Tyres & Why They're Important

[glrnet]

I refer you to part of the OP's opening post:-

 

"If you wish to disagree with me or correct on any point then by all means do, but at least give a reason for it: In turn, I'll try to do the same. If all I achieve with this post is to make just one person stop and think before they order a set of ditchfinders, then that's good enough for me. :)"

 

Personally I didn't feel as if I was being called an idiot, neither did I feel it was based on hearsay as the OP made it quite clear that he HAD driven on these tyres

 

 

So you slag off tyres you have never driven with or put on your car? You tell people that they are rubbish or to avoid them yet you have not even tried them?

 

LoL

 

I believe Dan has driven his brother Zed alot on the tyres he is discussing here.

 

I wouldn't say he is slagging them off either. More just discussing the pros and cons of certain brands.

 

In this thread look at others. Why a post based on here say and telling everyone we are idiots because we don't know the function of tyres and should buy the most expensive even if we don't need the extra performance, was stickied i dont Know.

[rtbiscuit]

but this is where i struggle to agree, i wouldn't call falkens ditch finders, they are a more than adequate tyre, i think tyres come in 3 sets, Premium, mid range and budget. the falkens i would class as a mid range tyre along with the VUS. budget would be your linglong and nankang and premium would be your michelins, bridgestones pirelli etc.

 

i think tyre choice is hugly subjective and actually has a lot to do with driving style, and tyre size and profile. i've driven the falken 452's on 18" wheels with a 45 profile, and i've driven them on 18" with a 30 profile. (i know it also matters about the tyre width) but the lower profile tyre felt much better to drive on than the higher profile. yet both were the same tyre, but admittedly on 2 different cars.

 

i've been so pleased with the falkens i've used them on the S2000 and the XKR. but would say they felt their absolute best on the S2000. i think with it being a lighter car made all the difference to how the tyre performed. but even still on the XKR i don't feel like i'm lacking confidence in them, but i did with things like the toyo's on a bigger profile.

 

but then my driving style is probably different with the jag auto box compared to dans in the porsche with the different gear set up and torque bands. same as my driving style was different in the S2000. there are way to many variables to turn round and say 1 particular tyre is the perfect tyre for every driver of every car in every size.

[martinmac]

Just out of interest I stickied it because it makes a lot of sense and with the amount of tyre question posts it makes a good point of reference.

 

At the end of the day people can use any tyre they want.

[Ebized]

i think tyre choice is hugly subjective and actually has a lot to do with driving style, and tyre size and profile. i've driven the falken 452's on 18" wheels with a 45 profile, and i've driven them on 18" with a 30 profile. (i know it also matters about the tyre width) but the lower profile tyre felt much better to drive on than the higher profile. yet both were the same tyre, but admittedly on 2 different cars.

 

You have mentioned this before Rich and I tend to agree as having had the 35 profiles on the 19" Nismo wheels (on my previous 350) I found them extremely good. In fact I can recall a Wales recce with xstric9 who had 452's on his 18" rims and I think they were 40 profile and he hated them, compared to the 050A's he subsequently used. Now as it was recce we had to make sure the roads were ZED friendly and I can honestly say that the 452's on the 19" Nismos and using 37 psi from cold, on more that the odd spirted occasion, worked extremely well as xstric9 following me had to concede.

 

But as others are saying driving styles vary (like set-ups for track) and what suits one person dosen't suit another but at the end of the day, and in my experience, I found the 452's on 19" rims with 35 profiles worked very well, and therefore good value for the money.

[Chris`I]

i think tyre choice is hugly subjective and actually has a lot to do with driving style, and tyre size and profile. i've driven the falken 452's on 18" wheels with a 45 profile, and i've driven them on 18" with a 30 profile. (i know it also matters about the tyre width) but the lower profile tyre felt much better to drive on than the higher profile. yet both were the same tyre, but admittedly on 2 different cars.

 

You have mentioned this before Rich and I tend to agree as having had the 35 profiles on the 19" Nismo wheels (on my previous 350) I found them extremely good.

I also concur with this. When I got my 18" Rota's, BigPhil recommended that I drop the profile (40 to 35 as they were wider than standard?), and never found the Falkens wanting for more until they were worn. I think with a bigger profile then they must flex more.

[Zugara]

What about these bad boys then??

 

 

 

coming to a car near you very soon......

[Dblock]

But you guys are saying falkens are good, but they are cheap which after reading the first post means cheap=rubbish. Either you guys are wrong or the OP who hadn't even tried these tyres is giving out unproven advice

[rtbiscuit]

i wouldn't say unproven, but i would say its a very black and white opinion when actually i think there is a lot of grey to the situation.

 

alot fo what is written is good common sense, but i wouldn't write off a tyre like the falken just because its cheaper.

 

thats like writing the zed off compared to the 911, yes the 911 is the better car but the zed is just as good in many other ways it might not cost as much but it doesn't make it a @*!# heap.

[Dblock]

i wouldn't say unproven, but i would say its a very black and white opinion when actually i think there is a lot of grey to the situation.

 

alot fo what is written is good common sense, but i wouldn't write off a tyre like the falken just because its cheaper.

 

thats like writing the zed off compared to the 911, yes the 911 is the better car but the zed is just as good in many other ways it might not cost as much but it doesn't make it a @*!# heap.

 

Well it is unproven unless he owned and compared each tyre. Just because something is more expensive doesnt make it better, usually it is but not always. Its even worse if he hasnt compared them. Even if he didnt want to use them on his car how can you say something is rubbish when it isnt.

 

Also my previous points still stand true IMO. Falkens are a good decent tyre no matter how much they cost. Goodyear effcient grip which arent grippy at all are more expensive than VUS and Falkens. Contisport 3's are more expensive then MPSS so your theory is out the window. If you had researched and actually used some of these tyres which you right off then you would have some credability.

 

Also you take people for idiots you think if someone has crap tyres or worn tyres they will end up in a ditch? You not think we can drive to condition or to the grip levels available. All out grip isnt everyones priority some people have to BALANCE cost vs performance. If you got off your high horse you might see that

[spursmaddave]

I wouldn't say Dan takes us all for idiots, he does have lets say a unique viewpoint though...

 

As he says, agree or disagree with him, as long as you give a reasoned debate then all is good. At the end of the day it is everyones own personal choice what rubber they get, personally around £600-£700 would be the max I would pay for 4 tyres for my Zed which is spot on as I have never had a scary moment with REO50As in any weather and thats having done over 30k in 25 months week in week out.

It all depends what you want in the end, my car gets me from A to B in cosumate style and the odd meet up and drive with mates. I don't track the car so I will never explore the limits of handling and grip on a daily basis, so I want decent grip in all weather and long lasting tyres... My previous Bridgestones lasted 24k so thats goid enough for me road noise not an issue, thats why I have a good stereo :wink:

 

Question - if someone that only does a few miles a year puts tyres worth £1k on their car just to drive to meets and shows does that make them more or less of a fool paying £400 for a set and using the car every day?

[coldel]

I think Dan conceded that the cost comparison wasn't the best and that he was picking numbers out the air somewhat - I think he chose to compare Falkens because they were well known on the forum and gave context, ironically by doing this chose a brand which people clearly feel quite strongly about. I would put Pilot Super Sports on in the blink of an eye, but as you say DBlock you have to balance cost vs capability. Falkens are probably 90% capable vs PSS which are 100% so really if you aren't tearing it up then they are more than capable for road use - and as it happened I was one of the first to comment that I didn't agree on the cost comparison, but I didn't feel like an idiot.

 

I think the point Dan was trying to highlight was that price differences do make a difference in some cases, certainly if you start going right down to budget stuff at £75 a tyre which over the course of the last year I have seen plenty of people posting about and seriously considering it mostly I see responses such as 'Ask Ekona he is the tyre expert' - I think I would despair every time I saw another post like that come up if I were Dan - if suddenly a few posts come up saying 'so how do you use this ebay thing' and people started saying 'Ask coldel' I think I would write a sticky like this also just my tuppence worth anyway.

 

Anyway...torch at the ready, time to wash the car see you all later guys

[Chris`I]

Anyway...torch at the ready, time to wash the car see you all later guys

I'm waiting for the sun to come up first

[coldel]

Yeah but now off down the post office to sort out a missing parcel - anticipating hassle - then back and off to Grasshopper, its manic in the col household this morning! Finished how anyway....shiny!

[lrh]

I'm fairly confident on saying that the R&D budget of Falken is dwarfed by Vredestein

Falken is owned by Sumitomo Rubber Industries, which also makes Japanese-made Dunlops in a joint venture with Goodyear. Vredestein’s parent company went bust in April 2009 and it’s now owned by Indian budget brand Apollo.

 

You know in QuikFit et al where they put those signs on the wall that say how a worn tyre can take twice as long to stop you as a new one? Well they're right, but you can get the same difference between a good tyre and bad tyre.

You're equating the "bald tyre versus new" comparison to differences in performance of new tyres which is wrong.

 

If you have a look through various tyre tests that the press do (EVO magazine is an easy one to find, however I take their results with a pinch of salt given their huge advertorials these days) you'll see the difference between various tyres, and between the top premium ones and the bottom budget ones the stopping distance can be twice as much.

No. The differences between the name brands are at worst 10-15% in the wet. Source: Evo (Dec 2010)

 

Evo is part of the same group as Auto Express and tyre tests are often shared with other magazines in the Auto Bild group. Every major magazine test fully discloses where it was conducted and publishes the results of each test in full.

 

A good experiment is to find your favourite wide roundabout and go round it normally, then go round it 5mph faster, and then 5mph faster again

Advocating high speed cornering on the public road in a discussion about tyre safety is of course inappropriate. A bump or patch of diesel will likely to send you into the scenery no matter what tyre your on. Fitting higher grip tyres doesn't make you a better or safer driver, or turn a poor handling car into a great one.

 

F1 driver James Hunt used to drive an old Bedford van on the road because the limits we so low he could drive it flat out and explore the limits at safe speeds. Ultimately, it's about knowing the limits of your vehicle and driving.

 

Next time either myself or anyone says that you're better off buying X tyre over Y tyre despite costing more, have a read through this and decide for yourself after taking all the facts into consideration

You’re equating limited anecdotal evidence on forums to fact. Some advice (about specific tyres on a specific make/model in comparison to others) is useful but should always be treated as subjective.

[varley16]

anyone used ENDURO tyres before? any reviews on these?

[Dynamic Turtle]

I want decent grip in all weather and long lasting tyres... My previous Bridgestones lasted 24k so thats goid enough for me road noise not an issue, thats why I have a good stereo :wink:

:

 

 

24k? Blimey, that's a good innings. My Zed is coming with brand new Bridgestones. I do <6k miles a year and drive rather gently [this is a lie ], so they should see me through until I get a 911. Or child. Whichever comes sooner

 

DT

[DP7657]

Like the thread, got some good points in it. Price compromise obviously also compromises safety one way or another.

 

I had Nexen rear tyres on my Z when I bought it and the Bridgestone Potenza on the front. Obviously not ideal; mis-matched and BUDGET on the rears. Now I've changed to 4 x Falken 452s due to advice from the forum a while back and I think they're a pretty good balance.

 

The 'ditchfinder' is the muppet behind the wheel, not what surrounds it.

[Wilja]

I have a question, not about which type of tyre to choose (although I have spent hours trawling through the various threads).

 

I need to replace my two rear tyres fairly soon - they are Bridgestone Potenzas.

 

The front tyres are not nearly as worn.

 

Should I replace all four at the same time? I was not going to go for Bridgestones again having read the reviews - debating which brand to buy currently and not after any further advice on this in response to this post - and is it more important to replace the fronts if not getting Bridgestone rears i.e. is it important the fronts match the rears??

[NeilMH]

Ideally you would want to match front and rear - if you have a disparity in grip levels it could lead to understeer or oversteer depending on where the greater grip level exists (ie. less grip at the front understeer and vice versa). If you only ever drive at 6/10ths it is not so critical I personally would not mix but that's just me.

[Ekona]

Read my sticky on mixing tyres and make your own mind up

 

I would not recommend mixing tyres on any car, so in answer to your question Wilja then I would match whatever tyres you have at the front.

[rtbiscuit]

as long as you match across the axle you'll be fine.

 

if swapping to a new tyre do the rears now, and the fronts later when they have worn.

 

as long as they are good tyres there isn;t an issue just avoid ditch finding tyres so stay away from the budget end.

 

 

also people keep saying falken are budget tyres, they aren;t they are a mid range tyre. same as toyo, Vreds, Kuhmo etc

[JeZed]

OK, so the front tyres on my Zed are 225 45 R18 91W. Bridgestone RE050. I know 91 is load rating but not many tyres are 91 - many are 95 and then there's XL ?

 

Also they are W rated for speed index and many tyres are Y.

 

My question is must I use 91 W or can I use any tyre that is 91 or better (e.g. 95) and what about Y speed rating and then there's XL.

 

If I can go for anything with minimum 91W or better it opens up a much wider choice of tyre.

 

Many Thanks.

[Strudul]

Those are just the ratings for those tyres.

 

You can go for better ones with no problems. Just means the tyres are capable of heavier / faster applications, which can only be a good thing.

 

Put your reg in here and anything it brings up should be suitable. Or wait for Dan to come along and convince you to get unmixed MPSS

Edited March 1, 2017 by Strudul

[Ekona]

I'll start with the load rating. A tyre marked 91 can take 615kg of weight, so if we assume the car has four of these on then total capacity for those tyres is 2460kg. You'd struggle to ever make a Zed weigh that much even if you really tried, so suffice to say that 91 is more than sufficient. If we look at the 95 rating, that equates to 690kg per tyre so even higher. So yes, you can safely use a 95 rated tyre, or an XL (Extra Load) tyre on your car. Feel free to mix and match load ratings, I can't even tell the difference between a regular and XL tyre when on a car.

 

In terms of speed ratings, W is rated for 168mph so if you never intend on going faster than that (in a standard Zed you won't), then it's a non-issue. Tyres rated as Y are good for 186mph, so even higher. Again, you can mix and match speed ratings as you see fit.

 

 

HOWEVER, I still maintain that matching tyre brand and model across the car is vital. As such, whilst I'd run something like 225/45/18 91W RE050A on the front and 245/45/18 96Y RE050A on the rear, I wouldn't run the same front with a 245/45/18 91W MPSS on the rear if you see what I mean. In general, any tyres of a type and a size you can get for the Zed are likely to be absolutely fine in terms of load and speed rating, so I wouldn't give them a second thought.

[Irn Bru]

@ Ekona, I'm running with Avon zz5's, were put on new for me at point of sale 2.5 years ago and still got a few 1000 miles left on them. I've found them to be good, at least for my driving ability and I've only really pushed them and myself to the limits when I done a track day at Crail. I found them to be pretty good and considering the Crail track resembles the state of our roads I was very happy with the performance of them.

 

Reason for asking is I'm probably going to use these again when the time comes to replace them, but I never hear of any other member using them or asking about them. They are A rated for wet grip, E rated for fuel and 70 on road noise. I like them and they are competitively priced just now at £100 for the fronts and £110 for the rears on 18's. Down £20 per corner since last year, which makes my tyre supplier think they are replacing them with a new version. So £420 in total for what I believe to be a very good tyre.

 

Your thoughts / knowledge on these Dan ?