Those Who Have NON RunFlats ???
05-18-2018, 11:49 PM
#121
Le Mans Master
Yes, I could have been a little more specific with replace with a pair," just as one would when replacing with any non-identical tire; RF or not, Summer or A/S. Even replacing a complete pair with an identical tire when significant tread is worn instead of just one.
That said, a little common sense goes a long way, and often when on the road, temporary repairs (of many sorts, not just tires) may have to be made to get you to where you need to go/or where permanent repairs can be done.
As for policies, they differ from brand to brand, and even more so from shop to shop. Some places are more willing and flexible in order to get a stranded motorist back on the road than others.
That said, a little common sense goes a long way, and often when on the road, temporary repairs (of many sorts, not just tires) may have to be made to get you to where you need to go/or where permanent repairs can be done.
As for policies, they differ from brand to brand, and even more so from shop to shop. Some places are more willing and flexible in order to get a stranded motorist back on the road than others.
05-19-2018, 10:37 AM
#123
Advanced
After reading various opinions on runflat vs non-runflat prior to this thread, I am 99% sure I will be getting non-runflats (Michelin Pilot 4S) when it's time. I like the concept of runflats, and I am not bothered nor have I noticed any handling or noise issues, but for how I use the car I feel I can safely forego them.
As someone with an economic background who specializes in risk management (not risk elimination), for me it comes down to the expected value of a flat, which considers the likelihood of a flat occurring and the dollar cost associated with remedying said flat for each non-runflat and runflat option.
My background situation/logic:
1. 80% of my driving occurs in a 30 mile radius in a major city. Car is only driven 7 months/year.
2. Car is driven on a 3 hour trip to visit parents every six weeks or so. Major highways, never after dusk.
3. The risk of a flat is relatively low, runflats do cost more from what I've seen, and despite recent advances, 9/10 doctors agree that non-runflats have better handling and ride quality.
4. In the event I do get a flat, I'm carrying slime/fix-a-flat (more research needed here) and a small portable compressor. Possibly a plug kit as well.
5. There appears to be a difference of opinion on patching runflats, but it seems likely I would have to replace the damaged tire and its counterpart in the event of a flat. This reduces a lot of value, to me.
In the end, it's a decision to simply insure something you fear strongly enough. It's similar to the reason I'll but the retailer's extra warranty on the 60k mile tires on my sedan but pass on them for the Vette. In the case of each, I'm basically paying for a 5th tire upfront that I may never use, but the likelihood I'll need it is higher for 60k miles than 15k-20k.
Maybe I'm wrong - only one way to find out. But nothing wrong with going the runflat option like I said, and welcome any counter-opinions that would change my mind.
As someone with an economic background who specializes in risk management (not risk elimination), for me it comes down to the expected value of a flat, which considers the likelihood of a flat occurring and the dollar cost associated with remedying said flat for each non-runflat and runflat option.
My background situation/logic:
1. 80% of my driving occurs in a 30 mile radius in a major city. Car is only driven 7 months/year.
2. Car is driven on a 3 hour trip to visit parents every six weeks or so. Major highways, never after dusk.
3. The risk of a flat is relatively low, runflats do cost more from what I've seen, and despite recent advances, 9/10 doctors agree that non-runflats have better handling and ride quality.
4. In the event I do get a flat, I'm carrying slime/fix-a-flat (more research needed here) and a small portable compressor. Possibly a plug kit as well.
5. There appears to be a difference of opinion on patching runflats, but it seems likely I would have to replace the damaged tire and its counterpart in the event of a flat. This reduces a lot of value, to me.
In the end, it's a decision to simply insure something you fear strongly enough. It's similar to the reason I'll but the retailer's extra warranty on the 60k mile tires on my sedan but pass on them for the Vette. In the case of each, I'm basically paying for a 5th tire upfront that I may never use, but the likelihood I'll need it is higher for 60k miles than 15k-20k.
Maybe I'm wrong - only one way to find out. But nothing wrong with going the runflat option like I said, and welcome any counter-opinions that would change my mind.
05-19-2018, 11:02 AM
#124
my suggestion is this... lets stop this thread right here. No more posting needed. We wait till the next thread on Run Flats start - which will be approx 1-2 weeks is my guess. 
05-19-2018, 11:11 AM
#125
Safety Car
Deleted
Last edited by madsonp; 05-19-2018 at 11:13 AM. Reason: Deleted
05-19-2018, 04:34 PM
#126
Burning Brakes
[QUOTE=Cherokee Nation;1597229751]I can't figure out why anyone would go to such extremes trying to make a Corvette ride like a Cadillac.
05-19-2018, 05:04 PM
#127
Race Director
05-19-2018, 07:21 PM
#128
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jul 2010
Location: Tacoma, Wa/Surprise, Az
Posts: 2,846
Received 182 Likes
on
163 Posts
The caveat is the GY's that come on the base model. I have never owned a base model, but a friend of mine does and he says the base model tires are not as good as the Supercar tires that came on the Z-06, GS, and Z-51 optioned cars. So one must compare apples-to-apples and I don't see that happen very often on the forum. Keeping in the same comparisons mode, Comparing hard 5 year old tires to new isn't correct either, yet there are plenty of threads that do so.
So comparing RF's to nonRF's for a daily driver, for me the answer depends. If I lived in a rural area or where getting a flat can be a tough situation, I would go with RF's especially if in a desert area. RF's or not, I carry a complete tire repair kit, and no slime. I can quickly plug a tire and re-inflate in less time than it takes to change it.
The following users liked this post:
GARYFINN (05-20-2018)
05-22-2018, 04:19 PM
#133
Melting Slicks
I just received my ContiComfortKit today. These are from Tirerack and are now on clearance. I had one in my 2002 vert. My 2008 vert already had new non-runflats on it when I purchased it in March.
I'll keep this kit and my AAA card until later this year and then I'm putting Firestone Firehawks on it as a Christmas present for myself.
I'll keep this kit and my AAA card until later this year and then I'm putting Firestone Firehawks on it as a Christmas present for myself.
05-22-2018, 06:16 PM
#134
I have yet to have a tire bleed air so quickly that I couldn't get home after a single fill up.
05-22-2018, 09:54 PM
#135
Burning Brakes
The current recipe is water based and cleans up easily. Unlike the original formulation which was a bitch to remove. Many shops would not touch such a tire.
Last edited by Larry Myers; 05-22-2018 at 10:00 PM.
05-22-2018, 11:21 PM
#136
Burning Brakes
When run flat tires became available in the mid 90s the limit was 200 miles. Soon it became apparent this distance was too great and the limit was lowered to where it is today.
If more than 50 miles from help, at the risk of sacrificing a tire, am certainly not going to simply stop. The tire does not disintegrate at 50 miles.
Damage that may render a run flat unrepairable also apply to a conventional tire.
05-22-2018, 11:33 PM
#137
Le Mans Master
The 50 mile limit is an effort to ensure the tire is still repairable.
When run flat tires became available in the mid 90s the limit was 200 miles. Soon it became apparent this distance was too great and the limit was lowered to where it is today.
If more than 50 miles from help, at the risk of sacrificing a tire, am certainly not going to simply stop. The tire does not disintegrate at 50 miles.
Damage that may render a run flat unrepairable also apply to a conventional tire.
When run flat tires became available in the mid 90s the limit was 200 miles. Soon it became apparent this distance was too great and the limit was lowered to where it is today.
If more than 50 miles from help, at the risk of sacrificing a tire, am certainly not going to simply stop. The tire does not disintegrate at 50 miles.
Damage that may render a run flat unrepairable also apply to a conventional tire.
05-23-2018, 10:32 PM
#138
Flat tire?
That statement isn't accurate Ed. I have run the GY Supercar tires as OEM on the Z-51 optioned cars, Same tire but larger size on the GS, Michelin RF's and Michelin Pilot SS Non-RF's and I run with the advanced Intermediate groups. No problems keeping up. I chose not to push the car any harder and going to R-Comp tires with all of the associated issues that go along with that level. The GY Supercar tires work pretty good on a track. The Michelins work well to, perhaps a bit better but not by leaps and bounds as some would have you believe. They Michelins are not any quieter either, RF or nonRF
The caveat is the GY's that come on the base model. I have never owned a base model, but a friend of mine does and he says the base model tires are not as good as the Supercar tires that came on the Z-06, GS, and Z-51 optioned cars. So one must compare apples-to-apples and I don't see that happen very often on the forum. Keeping in the same comparisons mode, Comparing hard 5 year old tires to new isn't correct either, yet there are plenty of threads that do so.
So comparing RF's to nonRF's for a daily driver, for me the answer depends. If I lived in a rural area or where getting a flat can be a tough situation, I would go with RF's especially if in a desert area. RF's or not, I carry a complete tire repair kit, and no slime. I can quickly plug a tire and re-inflate in less time than it takes to change it.
The caveat is the GY's that come on the base model. I have never owned a base model, but a friend of mine does and he says the base model tires are not as good as the Supercar tires that came on the Z-06, GS, and Z-51 optioned cars. So one must compare apples-to-apples and I don't see that happen very often on the forum. Keeping in the same comparisons mode, Comparing hard 5 year old tires to new isn't correct either, yet there are plenty of threads that do so.
So comparing RF's to nonRF's for a daily driver, for me the answer depends. If I lived in a rural area or where getting a flat can be a tough situation, I would go with RF's especially if in a desert area. RF's or not, I carry a complete tire repair kit, and no slime. I can quickly plug a tire and re-inflate in less time than it takes to change it.
05-24-2018, 12:24 AM
#140
