I didn't have an accurate scale available when I was getting them mounted. Best I can do is say the UPS shipping weight was 52.1 lbs for two tires. The plastic bag and three straps can't account for much weight...

 

hello ball bearing sway bar mounts...

 

[QUOTE=nmrado,Feb 21 2011, 05:15 PM]Disappointing day at my local Firestone.

 

I'm skeptical... With ~1/2" narrower treadwidth, I would think the ability to put power down during corner exit would decrease. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

All things being equal, the 245s will put power down better than the 255s. With the same load and PSI, the 245s contact patch will be longer and the 255s will be wider. Longer is better for accel/decell and wider is better for lateral accel.

 

This does hold true, but in this case you are talking about fractions of an inch length wise.

I doubt there would be too big of a discernable difference between a 255 and a 245.

 

I just got my 255 hankooks mounted this past weekend.

I agree this won't make a big difference. You want to see a big tread width difference, here's the RS3's versus some v710's from my C stock miata

 

The difference between winning and lossing is in the small details.

 

I feel the rear of the S2000 needs as much rear grip as possible. When I auot-x the CR on the RS3s, the rear is all over the place without making adjustments and restricting the front grip. The tire temps and wear for the 255s is pretty even on the 9" rims. I don't see how the 245 can provide more grip over the 255. I will let you guys be the guinea pigs.

 

I'm with ya on that Marc. I'm the 1st to admit that I'm no expert, but it seems like the tire manufacturers seem to think 9" rims are fine with the 255's. In fact, it seems like when they specify a range of acceptable widths... 9" rims are right in the middle. Then again, Kook seems to think their 245's are wider than their 255's.

-Dave