tire comparison
04-12-2005, 03:15 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
tire comparison
I just said fock it and bought 2 new rears for the Dragon (the consequences of driving on my current wear bares could be pretty dangerous while driving so far away)
I stuck with my ol fav of the Kuhmo MX's ..but look at the specs of the S03 vs MX
S03 $224 ea
255/40 YR17
94Y SL 220 AA A
max load 1477 lbs.
max inflate51 psi
tread 10/32"
weight 27 lbs. 8.5-10"
9"
10.4"
9.4"
25.1"
MX $134 ea
255/40 YR17
94Y SL 220 AA A
1477 lbs.
51 psi
9/32"
25 lbs. 8.5-10"
9"
10.3"
NA
25.1"
NA
I stuck with my ol fav of the Kuhmo MX's ..but look at the specs of the S03 vs MX
S03 $224 ea
255/40 YR17
94Y SL 220 AA A
max load 1477 lbs.
max inflate51 psi
tread 10/32"
weight 27 lbs. 8.5-10"
9"
10.4"
9.4"
25.1"
MX $134 ea
255/40 YR17
94Y SL 220 AA A
1477 lbs.
51 psi
9/32"
25 lbs. 8.5-10"
9"
10.3"
NA
25.1"
NA
04-12-2005, 03:27 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I almost got MXs but didn't since they didn't offer correct rear size for 16inch oem wheels.
Here is what I am gathering about the MX.
PROS:
Cheap
Good wet traction
Excellent through numerous heat cycles
Good tread wear
CONS:
soft sidewall
Takes damn long to reach ideal temperature
Noisy
I may have left some other facts here. But between the two, if money is no object, SO3 wins hands down in dry traction department. But if you track your car or drive your car hard in general and get those rubbers exercise fully everytime you get behind the wheel, MX is what I would stick with. Since SO3 will wear out quick and MX will outlast you and at operating temperature many auto-xers and track junkies are reporting that MX is fine tire to drive and attend and drive back from track events.
BTW, I am on RE750s. I love them for their wet traction and decent dry handling. It is much more predictable and audible when it is about to touch the limit of adhesion, thus much more communicative than SO2s as I hear.
Here is what I am gathering about the MX.
PROS:
Cheap
Good wet traction
Excellent through numerous heat cycles
Good tread wear
CONS:
soft sidewall
Takes damn long to reach ideal temperature
Noisy
I may have left some other facts here. But between the two, if money is no object, SO3 wins hands down in dry traction department. But if you track your car or drive your car hard in general and get those rubbers exercise fully everytime you get behind the wheel, MX is what I would stick with. Since SO3 will wear out quick and MX will outlast you and at operating temperature many auto-xers and track junkies are reporting that MX is fine tire to drive and attend and drive back from track events.
BTW, I am on RE750s. I love them for their wet traction and decent dry handling. It is much more predictable and audible when it is about to touch the limit of adhesion, thus much more communicative than SO2s as I hear.
04-12-2005, 06:38 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am also getting new rear tires next week for the dragon. i was looking at tire racks tests and the Avon M500 seem to have good numbers. anyone have any opinions on these. i was also looking at the yokohoma es1000, but for the same price the avons did much better in the wet. also, will it really make a big difference to get the 245/45 16 vs the 225/50 16? The stock tread width is 8.5" and the 225 Avons are 8.3. the 245's are 8.9. there's about a $15 per tire price difference. Another option would be to spend $10 more than the 245/45 avons and get 225/50 kumho mx. tire tack doesnt list the tread width on those though. any opinions?
