When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Will be buying a set of Kuhmos for my '86 along with some 17 inch ZR1 wheels (9.5 inch all around). I don't use the car in snow but I do use it in rain. Should I go with the MX or the Ecsta 712. I was also thinking of going with 285 40 17 rather than 275 40 17. Will there be any rubbing issues? They are just a little bit larger. Any and all advice welcome. Thanks! Cruz 86
The MX is an excellent dry weather tire and will work in the rain, and I have even run a couple autocross events in the rain with my MX tires and had no real problems as long as I was careful when applying power. But I'm not too sure about doing high-speed events on them.
For the money, you can't beat the MX tire. There are other tires out there that will outperform them in the wet but they cost nearly twice as much.
From: SCMR Rat Pack'r Charter Member..Great Bend KS
The 285 is less than 1/2" wider than the 275, so don't let that worry you.
The MX works fine in the rain (I have them on my Vette), but the 712 works better. It's all a compromise and only you can decide which is best for you.
I'm rolling the Kumho MXs on my '93. 295s on 18s out back and 265s on 18s up front. I have to be careful from a stop in the rain, but I feel pretty comfortable through curves and normal driving.
Another issue I failed to discuss with the Kumho Ecsta MX is that it doesnt have as many layers of spiral overlays and is a single=ply tire.
While reduced sidewall/shoulder stiffness is beneficial for drag-style launches, hi-speed steering response may not be as razor-sharp as say a Michelin or Goodyear with 2 plys and 2 nylon overlays. This information is marked on the sidewall.
Surprisingly, the Kumho Ecsta Supra 712 has the 2 ply, 2 overlay construction, while its more expensive Ecsta MX counterpart doesnt.
Keep in mind also that both Kumho Ectsa Supra 712 and Ecsta MX have skimped on the silica content. They are only giving you 18 parts silica vs. most other UHP's tire 30-50 parts silica filler. So they wont be as good in the wet. In the dry, there will be no difference.
I had a set of 712's for a couple of years. For the money, they were great tires. After over 35,000 miles, they still had a third of the tread remaining. Although they were fine in the rain, they weren't so hot in snow, so I replaced them with Pirelli PZero Nero's. At the track, I consistently got 60' times under 1.95 sec, and once got a 1.882.
I have the 712's now and would give them a 6 out of a possible 10. My previous tires were Firestone Firehawks and they had much better traction from a standstill than the 712's. I can spin the rears too easily with the 712's so it's like learning to launch again. I don't notice any difference in cornering between the two. I do know the 712's are a relatively heavy tire Next time I buy tires, I'll probably look for something better, but these fit the budget at the time.
The MX Kumos Pump the water better. I have them and run great in the rain. I live up here in Clevland, Ohio and drove my vette in the snow with the Kumos.
If you go to tirerack.com you can view user feed back on tires and the set I chose was the Ecsta ASX tire life rating 400 and rank 8th of all the tires they sell so they must be liked by someone other than me.