I've got a set of both right now RA1 and R888 in 255 all around. EXACTLY what you said is correct. The R888 is a better tire if setup perfectly but it seems that's a challenge, it demands very aggressive camber for example, to the point that an S can barely provide the minimum.

[/quote]

You bring up something interesting here I have not explored. I understand how camber relates to keeping an even tire temperature across its section, but whats the deal with these specific tires or any tires that need a particular set aggressive amount of negative camber to perform? Ive heard this before on the manufactures website, but I never understood why. There are several factors that determine how much camber you want to run typically, how can the tire itself dictate this? Doesn't make sense. Can you shed some light on that since you mentioned it?

 

Don't get me wrong, I love my rs3's, but they're impossible to find and cost more then nt05s now I think.

 

I've got a set of both right now RA1 and R888 in 255 all around. EXACTLY what you said is correct. The R888 is a better tire if setup perfectly but it seems that's a challenge, it demands very aggressive camber for example, to the point that an S can barely provide the minimum.

[/quote]

You bring up something interesting here I have not explored. I understand how camber relates to keeping an even tire temperature across its section, but whats the deal with these specific tires or any tires that need a particular set aggressive amount of negative camber to perform? Ive heard this before on the manufactures website, but I never understood why. There are several factors that determine how much camber you want to run typically, how can the tire itself dictate this? Doesn't make sense. Can you shed some light on that since you mentioned it?
[/quote]

There's probably four or so variables affecting this. I comprehend the concepts but not the application of them with the exception of the two major ones so I'll speak on those. The two major ones are the sidewall stiffness and the deflection properties of the footprint. The two are closely related. Deflection is the reason that a 255 tire on a 10" wheel puts down a different amount of effective patch than a 9" wheel. The first reason you'd think is that you're physically stretching the tire more/less and thus forcing more sidewall down to the pavement but that's not the only thing happening. The same way that a overinflated tire puts too much pressure in the center-line of the tread a under-inflated tire puts too much on the sides. Well that same thing can happen by choosing the too wide or too narrow of a wheel. In the case of the R888 the deflection properties of the tread patch were designed to work effectively during cornering and they do. They method they use to accomplish this is to allow for less deflection laterally of the tread patch. This is great in prime conditions where the car is in a corner and the car is leaned in creating a even contact from the outside to inside of the tire. The downside is since that the the tire won't "give" so we have to set it in terms of camber for exactly how we wish it to lay against the pavement. This is why the R888 needs minimum -2.5 or up to even -5 degrees camber and why it is so particular about setup.

I suppose the trade off is a mushy tire that works well because the tire deforms to fit the pavement but gives up total potential traction capabilities.... OR a tire like R888 that can put max traction capability to work so long as the setup is just perfect. This is also why people have been noting that the R888 performs well at high pressures, it's not using deformation to fit the road surface, it's being SET by camber and using it's fantastic deflection properties to yield the most potential.

I know that was long and maybe not easy to follow.

 

I should note, the R888 doesn't appreciate a high slip angle, which didn't sit well with me, I come from dirt and karting and use high slip angles and a very loose driving style to manipulate my angle of attack greatly while driving. The R888 just wears prematurely for me and doesn't provide the long break-away zone I appreciate as a looser driver. Still it's a wonderful tire once setup. If you're someone who likes to alter apex mid corner to exit on the inside of someone for a passing zone.....you'll find this tire to be frustrating at best. I had to intentionally adjust my driving style to fit the tire, instead of getting mad, I used it as a learning experience and tried to just say "it's nice to try something different once in a while".

 

I've got a set of both right now RA1 and R888 in 255 all around. EXACTLY what you said is correct. The R888 is a better tire if setup perfectly but it seems that's a challenge, it demands very aggressive camber for example, to the point that an S can barely provide the minimum.

[/quote]

You bring up something interesting here I have not explored. I understand how camber relates to keeping an even tire temperature across its section, but whats the deal with these specific tires or any tires that need a particular set aggressive amount of negative camber to perform? Ive heard this before on the manufactures website, but I never understood why. There are several factors that determine how much camber you want to run typically, how can the tire itself dictate this? Doesn't make sense. Can you shed some light on that since you mentioned it?
[/quote]

There's probably four or so variables affecting this. I comprehend the concepts but not the application of them with the exception of the two major ones so I'll speak on those. The two major ones are the sidewall stiffness and the deflection properties of the footprint. The two are closely related. Deflection is the reason that a 255 tire on a 10" wheel puts down a different amount of effective patch than a 9" wheel. The first reason you'd think is that you're physically stretching the tire more/less and thus forcing more sidewall down to the pavement but that's not the only thing happening. The same way that a overinflated tire puts too much pressure in the center-line of the tread a under-inflated tire puts too much on the sides. Well that same thing can happen by choosing the too wide or too narrow of a wheel. In the case of the R888 the deflection properties of the tread patch were designed to work effectively during cornering and they do. They method they use to accomplish this is to allow for less deflection laterally of the tread patch. This is great in prime conditions where the car is in a corner and the car is leaned in creating a even contact from the outside to inside of the tire. The downside is since that the the tire won't "give" so we have to set it in terms of camber for exactly how we wish it to lay against the pavement. This is why the R888 needs minimum -2.5 or up to even -5 degrees camber and why it is so particular about setup.

I suppose the trade off is a mushy tire that works well because the tire deforms to fit the pavement but gives up total potential traction capabilities.... OR a tire like R888 that can put max traction capability to work so long as the setup is just perfect. This is also why people have been noting that the R888 performs well at high pressures, it's not using deformation to fit the road surface, it's being SET by camber and using it's fantastic deflection properties to yield the most potential.

I know that was long and maybe not easy to follow.
[/quote]

Thanks for the reply, I understand completely To me a stiffer sidewall tire is essential in complimenting the precision of the s2000 handing, and why I felt it was fitted with Bridgstones which are some of the stiffest street tires available. Anything less seems a travesty. These guys that run the now seemingly popular single ply sidewall V12 Hankooks dont know what they are doing. I'd much rather eliminate a variable such as accounting for tire deformation on the track, and just let my suspension tuning be consistent and more repeatable under different surfaces. But that's my preference in driving style as well.

 

I've got a set of both right now RA1 and R888 in 255 all around. EXACTLY what you said is correct. The R888 is a better tire if setup perfectly but it seems that's a challenge, it demands very aggressive camber for example, to the point that an S can barely provide the minimum.

[/quote]

You bring up something interesting here I have not explored. I understand how camber relates to keeping an even tire temperature across its section, but whats the deal with these specific tires or any tires that need a particular set aggressive amount of negative camber to perform? Ive heard this before on the manufactures website, but I never understood why. There are several factors that determine how much camber you want to run typically, how can the tire itself dictate this? Doesn't make sense. Can you shed some light on that since you mentioned it?
[/quote]

There's probably four or so variables affecting this. I comprehend the concepts but not the application of them with the exception of the two major ones so I'll speak on those. The two major ones are the sidewall stiffness and the deflection properties of the footprint. The two are closely related. Deflection is the reason that a 255 tire on a 10" wheel puts down a different amount of effective patch than a 9" wheel. The first reason you'd think is that you're physically stretching the tire more/less and thus forcing more sidewall down to the pavement but that's not the only thing happening. The same way that a overinflated tire puts too much pressure in the center-line of the tread a under-inflated tire puts too much on the sides. Well that same thing can happen by choosing the too wide or too narrow of a wheel. In the case of the R888 the deflection properties of the tread patch were designed to work effectively during cornering and they do. They method they use to accomplish this is to allow for less deflection laterally of the tread patch. This is great in prime conditions where the car is in a corner and the car is leaned in creating a even contact from the outside to inside of the tire. The downside is since that the the tire won't "give" so we have to set it in terms of camber for exactly how we wish it to lay against the pavement. This is why the R888 needs minimum -2.5 or up to even -5 degrees camber and why it is so particular about setup.

I suppose the trade off is a mushy tire that works well because the tire deforms to fit the pavement but gives up total potential traction capabilities.... OR a tire like R888 that can put max traction capability to work so long as the setup is just perfect. This is also why people have been noting that the R888 performs well at high pressures, it's not using deformation to fit the road surface, it's being SET by camber and using it's fantastic deflection properties to yield the most potential.

I know that was long and maybe not easy to follow.
[/quote]

Thanks for the reply, I understand completely To me a stiffer sidewall tire is essential in complimenting the precision of the s2000 handing, and why I felt it was fitted with Bridgstones which are some of the stiffest street tires available. Anything less seems a travesty. These guys that run the now seemingly popular single ply sidewall V12 Hankooks dont know what they are doing. I'd much rather eliminate a variable such as accounting for tire deformation on the track, and just let my suspension tuning be consistent and more repeatable under different surfaces. But that's my preference in driving style as well.
[/quote]

So long as your driving style is consistent and precise like a scalpel a quick turn in and unforgiving yet higher max traction yielding setup will certainly best suit you. To play devils advocate, some might say a more forgiving tire is appropriate for a car that already is rather unforgiving such as the S2K. For me, I can adapt fairly effectively either way though a looser setup is better for me generally. You sound like you lean towards precision consistency rather than pushing deeper in a corner to make the time. To each their own, great drivers have existed on both sides of the spectrum. Watching two contrasting styles on the race track is what makes for the most exciting races regardless of the type of vehicle. I love watching styles clash as race lines cross paths over and over.

 

I've got a set of both right now RA1 and R888 in 255 all around. EXACTLY what you said is correct. The R888 is a better tire if setup perfectly but it seems that's a challenge, it demands very aggressive camber for example, to the point that an S can barely provide the minimum.

[/quote]

You bring up something interesting here I have not explored. I understand how camber relates to keeping an even tire temperature across its section, but whats the deal with these specific tires or any tires that need a particular set aggressive amount of negative camber to perform? Ive heard this before on the manufactures website, but I never understood why. There are several factors that determine how much camber you want to run typically, how can the tire itself dictate this? Doesn't make sense. Can you shed some light on that since you mentioned it?
[/quote]

There's probably four or so variables affecting this. I comprehend the concepts but not the application of them with the exception of the two major ones so I'll speak on those. The two major ones are the sidewall stiffness and the deflection properties of the footprint. The two are closely related. Deflection is the reason that a 255 tire on a 10" wheel puts down a different amount of effective patch than a 9" wheel. The first reason you'd think is that you're physically stretching the tire more/less and thus forcing more sidewall down to the pavement but that's not the only thing happening. The same way that a overinflated tire puts too much pressure in the center-line of the tread a under-inflated tire puts too much on the sides. Well that same thing can happen by choosing the too wide or too narrow of a wheel. In the case of the R888 the deflection properties of the tread patch were designed to work effectively during cornering and they do. They method they use to accomplish this is to allow for less deflection laterally of the tread patch. This is great in prime conditions where the car is in a corner and the car is leaned in creating a even contact from the outside to inside of the tire. The downside is since that the the tire won't "give" so we have to set it in terms of camber for exactly how we wish it to lay against the pavement. This is why the R888 needs minimum -2.5 or up to even -5 degrees camber and why it is so particular about setup.

I suppose the trade off is a mushy tire that works well because the tire deforms to fit the pavement but gives up total potential traction capabilities.... OR a tire like R888 that can put max traction capability to work so long as the setup is just perfect. This is also why people have been noting that the R888 performs well at high pressures, it's not using deformation to fit the road surface, it's being SET by camber and using it's fantastic deflection properties to yield the most potential.

I know that was long and maybe not easy to follow.
[/quote]

Thanks for the reply, I understand completely To me a stiffer sidewall tire is essential in complimenting the precision of the s2000 handing, and why I felt it was fitted with Bridgstones which are some of the stiffest street tires available. Anything less seems a travesty. These guys that run the now seemingly popular single ply sidewall V12 Hankooks dont know what they are doing. I'd much rather eliminate a variable such as accounting for tire deformation on the track, and just let my suspension tuning be consistent and more repeatable under different surfaces. But that's my preference in driving style as well.
[/quote]

So long as your driving style is consistent and precise like a scalpel a quick turn in and unforgiving yet higher max traction yielding setup will certainly best suit you. To play devils advocate, some might say a more forgiving tire is appropriate for a car that already is rather unforgiving such as the S2K. For me, I can adapt fairly effectively either way though a looser setup is better for me generally. You sound like you lean towards precision consistency rather than pushing deeper in a corner to make the time. To each their own, great drivers have existed on both sides of the spectrum. Watching two contrasting styles on the race track is what makes for the most exciting races regardless of the type of vehicle. I love watching styles clash as race lines cross paths over and over.
[/quote]

Yep, I'm a sensitive driver and just for the added enjoyment/sensation aspect of driving the car on street or track, I prefer that type of handling, even if its less forgiving at the limit sometimes.

We have gotten completely off base for what this thread was intended for though Ive gathered, which is purely strait line traction.

 

Fair enough! Generally those drivers are the ones I don't mind being wheel to wheel with on the track, they're predictable and trustworthy.

 

Yes. They are LOUD for daily driving and I wasn't impressed with the traction. They look nice tho.

 

Im not worried about how loud they are. I just hope they can get stickey.. I just ordered some 2 days ago. They're waiting to be mounted. I guess I'll find out myself and post back here