Hanook tyres were on the front of my tvr seac when I bought it and another make on the back I 've never heared of and I kept them on for a couple of years , they were fine , no problems with grip or soft tyre walls. Ok I was aware they were unusual makes but drove the beastie and realised they weren't going to send me into a ditch . No traction control or abs on a seac and 320 bhp !
Evergreen tyres
- Thread starter saskia
- Start date
Don't do it.
You will put them on and in the nice warm weather they may well feel OK. But in the first bit of bad Weather you may well find yourself going backwards down the road!
I put Vreds on 19s all round a couple of months ago. Took a few miles to bed in. However they are superb in all conditions and the car's handling and ride quality is transformed. Its soft and pliant even on 19s and just sticks on the twisty stuff.
I'm with everyone else. If you can run an M don't ruin it with c**p tyres!
Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk
You will put them on and in the nice warm weather they may well feel OK. But in the first bit of bad Weather you may well find yourself going backwards down the road!
I put Vreds on 19s all round a couple of months ago. Took a few miles to bed in. However they are superb in all conditions and the car's handling and ride quality is transformed. Its soft and pliant even on 19s and just sticks on the twisty stuff.
I'm with everyone else. If you can run an M don't ruin it with c**p tyres!
Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk
I've been running Hankooks on my Zed since moving to Germany. Did some laps of the ring. I even bought a set for the family touring car (2008 328i)
As per the evergreens. I would be very weary of the consumer feedback. Without a controlled environment, and highly consistent drivers. It might not be the best gauge for a performance tyre.
Here is what the car & Driver tyre test said about the Hankooks. They came in second highest in the ratings AHEAD of the much more expensive PS2.
“Deceptively quick” is a good summation of the Hankook Ventus V12 Evos because they often didn’t feel as strong as they actually were, particularly in the dry. Their fourth-place autocross time wasn’t spectacular, but they did outlap the benchmark Michelin PS2s. Geswein said the Hankooks felt “somewhat soft” and “imprecise,” although they were forgiving, yielding consistent laps with no surprises. Despite that feeling of softness, the V12 Evos somehow managed a second-place skidpad run of 0.93 g and were above average in braking. Hankook just launched a new extreme-performance Ventus R-S3 model, which wasn’t available in time for this test but likely has sharper dry responses.
In the wet, however, the V12s were as sporty and connected as they come, with grip second only to the PS2s’ and the best braking. The Hankooks were extremely consistent, likely because they were so well-behaved, which made them easy to drive quickly. Subjectively, they felt the best around the track, even though their time trailed slightly behind the Dunlops’.
With above-average wet and dry performances, and tying for quietest on the street loop, the V12 Evo is an impressive and well-rounded summer tire. And, at $106, it’s a bargain, too.
Here is a link to the full test.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/tire-test-nine-affordable-summer-tires-take-on-the-michelin-ps2-comparison-tests
As per the evergreens. I would be very weary of the consumer feedback. Without a controlled environment, and highly consistent drivers. It might not be the best gauge for a performance tyre.
Here is what the car & Driver tyre test said about the Hankooks. They came in second highest in the ratings AHEAD of the much more expensive PS2.
“Deceptively quick” is a good summation of the Hankook Ventus V12 Evos because they often didn’t feel as strong as they actually were, particularly in the dry. Their fourth-place autocross time wasn’t spectacular, but they did outlap the benchmark Michelin PS2s. Geswein said the Hankooks felt “somewhat soft” and “imprecise,” although they were forgiving, yielding consistent laps with no surprises. Despite that feeling of softness, the V12 Evos somehow managed a second-place skidpad run of 0.93 g and were above average in braking. Hankook just launched a new extreme-performance Ventus R-S3 model, which wasn’t available in time for this test but likely has sharper dry responses.
In the wet, however, the V12s were as sporty and connected as they come, with grip second only to the PS2s’ and the best braking. The Hankooks were extremely consistent, likely because they were so well-behaved, which made them easy to drive quickly. Subjectively, they felt the best around the track, even though their time trailed slightly behind the Dunlops’.
With above-average wet and dry performances, and tying for quietest on the street loop, the V12 Evo is an impressive and well-rounded summer tire. And, at $106, it’s a bargain, too.
Here is a link to the full test.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/tire-test-nine-affordable-summer-tires-take-on-the-michelin-ps2-comparison-tests
I replaced the run flats on my Series 1 with Hanooks Ventus and have been very pleased with them. I had heard of Hanooks before but had never heard of Evergreens until the OP started this topic.
I run landsail rears on the v50 and I run infinity on the front.
The rears are actually surprisingly ok, the fronts I just love the unpredictability, lack of grip in the cold and wet, their rate of ware, and the fact I never feel safe. As soon as I have the cash the tyres will be replaced.
I bought budget because I had to, I'm now swapping them to premium, because I have to.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
The rears are actually surprisingly ok, the fronts I just love the unpredictability, lack of grip in the cold and wet, their rate of ware, and the fact I never feel safe. As soon as I have the cash the tyres will be replaced.
I bought budget because I had to, I'm now swapping them to premium, because I have to.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
jimmybell said:Darren Slone said:
Whilst the importance of tyres is key .. i'm now slightly interested in your company providing an Alpina D3BT as transport? Where do i sign up?
the FD is a car nut, comes to Le Mans, The Ring with us, has 3 911's and I was going to have an A6 but he said to nip into Sytner and have a look, so I did and he bought it 
method in his madness though, he really did buy it in the end! I have the Falkens I think they are really good
is it April the 1st :!:shortfuse 2
Senior member
cheap tyres on a m noooooooo wayyyyyyyy :thumbsdown: the car was set up for conti s but verds just as good
Simon_P said:
Quite the attitude. So am I to gather that you think that if one doesn't buy the most expensive product. One should just go to the other end of the scale and buy a crap product. There are other less expensive alternatives to your selection that do not sacrifice performance for the cost savings. Maybe you didn't read the test report I posted. Funny that you drive a less than expensive sports car. I should think that with your reasoning. You should have bought either a McLaren, Ferrari, Or Pagani. Or Just bought a pedal car as the alternative.
oke:I will say that the OP should not buy crap tyres. At the same time. He doesn't need to spend a kings ransom on tyres that factor in a huge amount of advertizing/ racing sponsorship costs in their prices either.
bigdog said:Simon_P said:
Quite the attitude. So am I to gather that you think that if one doesn't buy the most expensive product. One should just go to the other end of the scale and buy a crap product. There are other less expensive alternatives to your selection that do not sacrifice performance for the cost savings. Maybe you didn't read the test report I posted. Funny that you drive a less than expensive sports car. I should think that with your reasoning. You should have bought either a McLaren, Ferrari, Or Pagani. Or Just bought a pedal car as the alternative.
I will say that the OP should not buy crap tyres. At the same time. He doesn't need to spend a kings ransom on tyres that factor in a huge amount of advertizing/ racing sponsorship costs in their prices either.
:rofl: :rofl: attitude :rofl: you need to turn your sensitivity down a few notches... And then delete the utter drivel you have posted above.
Not sensitive at all. Just found it a bit funny that you would dismiss anything other than the most expensive tyres or may as well mount remoulds. Even though this forum is about a great low cost sports car. Do you not see the irony in that? :lol:
No harm was meant.
No harm was meant.
bigdog said:
Nothing to do with expense, there are dozens of threads discussing tyres and these ones come top most often. Vreds are cheaper by also get a good reaction.
Also I'd hardly call the ///MC a low cost sports car. An MX5, RX8, VX220.... These are low cost sports cars. Unless you're thinking lost cost in relation to a supercar?
StevenH72 said:
The Michelin in the test I linked. Shows the Michelin at $192 USD was out performed by the Hankook which cost $106. Yet even then it was posted that if one didn't go with a top priced tyre. One may as well use remoulded. It was the all or nothing nature of the comment that I found ironic. Esp. Given that most seem to be happy with the performance of their Zed even though it is not THE most expensive sports car out there. So I simply responded with an all or nothing comment about the Zed. And was promptly called out for making an all or nothing comment about an all or nothing comment.
I've got nothing against the likes of Hankook, Kumho, Falken, Vred (assuming you buy something suitable for the weight/performance of the car), but in my experience of them on e34 M5s (100k miles and about 8 years) the price difference was balanced out by their higher wear rating.
On average, I'd get 12k-15k out of a set of rear P-Zeros, SportContact 2/3 or Pilot Sport 2. Whereas I was lucky to get 10k out of the Hankooks, Kumho or Falkens. On the Pilot SuperSports I'm getting even more miles per tyre (about 20k for the rears, and currently over 30k for the fronts).
So saving 30% a corner on mid-brand tyres (i.e. PSS front £170, V12 Evo front £120; PSS rear £204, V12 Evo not available £150 for the S1 Evo) just meant I'd have to swap them out every 6 months instead of very 9-12 months - which would negate any initial savings. Now I'd only put Hankook, Kumho, Falken, Vred on if it was an emergency and that was all that was available. I wouldn't put anything below them on though and would leave the car until I could get a semi-decent tyre on it.
On average, I'd get 12k-15k out of a set of rear P-Zeros, SportContact 2/3 or Pilot Sport 2. Whereas I was lucky to get 10k out of the Hankooks, Kumho or Falkens. On the Pilot SuperSports I'm getting even more miles per tyre (about 20k for the rears, and currently over 30k for the fronts).
So saving 30% a corner on mid-brand tyres (i.e. PSS front £170, V12 Evo front £120; PSS rear £204, V12 Evo not available £150 for the S1 Evo) just meant I'd have to swap them out every 6 months instead of very 9-12 months - which would negate any initial savings. Now I'd only put Hankook, Kumho, Falken, Vred on if it was an emergency and that was all that was available. I wouldn't put anything below them on though and would leave the car until I could get a semi-decent tyre on it.
Plenty good tyres out there. Plenty
Arguably, any of the "high performance" or ultra high performance tyres from Conti, Michelin, Perilli, Goodyear, Vred, Falken, Avon, Yoko, Hankook etc will be ok.
However, there's a line which I wouldn't cross. This extends to either
a) using standard tyres (edit - as in: not a performance tyre) from one of the above brands
b) using budget brands, regardless whether the tyres are top of the range e.g. Sunny, Barum, Wanli, Fullrun etc
However. I suspect that there are lots of forum members who will never drive in such a way that the integrity of the tyre will ever be put to test..... in which case a lower value tyre could be entirely appropriate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Arguably, any of the "high performance" or ultra high performance tyres from Conti, Michelin, Perilli, Goodyear, Vred, Falken, Avon, Yoko, Hankook etc will be ok.
However, there's a line which I wouldn't cross. This extends to either
a) using standard tyres (edit - as in: not a performance tyre) from one of the above brands
b) using budget brands, regardless whether the tyres are top of the range e.g. Sunny, Barum, Wanli, Fullrun etc
However. I suspect that there are lots of forum members who will never drive in such a way that the integrity of the tyre will ever be put to test..... in which case a lower value tyre could be entirely appropriate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
On my Hankooks I got 20K with 3mm remaining out of the rears and just replaced the fronts at 25K because of a screw. The fronts were at about %70 percent worn when the screw ruined it. The whole set cost 475 quid in October 2010. To include mounting, Balancing, Geometry check. The hankooks run 400 quid in the states per set as of today. The Michelin's are 588 quid.
But as they say. We are free to spend our money as we see fit.
For goodness sakes though. Buy high quality rubber. And ditch the long ling crouching dog Chinese crap. You can get great tyres without having to spend a fortune.
But as they say. We are free to spend our money as we see fit.
For goodness sakes though. Buy high quality rubber. And ditch the long ling crouching dog Chinese crap. You can get great tyres without having to spend a fortune.