Kumho ECSTA MX vs. MX XRP ??
02-08-2007, 05:43 PM
#1
Advanced
Thread Starter
Kumho ECSTA MX vs. MX XRP ??
I will be purchasing (and mounting on a spare set of wheels) a set of Kumho ECSTA either the run-flat (MX XRP)or non-run-flat (MX) for autocross and due to class and need to drive to the events (100-300 miles) would like to know if there is any performance advantage or disadvantage to the run flat vs. the non-run flat other than cost. Was wondering if suspension originally designed for run-flats, if others have had any issues autocrossing non-run-flats. My car is a 2001, 6speed convertible with F-45 adjsutable suspension. At this time the Kumhos will be used only when autocrossing as my stock no stick F1-GS-EMTs have many miles left in them for street use but are not the hot ticket for autocrosses. Also if any have run these tires is there a difference in pressures for MX vs. MX XRP for autocross?
02-08-2007, 06:32 PM
#2
Tech Contributor
Member Since: Oct 1999
Location: Charlotte, NC (formerly Endicott, NY)
Posts: 40,081
Received 8,924 Likes
on
5,330 Posts
For autocross you probably will be better off with the Non Run Flat. Any run flat tire is going to have stiffer sidewalls than the non run flat version of the same tire. The stiffer sidewalls will reduce cornering ability to some degree.
Bill
Bill
02-08-2007, 06:48 PM
#4
The non run flats will be lighter in weight. We run them on all our school cars and they have good grip for a street tire. Very predictable and consistent tire! Since you won't have a chance to heat them up by doing several runs before, I would suggest starting pressure at 30 to 32psi. Maybe some of you autocross experts can chime in.
