Replacement tires recomendations
05-11-2007, 04:59 PM
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Jan 2007
Location: Chandler Arizona
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Replacement tires recomendations
Are there any threads out there specifically about what type of replacement tires are popular? My 2001 vert is a DD. Looking for comfort with traction. Thanks
05-11-2007, 05:01 PM
#2
Team Owner
Member Since: Jan 2001
Location: in hiding
Posts: 46,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a thread going...probably still on the first page. I just ordered the Kumho SPT's. $555.66 shipped. I wasn't going to drop over a 1k on replacement tires and they seemed to be the most popular out of the sub $600/set choices.
05-11-2007, 08:08 PM
#3
Team Owner
Member Since: Mar 2004
Location: Oklahoma City OK
Posts: 58,268
Received 1,681 Likes
on
1,303 Posts
C6 of Year Finalist (appearance mods) 2019
I went with Goodyear Eagle F1 GS D3's.
05-11-2007, 08:27 PM
#4
Melting Slicks
Those Goodyear eagles f1 gs d3's have 280 treadwear & will cost you over $1000.00 for app. 28-30 k miles. Hmmmm.
Kumho's SPT's have 320 treadwear but not great traction. Cost is good.
Kumho AXS have 420 treadwear, state they are mud/snow rated yet h rated for speed. I have a set of these & will tell you that they ride great, no "singing" & have great traction in the rain.
Check this page for the info.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compar...playResults=23
05-11-2007, 09:28 PM
#5
Burning Brakes
Michelin Pilots
I have the Michelin Pilot Sports non All Season, I live in San Diego and mine is a Garage Queen. Since I got rid of the "run-flats" I cannot believe the difference in ride and handling. They were about $1,250.00 at Costco even with the $60.00 Tire Center Coupon from the Passort of Savings
If I replace them again it will be with the same kind. My treadware number is 220%. Hope this helps and enjoy the ride!
If I replace them again it will be with the same kind. My treadware number is 220%. Hope this helps and enjoy the ride!
05-11-2007, 11:10 PM
#6
Administrator
Member Since: Mar 2001
Location: In a parallel universe. Currently own 2014 Stingray Coupe.
Posts: 343,757
Received 19,527 Likes
on
14,091 Posts
C7 of the Year - Modified Finalist 2021
MO Events Coordinator
St. Jude Co-Organizer
St. Jude Donor '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-
'20-'21-'22-'23-'24
NCM Sinkhole Donor
CI 5, 8 & 11 Veteran
Hey travelingypsye - thanks for putting together the comparision from the Tire Rack on all the tires.
05-12-2007, 12:41 AM
#7
Race Director
This is now over a year old, but many of these tires are still being sold, Certainly, the best is still the best - why settle for less on a super car?
Although Car & Driver 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 Car & Driver 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
05-12-2007, 07:16 AM
#8
Racer
Just replaced the Good years with a set of Kuhmo Ecsta MX XRP run flats from Tire Rack, great price Just over $800.00...no tax...shipping for all four (shipped directly to the installer) $57.00. Great tire for nearly half the price of goodyears.
05-17-2007, 09:06 PM
#12
Team Owner
and I only paid $1088 from Discount Tire Direct with free shipping and a local shop mounted and balanced them for $20/tire.
05-17-2007, 11:31 PM
#13
Team Owner
05-18-2007, 01:14 AM
#14
Instructor
Member Since: May 2002
Location: Bel Air MD
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just replaced mine with Sumitomos, haven't really driven on them enough to have an opinion, but at $427 shipped to my door I couldn't beat the price. $100 a tire = burnouts without a guilty feeling
05-18-2007, 02:37 AM
#16
Race Director
Member Since: Jul 2005
Location: The Beautiful Greater Bay Area California
Posts: 11,308
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
This is now over a year old, but many of these tires are still being sold, Certainly, the best is still the best - why settle for less on a super car?
Although Car & Driver 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 Car & Driver 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
I was waiting for your note, Dave, good buddy! And, this listing is still very helpful as ever!
05-18-2007, 09:07 AM
#17
Racer
Member Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just bought kumho ecsta asx. $693 shipped with 30,000 mile 3 year treadwear and defect warranty at discount tire direct. They are all season and supposedly really good in the rain. I'll let you know how they are after the weekend!
05-18-2007, 11:06 AM
#18
Race Director
You forgot the most important factor in your question: do you want to keep the runflat technology or go with non-runflats? Big difference both in performance and cost.
IMHO:
Runflat: Firestone Firehawks
Non-runflat: GY GS D3s
Have had both on different cars - excellent.
Just bought the Firestone's for the wife's '98 convertible at the recommendation of Tire Rack. Would have put on the GY GS D3s but didn't want her getting a flat at night on the highway. The Firehawks have turned out to be an excellent choice (better ride comfort; much less road noise; excellent dry/wet handling over the OEM GY EMTs). Good luck!
IMHO:
Runflat: Firestone Firehawks
Non-runflat: GY GS D3s
Have had both on different cars - excellent.
Just bought the Firestone's for the wife's '98 convertible at the recommendation of Tire Rack. Would have put on the GY GS D3s but didn't want her getting a flat at night on the highway. The Firehawks have turned out to be an excellent choice (better ride comfort; much less road noise; excellent dry/wet handling over the OEM GY EMTs). Good luck!
