1974 when the factory records show the cn36 changed to tubeless with steel belt. Clearly not 40 week of 1984 as would by then be the revised tube type steel belted cn36. They were a first replacement of worn factory rears for early RS so now carefully stored for original to factory spec purposes for my car as that is what is written by hand of worker on its factory build/ conversion papers. Not able to access place where car and tyre are so can’t take photo the 185 70 Vr 15 Cn36 from the set.
    Name:  2813E7B5-9751-4B8F-9E2D-1FAB1F92C059.jpeg
Views: 938
Size:  129.6 KB
    Name:  F5751970-3CF6-4531-9921-16A18C7A55D7.jpeg
Views: 880
Size:  88.8 KB
    Name:  9DA88D99-6476-48C9-B67B-701F675745BF.jpeg
Views: 912
Size:  168.4 KB
    Last edited by 911MRP; 06-01-2020 at 08:10 AM.

  4. #4
    Serial old car rescuer Arne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    1,959
    FWIW - Car and Driver had a test of all three models in the Feb 1972 issue as well.

    https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...mparison-test/

    While the data sheet is not available online, the text noted that the T and E both were fitted with 15" Fuchs same as the S. They also noted that while the T and S both had Michelins, the E had Pirelli. No mention of which Pirelli in the text, but if you look at the pictures closely (pictures 21, 31 & 32) it is pretty clear that they are not CN36, but appear to be CN72.

    This may not truly be a new data point, however. The test E was a targa, looks to have been silver. Quite possibly the same car from the press pool that R&T tested.

    - Arne
    Current - 2018 718 Cayman, Rhodium Silver, PDK

    Sold - 1972 911T coupe, Silver Metallic; 1984 911 Carrera coupe, Chiffon white; 1973 914 2.0, Saturn Yellow; 1984 944, Silver Metallic

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,759
    Thanks Arne

    I initially found that online article and the Pirelli comment without tyre specifics As you say photo wasn’t cN36 which What have me idea to look a roadtests of day as likley source of what factory actually so went to the hard copy and found this that I posted earlier:
    Name:  2041E917-F1A5-4808-B966-F2D9469C456D.jpg
Views: 876
Size:  96.1 KB
    It began to confirm my suspicion that The cn36 on TES came along comparatively late in longhood era and the factory fit then was a different Pirelli. Cinturato 72 from that German acquires company apparently.

    Long-ranger’s reply from Pirelli corporate is similar reply to me so not surprised. Frankly would have doubted Pirelli customer service knowledge of olden days from help desk unless any reply from agent had been backed by old reference to back up the view. Longstone while I respect them and they are classic specialists they weren’t around in the day so unless they too has original reference material specifically from 68-73 are in the same boat of surmising when cn36 first used by factory on 911 TES.

    It is a small point but what got me intrigued was the posting of model year 70 kardex with Pirelli as “proof” that the CN36 was original fit then on TES I have my doubts. Personally I don’t think so because be in that size was only in preparation in July 71.

    No reason not to fit the CN36 that I’m pleased is available from longstone et al and generally gets good reviews . Great that longstone sourcing arrangement keeps this vintage tyre available to us in face of it not being front and centre to Pirelli corporate.

    In light of several comments saying folks were considering CN36 in part because they were assuming cn36 original fit to their car — maybe the wrong rationale if it wasn’t! Having said that the CN36 were used at some point and not sure cinturato 72 available as reissue so not a big deal.

    It is just one of those “assumed authenticity” details that having been put out there on ESR might become accepted as correct version of how it was in the day. Ive seen other things take hold when maybe (probably) wasn’t so back in the day. There are things that get stated and without challenge get accepted as fact. To some such factual things are not important. Some things get researched to nth degree with lots of examples yet others sometimes bigger things stated get accepted on the nod.

    I got interested in this particular comment about original fit and the Pirelli word on a 70 kardex being taken as referring cn36 despite it being irrelevant to my car, so questioned the presumptions being made. And then looked into what information I had to hand I had on topic. Frankly I don’t mind what is found/concluded provided it is supported by solid evidence.

    Regarding further evidence I do have a second veith pirelli booklet somewhere that might contains vehicle fittment details; this was usually kept with the other. Finding it would help but the set have become separated and other hasn’t come to hand yet:

    Name:  D4850F40-8547-43BF-9D94-4D1FCF7449BD.jpeg
Views: 866
Size:  80.9 KB

    So far using the limited data on topic seems to suggest that cinturato 72 185/70Vr15 from the Pirelli owned German company Veith Pirelli was what certainly by Porsche to 911 around 1972. So far no evidence ( so far) of cn36 being fitted by Porsche before the one i found in April 73 UK magazine. So likely a Feb built car based on UK delivery lead times. No such thing as so called 73.5 in rest of world but I’m wondering if cn36 coincided somewhat with the what gets loosely termed 73.5 era and the RS which being launched only in October was itself bit later than normal summer shutdown model lineipnferfresh.

    While no doubt the cn36 range was introduced generally in late sixties the very deliberate “in preparation” footnote against cn36 of the required size and more importantly speed range VR for Porsche 911 suggests that one only came to range later than some other sizes and speed ratings. If so this explains things— Porsche couldn’t use cn36 185/7915 VR on production 911 before July 71 if according to a Veith Pirelli document of time that particular spec cover was still in preparation by their specialist low profile German plant on that date, obviously!

    Incidentally i also have an nice patinated veith Pirelli tyre sprung metal display stand with logo like upper booklet as used on tyre shop forecourt display that I picked up in Germany at Essen. Disappointed it was too narrow for my 215 60s above but maybe fit an earlier 165 early cover or widen for display of a tyre too old to use on car.


    Steve
    Last edited by 911MRP; 06-02-2020 at 04:54 AM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Burford, ON, Canada
    Posts
    4,239
    Steve, you are quite correct regarding reading too much into information on Kardex or CoA. Do not infer any information that is not provided. Only rarely do I see a specific tire model. Even the speed rating is rarely noted.
    Porsche Historian, contact for Kardex & CoA-type Reports
    Addicted since 1975, ESR mbr# 2200 to 2024 03
    Researching Paint codes and Engine Build numbers

  7. #7
    Oil Cooled Heart Bullethead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,195
    Another thread, check out post #11:

    https://www.early911sregistry.org/fo...5-66-911-Tires
    Russ

    ESR # 1537

    '62 356S Notchback Hotrod
    '67 S Das Geburtstagsgeschenk
    '68 T Targa Sportomatic
    '68 L SW Targa Sportomatic
    '70 914/6 GT

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,759
    Cheers Dave

    you have way more kardex resource than me but usesful to know it is too general info.

    Not sure where this Info will be dug out — roadtests when new are obvious source because it is something journalists note in handling Section and was evident from tyrewall but with Dunlop and Michelin being common a bit of a train spotting exercise To fond pirlelli.

    Pirelli publication is more aftermarket than OEM but like the veith one I have photographed that flag it as “in preparation” so rather a big clue on availability — evidently a product development milestone in CN36 range deemed worthy of noting in that booklet. So we know it wasn’t by then launched by the Pirelli German subsidiary that were supplying Porsche. factory.

    Maybe low mileage survivors cars might give a few pointers but that is difficult as even on them tyres degrade and are replaced ... maybe a few Never used spares with three digit dot code still out there though?

    Also COA probably not specific about type of Pirelli Fitted even if often woeful COA data can be trusted.

    Not sure it requires a vast number of data points in my mind the in preparation comment along with the R&T along few others is fairly clear it was cinturato 72 at least until MY ..probably not until MY 73 unless hard proof emerges to contrary.

    Frere says this about cn36 superseding the previous base model configuration DiringbG series — so after RS use of cn36:
    Name:  CDF5AC7C-93B3-4D56-AA6C-F4F0794264CB.jpg
Views: 797
Size:  130.7 KB
    It does not say it was the first use of cn36 but Fere’s comments certainly highlight the adoption of CN36 with the G series which tallies with David’s personal recollection of tyre evolution on his long term owned 73 targa in the other thread.

    As mentioned elsewhere the first objective evidence of cn36 I’ve found is in spring 73 roadtest of the UK importer’s press 911T demonstrator.

    Thanks Russ. Generally the tyre types evolution is not something well documented on one thread here — crops up in various ways - possibly because unlike less consequential but massively chronicled things like toolkit tyres are lifed by wear or age; never less are a authenticity point for folks who care about such historical matters.


    Steve
    Last edited by 911MRP; 06-02-2020 at 10:59 AM.

  9. #9
    Righteous Indignation 70SATMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by 911MRP View Post
    Cheers Dave

    Maybe low mileage survivors cars might give a few pointers but that is difficult as even on them tyres degrade and are replaced ... maybe a few Never used spares with three digit dot code still out there though?

    Also COA probably not specific aboit type of Pirelli even if often woeful COA data can be trusted.

    Not sure it requires a vast number of data points in my mind the in preparation comment along with the R&T along few others is fairly clear it was cinturato 72 at least until MY ..probably not until MY 73 unless hard proof emerges to contrary.

    Thanks Russ. Generally the tyre types evolution is not something well documented on one place here — crops up in various ways - possibly because unlike less consequential but massively chronicled things like toolkit tyres are lifed by wear or age; never less are a authenticity point for folks who care about such historical matters.


    Steve
    Steve,

    This is a good reference for the TIN:

    https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-recordkeeping

    The multi character TIN was a requirement Jan 71 so, the three digit date codes by themselves can't really be applied to '84, 94 etc. Now the date code that is PART OF the multi character TIN can be '74, '84 etc per the picture example you provided.

    I looked into this myself some time back (for my Dunlop SP57 spare, 185/70 VR15) because I have a very original 4/69 deep six still with the original wheel weights inside and outside yet, the date code on the tire is 143. I always assumed that the tire was original on the rim but, the "maths don't make no sense". The tire does not have the multi character TIN which throws me because:

    1. Its hard to believe its a '63 dated tire that Porsche mounted on a 4/69 wheel which would have been on a late 69 car most likely. Not that I know when the SP57s first came out,,,
    2. From what I've read, as a '73 dated tire, should have had the full TIN format number like your '74 tire example which it doesn't. There is another series of numbers/letters on the outside of the wheel only that I'm still looking into but, it doesn't incorporate a date code.

    Not germaine to your Pirelli question but, could provide some insight into rooting out original tire date codes.
    Michael
    “Electricity is really just organized lightning”

    -Dusty 70S Coupe
    -S Registry #586

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,759
    Thanks for sharing that Michael

    Whether or not people are interested in preservation the various codes and markings due to evolving international and national regulations and / or manufacturing quality control / warranty systems are important in deciphering vehicle specification and configuration back in the day. Deciphering based on available surviving evidence. Diminishing evidence. As more restorations happen and lifed components wear out And broken things replaced it is harder to read these “ footprints” in the sand.

    Restore or replace is owners prerogative and it saves many an old car that might have been lost. This ESR community is in a strong position to grab this insight from longhoods before it gets washed away after which point supposition or conventional wisdom of the dominant group becomes accepted as fact. This happens to greater or lesser extent on certain components threads for reasons I can’t quite fathom. Not criticising it but a bit bizarre tool reference is one of the longest and most forensic threads when in reality the toolkit bits were possibly the least consequential to cars original owner!

    Some care about understanding factory spec; some don’t. I happen to like this aspect of the hobby but mainly focus on MY 73 however sometimes passing comments and assumptions that don’t feel correct capture my interest. For some reason consumable parts windscreen, headlamp glass, tyres with various markings on all manner of parts are something that is an interesting thing to “read” in understanding an old cars life history.

    Steve
    Last edited by 911MRP; 06-02-2020 at 11:52 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Message Board Disclaimer and Terms of Use
This is a public forum. Messages posted here can be viewed by the public. The Early 911S Registry is not responsible for messages posted in its online forums, and any message will express the views of the author and not the Early 911S Registry. Use of online forums shall constitute the agreement of the user not to post anything of religious or political content, false and defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise to violate the law and the further agreement of the user to be solely responsible for and hold the Early 911S Registry harmless in the event of any claim based on their message. Any viewer who finds a message objectionable should contact us immediately by email. The Early 911S Registry has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.