Reply With QuoteWhick Khumo tire did they test? Also it looks like they left off the azenis.
C&D Tests Tires; Some Surprising Results
Linkie.
They tested high performance tires this month. The results are surprising.
Some snippets:
----------------
Eighth Place
Toyo Proxes T1R
Toyo says its new T1R has "high-modulus bead apex rubber." You probably don't know what that means, and neither do we. This wasn't much more clear: "Spiral-wound, jointless edge and capplies." If this test were based on no comprendo engineer-speak, Toyo would win.
In fact, the Proxes never placed higher than eighth in any test, and in two dry tests, the autocross and the skidpad, the Toyo finished last, trailing the top finishers by significant margins. In some tests it felt better than it actually was performing, but overall, Geswein noted it was "soft and imprecise" and didn't "feel like a sport tire."
----------------------
Fifth Place
Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212
The Hankook has one feature the other tires can't match—a $99 price. And to its credit, the Hankook didn't behave like the cheapest tire, particularly when the track was dry. It tied the $175 Yokohama and $145 Goodyear for second place in lateral grip, scoring 0.94 g. And although its dry-braking results landed it in last place, that shortcoming did not greatly affect the Hankook's dry-autocross showing—a 29.86-second average, a third-place result that was only 0.20 second away from the winning effort.
It became apparent that the Hankook was clearly tuned for dry running as its wet-track results were below average. Like the other poor runners in water, the Hankook felt greasy and was slow to recover once it broke traction. But in the dry, the Korean tire felt just as responsive and sticky as its more-expensive competition.
The thing is, though, the harder you drive, the more tread you'll burn off a tire. So if you're a track-day addict who doesn't mind sacrificing some wet-weather capabilities, the Hankook is a choice that will save you money without losing much performance.
-------------------------------------
Third Place
Yokohama Advan Neova AD07
On dry pavement, the Yokohama tires put the BMW cars in a position to go fastest through our tests. Check the results. With the Yokos at all corners, the BMW was fastest on the dry autocross, and they provided the shortest stopping distance by a significant margin.
Geswein knew the Yoko was a grippy tire before its results were posted. "Grip is way up," he commented after a run. He also noted that grip level stayed consistent even when the tire was sliding. In the dry, it performed a lot like the BFGoodrich, but the Yokohama is also pretty good in the wet.
Of all the tires, Geswein thought the Yokohama and the BFG g-Force rewarded aggressive driving because the two had a wide plateau of grip versus slip angle. That means if you enter a corner a little too fast and begin sliding, the Yokohama recovers quickly and in some sense covers up your mistakes.
The behavior in the wet was a little more toward the slippery end of the scale, but we could push the Yokohama hard and not feel as if we were on the verge of a sudden spinout. This combination of outstanding dry performance and more-than-passable wet performance makes the Yokohama a very alluring product. If you're looking to cut the quickest lap times while using a street tire, this is the one to have. Bring money: They're $175 apiece.
-----------------------
First Place
Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3
As an all-around high-performance tire, you can't beat this Goodyear. It was the best performer in all three wet-track tests and was very competent in the dry. It generated 0.94 g on the dry skidpad, only 0.01 g off the first-place BFGoodrich and tied with the Yokohama and Hankook.
The Goodyear gripped so well that you might not have been certain the road was wet, and it lost traction in a gentle, predictable manner. It held onto the wet track with 0.82 g of stick, an impressive figure considering the worst tire in that test made only 0.67 g.
The Eagle F1 got a lot of favorable comments. In the wet, Geswein called it "direct"—a way of saying the tire provided clear signals about its contact with the pavement.
There were tires that performed better in the dry, but the Eagle wasn't far off. It was a little less precise than the BFG and Yokohama on a dry track, but not by much. And like the Continental, the Goodyear had a high 280 tread-wear grade. At $145 each, it's $34 cheaper than the most expensive tire here.
Goodyear: 1050.4
Continental: 1031.9
Yokohama: 1027.0
Michelin: 1018.7
Hankook: 1015.4
Dunlop: 1002.2
Pirelli: 1002.1
Toyo: 999.7
Bridgestone: 993.9
BFGoodrich: 993.0
Kumho: 990.7
Max points
dry performance (x2): 600
wet performance: 300
price: 100
tread wear: 100
total possible: 1100
-----------------
S.
Whick Khumo tire did they test? Also it looks like they left off the azenis.
There is a link at the top of the original post for your viewing pleasure, Sparky.
Eleventh Place
Kumho Ecsta MX
Compared with tire companies that have been in business for more than 100 years (Michelin and Goodyear, for example), Kumho began selling tires in Korea 45 years ago. The company has been selling its rubber in the U.S. since 1966, and its racing tires are well established and competitive in amateur circles. Its highest-performing street tire, though, couldn't keep up here. In every test except dry braking, the MX finished well down the scale.
In the dry tests, the Kumhos felt stable and easy to drive and gave plenty of warning of the approaching traction limit. The tires recovered well once that limit was crossed. They didn't offer much grip (0.92 g versus the best at 0.95), and the time of 30.28 seconds in the dry autocross was 0.62 second slower than the fastest tire. That may not seem like much, but our test course was only 0.3 mile long, and on a longer track, the gap would be commensurately greater.
It was tricky driving the Kumho in the wet, however, because once the tire started sliding, it took seemingly forever to recover and regain traction. Geswein determined it was simply "slippery." That behavior would have been excused if the Kumho had posted fast numbers in the dry, but it didn't. And although the MX—at $136 per—was the third-least-expensive tire in our test, the high score in the price category wasn't enough to regain ground lost in the performance tests. As a side note, Kumho recently introduced a new tire called the Ecsta SPT that offers slightly less performance than the MX but may be quite tempting with a price of $90.
S.
Maybe 4 wheels aren't so bad after all... wickett.org
It only goes to show when people can no longer discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, or sexual orientation, they can improvise and still find someone to hate. - Dave Moulton
Car and Driver what do they know about tires!
Last edited by POS Racing; 11-10-2005 at 08:03 PM.
There have been some posts about this test over at sccaforums.com.
FWIW, they tested all of the tires at BMW's recommended tire inflation (29psi front, 36psi rear), and all of the tires were full tread depth. While this test offers another data point, it's hardly an exhaustive comparison, based on those two facts. It would have been interesting if they had been able to test at different pressures and tread depths, but the number of variable combinations can quickly grow out of hand. Plus, a small change in the ambient conditions (temperature, relative humidity, etc.) or the surface could produce a completely different set of results.
I was involved in some tire testing for UTA's Formula SAE team while I was working on my degree. We were only testing one tire compound, on two different surfaces, over a small range of pressures, under controlled ambient conditions, and it still took us the entire semester to gather a reasonable set of data and attempt to make some sense out of it.
Iain
"We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw
Sweet! The Goodyear (and winner of this test) is now available in the MSM's stock 205/40-17 size! And at $135 it ain't too expensive (ain't cheap either, though).
As an all-around high-performance tire, you can't beat this Goodyear. It was the best performer in all three wet-track tests and was very competent in the dry. It generated 0.94 g on the dry skidpad, only 0.01 g off the first-place BFGoodrich and tied with the Yokohama and Hankook.
The Goodyear gripped so well that you might not have been certain the road was wet, and it lost traction in a gentle, predictable manner. It held onto the wet track with 0.82 g of stick, an impressive figure considering the worst tire in that test made only 0.67 g.
The Eagle F1 got a lot of favorable comments. In the wet, Geswein called it "direct"—a way of saying the tire provided clear signals about its contact with the pavement.
Sounds like a great street tire to me!
S.
So why are you looking at it in the 17" size? I thought you wanted 16"Originally Posted by srivendel
Sweet! The Goodyear (and winner of this test) is now available in the MSM's stock 205/40-17 size! And at $135 it ain't too expensive (ain't cheap either, though).
Sounds like a great street tire to me!
S.?
I do. But at the moment the $1,300 it'll take to buy a set of those isn't in the "Miata Fund". Plus then what do I do with the stock wheels? I'm very conflicted on the whole wheel issue. The nice thing about tires is that they eventually wear out! Therefore it's not a permanent commitment. Which means I can pick up a set of these soon and then upgrade to the SSRs once they wear out.So why are you looking at it in the 17" size? I thought you wanted 16"
The immediate problem is that the stock Toyos suck in the rain (and they're not too hot in the dry, either).
S.
id love to see where our other favorite tire would land; the falken azenis 615.
Probably not so well because of poor wet performance, ride quality and noise. Plus the Advan Neova is supposed to be a better performer (so that's what I hear).
You also have to wonder if Car and Driver is a very unbiased source of information. You never know.
BTW, Grassroots motorsports had a street and r-comp tire comparison about half a year ago and it was a great write up.
Thomas
V-to-the-Dub
yeah itll lose points in the wet but gain some in the dry. i didnt think the noise and ride were tested in the C&D test, so what they dont test sont hurt it.. (?)
Posting Permissions
