|
|
|
Hey guys/gals,
I just got my '91 745Ti ready to come out of winter hibernation the other day and as I was getting ready to take the car off the jackstands I noticed some pretty bad cracking in the front tires around the rim. So, I guess it's time for new tires :( I'm going to get my mechanic's opinion tomorrow. The tires on the front are Goodyear American Eagles. The rears are some cheap brand. It came with these tires when I bought it a couple years ago. The wheels are 16" Hydras and the tires are 205/55R16s. Both the front and back tires are T rated. The car is equipped with IPD sways and chassis braces. I have found that the T rated tires have a hard time keeping up with the handling upgrades so I'm thinking that I should get H or V rated tires. I don't have a ton of money to spend so I want a tire that is a good value. I want a tire that will give grip for the handling upgrades, but still provide a desent ride and wear. Tires I have been considering are: Toyo Proxis TPT (H rated, 80K km treadwear), Khomos (cheap), and the other day there was a nice looking set of Falkens (V rated) at my mechanics that they put on a '95 964. I would consider the Toyos the higher end of the price range at around $125 CDN (~$95 US) a piece. We usually run Michelins on our cars/trucks, but they don't seem to have a suitable tire in the price range. We have a set of Michelin Energy Pluses on our Acura Vigor right now that are due for replacement. We won't be getting another set > The older Energys were better tires. Anyway, I appreciate any help.
PS- The tires will be used in the summer only so snow traction doesn't matter.
--
Chris. Halifax N.S. '91 745Ti, 287K km and '91 745 NA, 368K km.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Quite interesting reading the responses below. Just a few comments before my recommendation.
First, speed rating, as has been stated, does not correlate with grip. Speed rating is the capacity of the tire to recover its shape in one revolution after contact with the road, which deforms the bead, and be ready for another "pass". This also keeps the tire from exploding from the forces generated by rotation. It depends mostly on ply materials and design.
Second, Zero tread is not the most optimal "pattern" for traction, even given a perfect surface. Smooth to the touch is not smooth on the molecular level, and its the irregularities in both surfaces that create grip. A more significant factor is allowing individual patches of tread to shift slightly and maintain contact for collective nanoseconds, which all add up to traction, a major consideration in tread design. That's why dragsters "sipe" their tires - they make lateral slices in the tread area to allow small but significant amounts of movement in the contact surfaces.
Recommendations from my subjective experiences: Kumho - useless in wet and "dusty" surface conditions (they came on my 744T). Michelin - wet under 40mph OK, but I have hydroplaned too often with them, and I'm not fond of their traction. Pirellis - too many quality control problems = difficult to maintain balance, out of round. I currently run Bridgestone Potenza RE950s on my 945T and I intend to use those on my 700 series bricks as soon as their tires wear enough. Great at speed, excellent grip and quiet. eTires sells 205/55x16's for about $105us.
Jim Weiss
83 245T, 90 744T/M46, 90 760T, 93 954T, want more ...
|
|
-
|
|
|
Wow! Thanks for all the responses! Now I've got some info to work with and I'll spend some more time reading at the Tirerack. I drove the 745T briefly today. Now I remember how much I like that little B230FT! :) Thanks again everyone!
--
Chris. Halifax N.S. '91 745Ti, 287K km and '91 745 NA, 369K km.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Dunlop SP Sport A2s. A very reasonably priced tire that has blown the snot out of tires over twice as expensive in numerous reviews, both by reviewers and by actual owners.
These tires have some of the best wet traction I've ever encountered, so much so that I feel safe cornering in bad weather where I feel like other tires are about to break away. On top of that and the low price they come with lifetime road hazard. Schaaawing.
-rt
|
|
-
|
|
|
T, H, V ratings, etc. have nothing to do with handling. They are maximum speed ratings, and as such they do not affect cornering.
T rating has a maximum speed of about 118. S is 110 I believe, and H is about 135. V is somewhere really high up there. So high in fact that you'll never have to worry about it most likely.
That being said, if you are looking for an all-season tire, I recommend ordering a set of Kumho Ecsta HP4 716s from Tirerack. They are cheap, are rated very highly by other people that have them, and I have a set, and LOVE them.
Goodyear Eagles are crap compared to them.
Also, these perform decently (for an all-season) in the snow, at least compared to the Goodyears I used to have. These are definitely better in rain as well.
--
Kenric Tam
1990 Volvo 740 base sedan (B230F)
My Volvo 'Project'
|
|
-
|
|
I agree that the 716s are pretty nice tires. If the original poster was looking for a more performance oriented tire I wonder if the summer Kumhos like the 712 or 711 would be more worthwhile.
Another brand that comes to mind is Yokohama. The Avid H4S or V4S are pretty cheap, and AVS dB S2 for a bit more grip.
--
alex
'89 765T, 173,0xx mi
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Tom108
on
Wed Apr 28 02:45 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
While i am also looking for Kumho 716 for my Mercedes in Canada.Difficult to find Kumho tires as compared to US(ie Tirerack
Beware of the 712,711 some Kumho with Z rating has been subject to recall and Tirerack has stopped selling them.
Check at the Tire section of mercedesshop.com with comments from Luke from Tirerack.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi Tom,
I don't know where you are, but I'm in Halifax and there's a place in the city called "Dartmouth Surplus" and they carry Kumhos as far as I'm aware. They also carry other brands, but some are tires that have been sitting around for a while I think. I believe all their Kumhos are fresh though. So, where are you located?
--
Chris. Halifax N.S. '91 745Ti, 287K km and '91 745 NA, 369K km.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Tom108
on
Thu Apr 29 14:11 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hi Chris,
I am in toronto. there are Kumhos available but the price differential is not as much as in the USA.
e.g while in the US kumhos 716 are 25-30 % of MXV4 Michellin.
In toronto they are 50-60% of Michellins here in Toronto.cos Michelins are cheaper in Canada/
|
|
-
|
|
|
Not the 711/712's. It's their new Victoracer V710 (competition) that's being recalled. Kumho will take the tire back - new, used, worn, whatever - give you a new set of another of their competition tires, pay for shipping, mounting, etc., and when the rereleased V710 comes out, you get a new set of those too.
This arose after a some of their tires experienced delamination at a SCCA event. The recall was out the day after it was brought to light.
-- Kane ... I give 'em credit for being more proactive, unlike some other tire company (and the automaker which spec-ed them to be underinflated).
--
Blossom II - '91 745Ti/M46 ... Bubbles - '74 144GL/BW35 ... Buttercup - '86 245GL/AW70 ... The Wayback Machine - '64 P220/M40
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi Kenric,
Thanks for the quick response! I'm aware that the T, H, V, etc ratings are speed ratings and refer to the top speed the tire is rated for. I've always been under the impression that that rating also gives an indication of the (dry) grip that the tire will provide. Meaning that a higher speed rated tire will generally gave more grip (softer rubber). Is this a wrong assumption? As I mentioned before, the tires that the Vo has now can't keep up with the handling upgrades. The car gets into a corner, stays fairly flat, but doesn't seem to handle to the suspensions potential due to the tires :( I've also been told that those Kumho HP4 716 are good tires. I think their is a place that I can get them at locally. I'll have to check it out. I wonder if these new Michelin "Hydroedge" tires are any good? They have a 140K km treadwear warranty, which is great, but that, along with their T rating lead me to believe that they wouldn't provide the grip I need......Thanks for the help!
--
Chris. Halifax N.S. '91 745Ti, 287K km and '91 745 NA, 368K km.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be SL
on
Wed Apr 28 03:31 CST 2004 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hi , Ive had the Michelin "Hydroedge" on my 965 and am very pleased the way it handles when I push it. Only thing is I'm constantly picking stones from between the tread.
little pricy though at around $100 each.
http://www.1010tires.com/Michelin_HydroEdgeTM_tires.html
92 965 200k
|
|
-
|
|
|
Meaning that a higher speed rated tire will generally gave more grip (softer rubber). Is this a wrong assumption?
Yes, that's an incorrect assumption. Again, speed ratings have nothing to do with traction and handling.
I'd avoid high-milage tires (60k+ warranty). All else being equal, the harder compound offers less grip. That's not saying that all high-milage tires are bad - they're not, but generally speaking, that is the case.
The UTQG grades do not 100% correlate to a tire's handling properties either. The traction grade is simply the ability to stop on wet pavement "under controlled conditions on specified government test surfaces". With this regard, your best bet is from testing and feedback (ie Tirerack reviews).
Both the Kumho HP4/716's (grand-touring/high performance) and their new ASX (ultra-high performance) should be good and affordable choices.
-- Kane
--
Blossom II - '91 745Ti/M46 ... Bubbles - '74 144GL/BW35 ... Buttercup - '86 245GL/AW70 ... The Wayback Machine - '64 P220/M40
|
|
-
|
|
|
re: Meaning that a higher speed rated tire will generally gave more grip (softer rubber). Is this a wrong assumption?
Generally this is correct but not always. Yes, generally you will experience better traction, especially on slicker surfaces with softer rubber, and many times higher speed rated tires will have softer rubber. Very few V-rated tires, for example, promise much in the way of mileage, and that's due to two factors, (1) softer rubber, and (2) less initial tread depth.
re: T, H, V have nothing to do with handling
Not particularly true, either, as one of the features of higher speed rated tires is less tread depth--necessary to combat hig-speed heat buildup--and of course tires with less tread depth will theoretically handle better.
Remember there are only two reasons for tread and tread depth:
1. Water dispersion
2. Provide space between carcass and the road so as to provide mileage "life."
There really isn't any Volvo except perhaps for a later Turbo that needs anything more than S- or T- rated tires. The driver is going to have very few opportunities to exceed 112 or 118 mph, and most drivers don't have the skill to take advantage of the tread/compound differences between the higher speed rated tires in any event. Lots of egos get in the way of this basic fact, however, and many cars wind up over-tired. As far as cornering goes, a lot of Volvos will need significant modifications to address roll before they're able to test tire traction. Tires don't change this.
The most significant decision point should be the tradeoff between tire life and wet road grip. 80K mile rated tires will be fine if you're careful. The next most significant decision is brand, as some aren't round or generally of high quality. You're likely to get what you pay for, and there are probably not any fabulous bargains out there.
|
|
-
|
|
|
- Not particularly true, either, as one of the features of higher speed rated tires is less tread depth--necessary to combat hig-speed heat buildup--and of course tires with less tread depth will theoretically handle better.
Tread depth has nothing to do with handling! The contact patch is what's on the surface of the tread. Tires can have 3/32" or 13/32" of tread depth ... the contact patch is still the same.
Heat buildup has to do more with the construction of the tire. If it was about tread depth, then those Firestones-truck-tires-that-blowup would not get C-ratings on temperature, while competition slicks get an A-rating.
And high-speed rated tires can be crappy in the traction department too. Nankang tires come to mind ... Z-speed rated, but hardly a good performer.
- Remember there are only two reasons for tread and tread depth:
1. Water dispersion
2. Provide space between carcass and the road so as to provide mileage "life."
Wrong - life has nothing to with tread depth. Nevermind the ride, but a solid rubber tire can run for a very long time. It is about water dispersion, and traction in less-than-grippy surfaces (ie snow).
- ... most drivers don't have the skill to take advantage of the tread/compound differences between the higher speed rated tires in any event. Lots of egos get in the way of this basic fact, however, and many cars wind up over-tired.
You seem to imply that there is a direct correlation with how a tire performs overall with its speed rating.
By that sense, we can get by on any round S/T-speed rated tire, no matter how poorly they handle in adverse situations, since we don't get into 'em. Look - it's not about how "over-tired" they are in everyday situations - it's about how well they perform when you need 'em to (ie emergency situations). Need to swerve to avoid a kid running into the street? Panic brake? It's not about ego and how fast the tire can go on the autobahn - it's about how they can perform when you least expect it.
Bottom line - there's more to a tire than just the speed rating, and you need to get out of that mindset.
- As far as cornering goes, a lot of Volvos will need significant modifications to address roll before they're able to test tire traction. Tires don't change this.
Read the original post! YEESH!!! iPd bars and chassis braces made a HUGE difference, hence why he needs new tires.
- The most significant decision point should be the tradeoff between tire life and wet road grip. 80K mile rated tires will be fine if you're careful.
Yeah, suggest that the next time it's raining and an idiot cuts you off on the highway and stomps on the brake. All it takes is one minor accident to wipe out any savings that a longer-wearing-but-poorer-wet-weather tire can bring on.
Again, I'm not saying that all high-milage tires are poor in this department, but as a class, they don't perform as well as stickier (and faster-wearing) tires.
- The next most significant decision is brand, as some aren't round or generally of high quality. You're likely to get what you pay for, and there are probably not any fabulous bargains out there.
So you mean that I was better off replacing the one $100+ Michelin that took 1.25oz to balance and ultimately had a cord separation on me with another one $100+ Michelin that'll perform much the same, instead of spending under $50/ea. for the Kumho's which total for all 4 tires didn't even take 1oz of weights? And offered better handling and wet weather performance?
Go ahead and spend more, but I stand by my opinion with the very affordable Kumho tires.
-- Kane ... who usually doesn't like chewing out others on the board, but bad information is worse than no infomation.
--
Blossom II - '91 745Ti/M46 ... Bubbles - '74 144GL/BW35 ... Buttercup - '86 245GL/AW70 ... The Wayback Machine - '64 P220/M40
|
|
-
|
|
|
In his defense about the tread depth, it's not completely wrong.
0 tread depth (slicks!) makes for excellent traction on dry asphalt. ;-)
--
Kenric Tam
1990 Volvo 740 base sedan (B230F)
My Volvo 'Project'
|
|
-
|
|
|
Excellent info from Kane. Just to add to what he was saying about UTQG, it's also on a straight line only. Their tests do not consist of cornering at all, so while a tire may hold while accelerating and braking, it may not be able to hold as well while cornering.
Check out the tire ratings on Tirerack. I think pretty much all of their tires have user feedback/survey results. Make sure when you're looking at them to take into account the number of reported miles. A tire that only has something like 50,000 miles and is all 9's across the board may LOOK good, but it ONLY has 50,000 miles.... as opposed to the tire that has all 8.5's across the board, but has 5,000,000 miles reported.
P.S. I'm not really concerned about how long my tires will last. If it's anywhere around 20K-30K miles, I'm happy with it. The Kumho's should easily last that long. I figure that if a tire gets to that age, it'll start cracking anyway and I'll replace it. The cost really isn't that bad considering each of the Kumhos is only $37 (for 195/60 HR15, probably more for the 205/55 R16's you have). But honestly, do you really want to skimp on money on the only 4 points of contact that your car has with the ground? :-)
--
Kenric Tam
1990 Volvo 740 base sedan (B230F)
My Volvo 'Project'
|
|
-
|
|
|
One point to evaluate on new tires with little feedback is how the other tires in the company's line perform. If a company produces tires that are all decently ranked, then that's more assurance that the new tire ought to be decent too, lest they want to ruin their image. Likewise, if a company has produced a good number of crappy tires, then you'd prolly want to wait for feedback on their new tire before considering.
It's kinda the same way reliability trends are given to new cars. You can expect first year Honda and Toyota vehicles to be decent. You might want to wait for a year or two until the wave of recalls pass on .. oh, say a new Ford. :)
Back on tires ... looking through my records, I've actually about 30k road miles (as opposed to odometer miles) on my set of 716's. There's still about 6/32" of tread left, so they're holding up. Still, YMMV - in the literal sense.
-- Kane
--
Blossom II - '91 745Ti/M46 ... Bubbles - '74 144GL/BW35 ... Buttercup - '86 245GL/AW70 ... The Wayback Machine - '64 P220/M40
|
|
|
|
|
