The bulk of this post comes from my response to a recent post about yet another wet-weather accident caused by loss of rear tire traction.

As I drove down the (perfectly straight) thruway two weeks ago at 50 mph (80kph for us Canucks), I couldn't help but notice frequent momentary losses of traction from my (stock) rear tires. This scared the daylights out of me, despite 30 years experience driving both front and rear-wheel drive vehicles through rain, snow and ice. I wasn't going fast at all; loss of traction was entirely due to hydroplaning (and no, there were no big puddles). Slicks and rain don't go together. The word "uncontrollable" comes to mind.

As an engineer, I have always felt that Honda made a mistake with their "OEM specs" for these tires. These tires have much less void space than the S02 PPs; they're basically slicks: great in the dry, dangerous in the wet. There is pitifully little void space on the tires when they're new; put 7k to 10k miles on them (10K or 15K km) and you basically *do* have slicks. That makes them unacceptably dangerous in the rain. Statistics don't lie.

Talk's cheap, and my life is too important to just sit and complain. I took matters into my own hands and decided to get rid of the offending tires. After due consideration, I chose to replace my rears with Bridgestone S03's (245/50-ZR16). They are a far more sensible tire for anyone who has to drive through rain, with minimal loss of "10/10ths" performance. The difference was immediately noticeable the first time I drove them in the wet.

The bottom line: I think that Honda made the wrong tire choice for the vast majority of us. The rear OEM S02's are dangerous in wet weather. Once you know there's a problem, and you don't take steps to resolve it (even if it's someone else's fault), then you have yourself to blame for any trouble you encounter. When it's your turn to lose it in the rain, it won't be driver error, but it will be owner error .

If you ever drive in the rain (and most of us do, I think), dump you worn out OEM S02 near-slicks and get real-world tires (eg Bridgestone S03's or Michelin Pilot Sports). Don't pay the ultimate price for Honda's poor judgement.

 

I, for one, am glad Honda made the decision they did. Using your logic, this car should be all wheel drive with 10 inches of clearance and snow tires on it. That way, I know I'll be safe in a blizzard. The bottom line is that this car wasn't designed for bad weather. I'm fortunate enough to live in Southern California where we don't get huge amounts of standing water. If I lived in Michigan I sure wouldn't buy this car as my only car. I'd have something more sensible for the environment as my primary vehicle. If I could afford two cars this would be my 2nd. But I sure don't want Honda designing one of the finest sports cars in the world with the mindset of making it safe for the lowest common denominator. It's up to the buyer to understand what the car is designed for and make the appropriate decisions based upon that.

 

Car's fine in bad weather. Front tires are fine in bad weather. Back tires aren't. They also lack feedback at the limit.

The good news is that there are some very good performance tire alternatives.

I'm glad I got here early. I'm pretty sure this one is heading for flame wars!

 

Enough said, just look at the post count ... Then again, it won't be driver error if the owner is trying to save some money or what, not changing new tyres when the threads are running low?

 

Unless a tire which appears to be in perfect condition fails its pretty much always the driver's fault.

If you feel the back end hydroplaning, slow down. If you're going too slow to feel safe with traffic (more than 5-10 mph under the limit for example when everyone else is cruising), then get off the road.

If this is a frequent condition and it bothers you:

1. Sell the car
2. Get new tires
3. Get a bad weather beater

There is no reason for anyone to lose the back end of this car driving in a straight line on public roads. And losing it in a corner is almost always avoidable.

I'm with Strike - Honda made the right choices for this car based upon what it is. I wouldn't want this to be my only car, even in SoCal. But I sure am glad I own one. Outside of even more grip, even more brakes and even more power, I'm totally happy :-)

UL

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GR8-S2K
[B]




The bottom line: I think that Honda made the wrong tire choice for the vast majority of us.

 

Everything is relative as far as speed in the wet goes - a good driver knows the limitations and capabilities of the vehicle under different conditions and drives accordingly. I don't think the S2000 does any worse (given the same tire wear levels) than any other car with similar tires. If you know that you are going to be doing a lot of rain driving, go with SP9000 or S03 tires.

Honda did the right thing with the S2000. I think they did the wrong thing with the RSX-S by using touring all season Mich MXM4 tires on it.

 

jschmidt,

I have never owned a set of tires that gave any feedback before losing grip in bad weather. I come from the land of ice and snow (aka the Midwest) and learned to judge loss of traction by feel, since tires don't squeal on ice/snow/hydroplaning. Of course, that may also be the reason that I love the S02's.

For being mostly a 1-man army, you are certainly keeping this issue active in threads all over the board.
Tanq

 

Driver error for driving on bald tires, unsafe speed for the conditions, or using summer tires in cold weather.

 

The tires only seem to feel unstable when there starting to go bald.
If you want more miles out of the tread get a hard rubber tire,
won't be as sticky as the soft rubber, but will last a lot longer.

I completely Agree

axcilla: