Not entirely valid to compare "square vs. staggered" when you are changing tire make/model at the same time. RS4s are going to behave and feel somewhat differently from RE71Rs even same-size vs. same-size.

Also, as already mentioned, it's hardly conclusive when the "square" case has a lot more average tire width vs. the "staggered" case. 235/255 compared against 245-square, or 215/255 vs. 235-square would be a fairer comparison.

Also, what wheel widths vs. tire widths is a factor, which is impossible to compare precisely like vs. like because wheels come in 1/2" width increments while tires come in 10mm increments.
Ditto tire diameters. 235/255 vs. 245-square doesn't *really* work as a valid comparison because gearing and front/rear brake distribution are changed...

Also, setup. It's possible OP's setup was intenionally or not optimized more for a square setup. Only valid comparison would be vs. optimized setup for staggered.

Also, IMO it's not just "square vs. staggered". Nothing magical happens with "square" except ability to rotate. If "square" is so so much better vs. even modestly staggered, that would only suggest that further bias toward front width should be even better! I.e., why stop at square? Why not 255 fronts with 235 rears?

If one were able to truly determine "optimal" tire stagger for any car, including the effects of optimizing overall setup around each tire size configuration, does anyone think that 255 fronts with 235 rears would be equal in performance to 235 fronts with 255 rears? I would bet a beer or two that the "optimal" tire stagger for a stockish power S2000 is at least a smidge rear-width biased... But again, kind of impossible to test due to unavoidable variances in tire diameters and wheel-width to tire-width ratios.

FWIW, I ran a bunch of different tire width staggers on the street/track FD over the years, 255/265, 245/275, 235/275, 255/275, and honestly the overall general demeanor of the car's handling at the track wasn't hugely affected. For sure a bit more mid-corner understeer with 235/275, but all sizes were within range of tuneability via connecting/disconnecting the stock rear sway bar.

My 0.02 :P

 

I agree, I was trying to sneak up on how it works to paint an easier to understand picture.

 

 

I find this funny, here's why.

This is my first year running TT5with a VERY basic setup, Koni yellows w/ CR springs, CR wing, OEM brakes w/ PowerStop Advanced pads, OEM sway bars and RC1s and I'm still staggered (225/255) but I'm still relatively competitive. The suggestion was made that I try a reverse stagger. Interesting to here someone else think that way or even say it.

 

It is funny, and in the sake of ZDaves post I took it as a rhetorical question really, making a point and it is a pretty ridiculous notion on an s2000, which fly's in the face of logic and common sense to run a set up like this and expect it to achieve anything favorable.

 

I'm running 255/225 reverser stagger right now, it's just to check clearance because I want to go square next season.
Only driven it a few miles on the street so cant tell that much except that it feels pretty weird and it does not give you much confidence to push

 

 

How about to over steer?

 

What were wheel sizes with 225/255? OEM 7"/8.5"? If so, tire pooch/stretch changed. Which would have an effect on handling feel.
Closest wheel/tire width pooch/stretch for 225/255 would be wheel widths of 8"/9".

Yeah, my post was a bit much intentionally to make a point: there are way way WAY too many variables in play to say that anecdotal results on "feel" in your case mean THE END of "square vs. staggered"...