TIRES!!!!
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 82
From:
TIRES!!!!
As many of you know i jsut wrecked my vette... well it had firestone firehawks on it and they are gonna replace one... or give me cash to replace it... what is a good not TOOOOOOO expensive replacement i can use in place of the FS's so i can just go ahead and get them both replaced?
I guess im asking for you to advise me on some tires that arent $1000 a pair that are still good tires... i dont need runflats I might regret this some time, but i hope not...
-me
P.S. Are kumhos CRAP?????
Tires and they do come in runflats.. even a set of runflats woudl be under $500 total...
I guess im asking for you to advise me on some tires that arent $1000 a pair that are still good tires... i dont need runflats I might regret this some time, but i hope not...
-me
P.S. Are kumhos CRAP?????
Tires and they do come in runflats.. even a set of runflats woudl be under $500 total...
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 903
From:
RE: TIRES!!!!
I'm not sure I understand. If you wrecked your C5, why are you buying tires? If the car is being repaired and you are going to sell it in a few months, Kumhos will do, but really, they can't hold a match against the Goodyear GSD3s or even Michelin PS2s. Kumhos are decent, cheap tires, nothing more.
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 82
From:
RE: TIRES!!!!
I have to replace one tire... and the rears both needed replacing... so im gonna take the money they gave me to replace a $450 tire (think htey gave me like $385 for a tire) and try to spread it and a lil more money out to get me 2 rears while im having the work done....
-me
and upon looking PS2's are $300 on tire rack...
goodyear eagle f1 gs-d3's are $285... hmmmmmi like the look of the f1.... and fronts are like $190... (which ill prolly get by summer)... all the stats including tread wear look good... i think i might just take your advice on that one...
-me
and upon looking PS2's are $300 on tire rack...
goodyear eagle f1 gs-d3's are $285... hmmmmmi like the look of the f1.... and fronts are like $190... (which ill prolly get by summer)... all the stats including tread wear look good... i think i might just take your advice on that one...
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,105
From: Central North Carolina
RE: TIRES!!!!
You are going to get all sorts of opinions on tires.
For the record mine are: BFG G-Force are about as good as it gets for the street, particularly the most extreme of the G-Force models (forget which, KD or some letters), but they wear really quick, and their drag radials have as much traction as you can get without slicks, but last only 5000 miles, will hydroplane on any wet pavement, and get no traction when the temp is below 45 degrees. Pirellis have given my more problems than any other tires, and Michelins are actually pretty good, but made by the French, which causes me some problems (I won't go into politics here . . . )
My experience with Kuhmos is pretty good overall -- I had a set on my Audi S4 for a year (after the original Contis went 13000 miles toward complete wear out at 15000) and the Kuhmos did well -- not quite as high performance as the Contis (I could tell a slight difference in turn in, that was all), but the difference was unimportant day to day, and in 10000 miles of running before I traded the car, they only wore about 1/3 -- that is a good wear rate for a high performance tire on a near- 4000 lb car..
If price is an issue, youmight look at Dunlops. I just replaced the tires on my Porsche with them. I asked my son (service manager at a big Ford dealership) for a recommendation on the best high performance bargain -- I'm pouring money into my business at the moment and wanted a bargain. This tires handle very well but are supposed to wear well, and they were only a bit more than Kuhmos (they were about $115 each on sale).
For the record mine are: BFG G-Force are about as good as it gets for the street, particularly the most extreme of the G-Force models (forget which, KD or some letters), but they wear really quick, and their drag radials have as much traction as you can get without slicks, but last only 5000 miles, will hydroplane on any wet pavement, and get no traction when the temp is below 45 degrees. Pirellis have given my more problems than any other tires, and Michelins are actually pretty good, but made by the French, which causes me some problems (I won't go into politics here . . . )
My experience with Kuhmos is pretty good overall -- I had a set on my Audi S4 for a year (after the original Contis went 13000 miles toward complete wear out at 15000) and the Kuhmos did well -- not quite as high performance as the Contis (I could tell a slight difference in turn in, that was all), but the difference was unimportant day to day, and in 10000 miles of running before I traded the car, they only wore about 1/3 -- that is a good wear rate for a high performance tire on a near- 4000 lb car..
If price is an issue, youmight look at Dunlops. I just replaced the tires on my Porsche with them. I asked my son (service manager at a big Ford dealership) for a recommendation on the best high performance bargain -- I'm pouring money into my business at the moment and wanted a bargain. This tires handle very well but are supposed to wear well, and they were only a bit more than Kuhmos (they were about $115 each on sale).
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 903
From:
RE: TIRES!!!!
I've had the Goodyear GSD3s for more than 2 years now and they still have plenty of thread left. Car & Driver tested many ultra-high performance tires, about a year ago and here's the results:
Although they used "only" a 325 BMW as a test mule, you are very likely to experience similar results with your C5. To minimize variables such as driving techniques, track surface temps, etc, C&D enlisted the help of the Tire Rack and their test mule vehicle. Although the track used was small, it's lined with sprinklers that can soak the asphalt. "It took three days to perform all the tests. We accerated to 50 mph and then braked to a standstill. There was a benefit to that lower speed: It ensured that we were measuring the braking performance of the tires and not just brake fade."
"In addition to factoring the wet and dry scores, we gave points based on a tires's price and tread-wear grade, which is a rough estimate of how long a tire will have usable tread." "Our test focused on measuring performance, so we decided that results in the dry-lateral grip, for example - would carry the most weight."
So, without further adeau, here're the results:
(Best to worst):
NUMBER 1: Goodyear GSD3: "As an all-around 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 .94g on the dry skidpad, only .01g off the first place (dry) BFGoodrich and tied with the Yokohama and Hankook.
The Goodyear gripped so well, that you might not have been certain that the road was wet. It held onto the wet track with .82g of stick, an impressive figure considering the worst tire in that test made only .67g.
...And like the Continental, the Goodyear had a high 280 trad-wear grade. At $145, ieach, it's $34 cheaper than the most expensive (guess which tires have THAT distinction!).
2nd place: Continental ContiSportContact 2: "It simply didn't feel as sporty as the others.....on dry surfaces, the Conti never rose above third from last among 11 tires. It felt soft and imprecise. But in the wet, the spread from best to worse was 15 percent, which made for a larger point spread (giving the Contis a boost). Plus the Continental had a 280tread-wear grade that was the highest (tied) for this test.
3rd place: Yokohama Advan Neova AD07: Excellent dry performance, but a bit on the slippery end in the wet stuff - expensive at $175 apiece.
4th place: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2: "At $179, the PS2 is the most expensive tire in the test." Competent, but expensive sums up this tire.
5th place: Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212: At $99 each, these are the least expensive tires - very good on dry pavement, but "greasy and slow to recover" on the wet stuff.
6th place: Dunlop SP Sport Max: "In the dry, the tire seemed to lose its confidence..."
7th place: Pirelli P Zero Rosso Asimmetrico:"In the dry-lateral-grip test, the Pirelli tied for second to last, and it finished seventh in the dry-braking test.
8th place: Toyo Proxes T1R: "...the Proxes never placed higher than eighth in any test"...nuff said!
9th place: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A: "it felt dull and disconnected and was somewhat soft and imprecise when driven hard."
10th place: BFGoodrich g-Force T/A KD: Outstanding performance on dry surfaces, but very scary on wet surfaces - don't get caught in a rainstorm wearing these shoes...
11th place: Kumho Ecsta MX: "They didn't offer much grip and the time of 30.28 seconds in the dry autocross was .62 second slower than the fastest tire. That may not seem like much, but our course was only 0.3 mille long, and on a longer track, that gap would be commensurately greater." "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."
On a congratulatory note, the first place tire is made right here in the USA by an American tire company!
Although they used "only" a 325 BMW as a test mule, you are very likely to experience similar results with your C5. To minimize variables such as driving techniques, track surface temps, etc, C&D enlisted the help of the Tire Rack and their test mule vehicle. Although the track used was small, it's lined with sprinklers that can soak the asphalt. "It took three days to perform all the tests. We accerated to 50 mph and then braked to a standstill. There was a benefit to that lower speed: It ensured that we were measuring the braking performance of the tires and not just brake fade."
"In addition to factoring the wet and dry scores, we gave points based on a tires's price and tread-wear grade, which is a rough estimate of how long a tire will have usable tread." "Our test focused on measuring performance, so we decided that results in the dry-lateral grip, for example - would carry the most weight."
So, without further adeau, here're the results:
(Best to worst):
NUMBER 1: Goodyear GSD3: "As an all-around 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 .94g on the dry skidpad, only .01g off the first place (dry) BFGoodrich and tied with the Yokohama and Hankook.
The Goodyear gripped so well, that you might not have been certain that the road was wet. It held onto the wet track with .82g of stick, an impressive figure considering the worst tire in that test made only .67g.
...And like the Continental, the Goodyear had a high 280 trad-wear grade. At $145, ieach, it's $34 cheaper than the most expensive (guess which tires have THAT distinction!).
2nd place: Continental ContiSportContact 2: "It simply didn't feel as sporty as the others.....on dry surfaces, the Conti never rose above third from last among 11 tires. It felt soft and imprecise. But in the wet, the spread from best to worse was 15 percent, which made for a larger point spread (giving the Contis a boost). Plus the Continental had a 280tread-wear grade that was the highest (tied) for this test.
3rd place: Yokohama Advan Neova AD07: Excellent dry performance, but a bit on the slippery end in the wet stuff - expensive at $175 apiece.
4th place: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2: "At $179, the PS2 is the most expensive tire in the test." Competent, but expensive sums up this tire.
5th place: Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212: At $99 each, these are the least expensive tires - very good on dry pavement, but "greasy and slow to recover" on the wet stuff.
6th place: Dunlop SP Sport Max: "In the dry, the tire seemed to lose its confidence..."
7th place: Pirelli P Zero Rosso Asimmetrico:"In the dry-lateral-grip test, the Pirelli tied for second to last, and it finished seventh in the dry-braking test.
8th place: Toyo Proxes T1R: "...the Proxes never placed higher than eighth in any test"...nuff said!
9th place: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A: "it felt dull and disconnected and was somewhat soft and imprecise when driven hard."
10th place: BFGoodrich g-Force T/A KD: Outstanding performance on dry surfaces, but very scary on wet surfaces - don't get caught in a rainstorm wearing these shoes...
11th place: Kumho Ecsta MX: "They didn't offer much grip and the time of 30.28 seconds in the dry autocross was .62 second slower than the fastest tire. That may not seem like much, but our course was only 0.3 mille long, and on a longer track, that gap would be commensurately greater." "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."
On a congratulatory note, the first place tire is made right here in the USA by an American tire company!
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 16
From:
RE: TIRES!!!!
IF you live within a reasonable distance to a Discount Tire store go price a set of NITTO 555 tires. They should run around $800 out the door and they are a great tire!
I've been running them on my two C5's and I'm happy as can be with them! They're quiet, handle well in wet or dry, and I've got great mileage (40,000+)out of them.
Good luck.....
I've been running them on my two C5's and I'm happy as can be with them! They're quiet, handle well in wet or dry, and I've got great mileage (40,000+)out of them.
Good luck.....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
