hey you found my shank!! Thanks!!

All kidding aside, that sucks pretty hard. I will probably run the RF's daily and have devoted track wheels/tires. The piece of mind they provide is reason enough for me to keep them.

 

I agree, pros and cons.
I dislike them for there stiffness, rough, noisy ride and wheel hop in curves if you hit an uneven patch (thats sphincter factor there )

With the bad comes the good...

Once I was coming home from the Fl Keys on a Sunday and NO shops were open, 50mph (C5 at the time) all the way home, hence I made it home

 

Since regular Vette size tires are usually not available everywhere then non run flat owners will be waiting for tires also. It is all part of owning a Vette.

Your option to patching a tire is spend $300 or more on a new one. 99% of Vette owners will ever see the full potential of their car. A $50k car also doesn't look that good on a flatbed which is what you would need for non run flats and anything but a small leak.

Yes, run flats may blow out. Chances are they will hold their shape though while the non run flat rim is kissing the ground.

In the end it really doesn't matter what you choose as long as you are happy with your decision.

 

 

Been running nonRF for 1 year and 8k miles and no "problems" yet. I carry a plug kit but in this case I dont think it would work

 

OK, I'll throw my $.02 in on this one.
I owned a 05 SSR before the Vette and it came with no spare, non run flats, a 12 volt air compresser and a can of fix a flat. I was behind a work truck when they deposited some metal strips on the interstate in front of my truck at 75mph. Needless to say it put a huge gash in my right front tire. Even with the large slash I managed to air it up enough to drive to a tire store a couple of miles away.
Obviously it wouldn't go 25 or 50 miles in this situation but it would go far enough to get safely off the highway.
As soon as my runflats wore down on the Vette I replaced them with non run flats, a compresser, fix a flat and bought some minutes with Onstar. I figure if the tire damage is catastrophic enough that it can't be repaired it probably would also have to be replaced if it was a run flat.
I have owned my own business for over 20 years so I am used to taking a measured chance
And yeah, the highways around here can really suck with all the debris and road constuction

 

I'm on board

 

Yeah.. it's better to see all the crap on TV in color.. and everyone's driving has improved while making phone calls...

 

Good luck, for a change! And I like runflats. I'm running on them right now, about 2K miles into a trip and still going...

 

I bet that at some point in the future they will be mandatory for new cars - just like seatbelts, airbags, TPS. If more manufacturers make them there will be more competition and the prices will come down. Maybe getting the TPS on all cars (by 2008?) was the 1st step.......

 

Reminds me of my grandparents.

 

Grandparents rule!!

 

Back to my Grandparents rule statement.. Why do you want the extra weight, noise and stiffness of RF's.. ? I do understand the only benefit of runflats.. but it compromises performance , ride and handling..
newer technology doesn't make everything better.. GM didn't have space for a spare.. main reason..

 

Sure they did, they just chose to give us luggage space rather than a cubbie for a toothbrush. THANK YOU GM for getting that right.

 

One of the more rational posts in this thread......

If you don't like run flats, don't run them. If you wish to stay with them, cool.........

 

We spend too much time on this site telling each other which way is right. In the end runflats have their pros and cons, so do all tires though. One point that people failed to mention is that you will lose steering response with non-runflats due to the sidewall having a lot more flex in it.

I would really love to see the same car run PS2 ZPs and then run regular PS2s on a track to see the difference. Somehow I bet this "performance" difference that everyone is talking about is minimal at best. I look at it this way. If there was a big or even any difference GM would have put non runflats on the Vette. They are cheaper which fits right into GM's style. They have thrown a can of fix-a-flat in various other GM models.

We just spend too much time criticizing each others decisions on this site. Remember also that some guy in Miami has different needs for a car than some guy that lives in the Rockies. Cruising around back east is great since there are cell phone towers everywhere, out west you can go 100 miles without seeing a tower, sometimes another car.

I just want to see some proof that non runflats have better performance and there isn't any. Remember the ZR1 uses ZPs and it set The Rings lap record. If GM could have done better with non run flats, they would.

 

it is a real safety issue in houston

 

Seems to me that a flat on a regular tire always took me down to the rim. The price of replacing one of our rims and the tire seems to out weigh the cost of the run flat.

If, and I mean if, there is such a difference and if I were seriously into racing where 1/10ths count then I would have a racing set of wheels and tires that I would put on the car for the supposed "optimal performance". Seeings how I'm not wringing out every last shred of performance with my car, the run flat takes care of my needs quite adequately.

Elmer

 

Good point.. but they could have given us an inflator kit like used on the C5 Z06.. OH well.. RF's are not that terrible..

 

As a runflat supporter I get tired of the runflats suck comments. We need to learn some people like the runflats, the Bose, and other options the Corvette has. Nothing is perfect and there is a pro and a con to just about everything.

Yes, the numbers the ZR1 have put up with RF's are beyond impressive.