Tyres!

These are the links from tyrereview's own pages (which is customer feedback rather than magazine testing):
Goodyear Eagle F1 A - http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Goodyear/Eagle-F1-Asymmetric.htm = average 84%
Michelin Pilot Sport 2 - http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Michelin/Pilot-Sport-PS2.htm = average 88%

There are also no Pirelli - which is the one that won the below German test.

And then you have a German test which tested many more tyres than Motor, and came to a different conclusion...
1. Pirelli P Zero
2. Continental Sport Contact 3
3. Dunlop SP Sport Maxx TT
4. Hankook Ventus V12 Evo
5. Bridgestone Potenza RE 050 A
6. Michelin Pilot Sport 2
7. Uniroyal Rainsport 2
8. Nokian ZG2
9. Goodyear Eagle F1 A
10. Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta
11. BF Goodrich G-Force Profiler
12. Firestone firehawk S790
13. Fulda Carat Excelero
14. Kumho Ecsta
15. Bravuris Barum
16. Toyo T1R

There's also a note on there about the German magazine coming out with different results than the UK Evo magazine - and they say that it may be purely down to the driver on the day liking the feeling of some tyres more than others, and so driving faster as they feel more confident in them, and not necessarily driving faster solely due to the tyre allowing it.

The other thing to remember, is that a Michelin PS2 for the UK (from Germany) is not necessarily the same as a Michelin PS2 for Australia (maybe from China) - and may not be manufactured to the same specs, so could be better or worse in any specific market.
 
Thanks. I think there is probably little between the PS2, Sport Maxx, Eagle F1 A, P Zero and Conti SC3. PS2 is too pricey for me so as I'm quite keen to try something different from the Conti M3s, it will probably come down to VFM. Still go a few weeks till I need to replace so will have a study up in the meantime. That's half the fun anyway isn't it?
 
The PS3 and SportContact 5 are due out soon, but don't know whether these will be better overall or just in one aspect (maybe they're reduce grip slightly to favour wear rates, or wet traction). I remember the Bridgestone S02 being much better than the S03 when that came out.
 
Andy said:
vredesteins all the way, no brainer imho.

get a price for comparison and see what you think. tonnes of support for them on here.
Click to expand...


my brother and a few of his 'supra' mates were trying to get me to buy the sessanta jobbys and they swear by them but i wanted to try the falkens as nearly everyone on here says they are great.

worth a go i reckon
 
[youtube]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3cq5ANbFOZg&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3cq5ANbFOZg&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube]
 
flimper said:
Still deciding on my next tyres, this looked a useful guide, EVO test 2007
Click to expand...

Not much useful information from that as the Z4 has very little in common with a Golf GTi that the test was done on - other than weight.

Don't forget that without lots of details on how the test was carried out it becomes a minefield.
For example:
  • If it took a whole day to do the testing, did one driver do the entire test, and if so did he not get tired and less responsive which would affect the lap times?
  • Was the car rested between tests or did the braking performance test just go one after the other in a short space of time? Did the tyres perform badly or did the brakes overheat?
  • Did the wind change direction?
  • Did the temperature change?
  • Did it rain?
  • etc.
 
One thing the "test" doesnt evaluate is tyre life... I noticed my Goodyear Asymmetrics were much softer than the previous Michelin PS2s, and subsequently wore out much quicker.

So it seems although they cost less initially, you'll be replacing them more often, so the purchase price may be a false economy.
 
The Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta look ace, only £87 a Tyre too for 225/40/18. Ill be looking at them when I need tyres next!
 
sixspeed said:
One thing the "test" doesnt evaluate is tyre life... I noticed my Goodyear Asymmetrics were much softer than the previous Michelin PS2s, and subsequently wore out much quicker.

So it seems although they cost less initially, you'll be replacing them more often, so the purchase price may be a false economy.
Click to expand...

How did you find the Goodyears? And what are you using now?

As for the EVO test, I know it's not massively relevant, but if you look at enough of these tests and reviews, I'm sure you can get a good feel for which tyres are consistently good and make a decent choice when the time comes.
 
These guys seem to offer some good prices, and some interesting info as well possibly

http://www.tyres-pneus-online.co.uk/tyres-full-tests.html
 
Have been looking at tyres as mine is getting close to wear markers. What do peeps reckon about these prices, standard M sizing complete set fitted inc VAT.

Continental sport contact M3 (specific fit) £669.18,

Continental sport contact 3 £740.64,

Vredestein ultrac sessanta > not a stock line (special order only ) £816.76.

Cheers,

Jon
 
I am running avon zz3 235/35/19 front and 265/19/rears the grip in wet and dry conditions is amazing and cost less than £400 all round I used to run on avon turbo speeds when I was road rallying back in the 80's and I could not fault them they are a top brand that seems to have been forgoten in recent years would recomend (google avon zz3 and read the reviews ) I am not disapointed you wont be here is one reveiw I copied and pasted

Superb tyre for the price. My Ibiza came with Bridgestone Turanza fitted. When it came to replacing them, I wanted something better in wet conditions, as the Turanzas were pretty terrible.
I found the ZZ3s by chance, whilst looking for a good deal online. They are considerably cheaper than Bridgestone (£110-£130 each) at around £80 to £90 each, fitted, and outperform them in all ways except wear.
I've seen a fair few negative reviews of the ZZ3s, and all I can think is the owner either had them inflated to the wrong pressure (overinflation causing poor wet performance I suspect!), or they were expecting the wear to be outstanding. This is a pretty soft tyre, as should be clear from the silica content. This is a tyre for the more enthusiastic driver, and if you spend your whole time on the motorway and want as many miles as possible, then it probably isn't for you.
Personally, I wanted a tyre that was good value, with as high a performance as possible. The ZZ3 achieves this, with superb grip in all weather, low noise, and as a bonus, the tread pattern looks awesome too!

Pro: Quiet, grippy, good value
 
I had one full set of Conti's 4yrs ago when I got the car, ever since then I've been on Vredesteins and love them. I pay about £500 fitted, they're simply amazing in the wet, & for me that's a big priority.
 
Agree about the Vred's in the wet, with all the rain last weekend and a long trip round the M25 they coped brilliantly with the standing water and not once did the car seem bothered.

You can defo get them cheaper than that Jonty if you decide to go that route...
 
Somebody off the other forum I am on, has fitted Falken 452's to the standard Z4M wheels. I had them on my 350Z and they are great in all weathers and offer a good performance at a competitive price. Anyone else running these?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom