My experience is that the S02s provide marginal to no traction in the wet.

It might be that I have only driven in wet and COLD in Virginia since purchasing the car in November - but I have switched places with my front and rear end (luckily on an empty road) and drive very cautiously in the wet.

aran

 

Back when I had a lot of tread on the rears I thought the wet performance was fine. Now at 11,000 mile with the rear getting slick (=big hydroplane surface), it is getting a little scary. Just ordered some new tires.

 

I spent a few hours driving at relatively high speeds in rain varying from a drizzle to a pretty good steady rain (no downpours). At no point was traction and issue. Driving on wet pavement and low temperatures can get a little dicey but that's more a function of the temperature (any hi-po tire gets hard in the cold) as well as understanding vehicle dynamics (RWD vs. FWD, etc.). I have yet to have a problem in the wet while having a nice (?!) sideways excursion when cold. Hydroplaning is one thing; losing it due to unwise throttle positions is another.

The original post indicated very low RPMs when losing traction. That's not a tire problem - it's a surface traction one. Could have been very cold, perhaps cold enough for some ice to be forming. Could have been an oily surface or something that managed to coat the tire tread. I've driven where there was an oil spill and it remained slippery for weeks, even months.

Finally, hydroplaning is a function of tire pressure. While I don't recall the formula, HIGHER pressure REDUCES hydroplaning (everything else being equal). I suspect the major reason is that the tread doesn't deform as much due to the increased pressure. Check out the bottom of the page found at http://www.tirerack.com/tires/bfg/bfgr12.html for BFG's recommendations for rain pressures (increase from 6-10 PSI in the wet).

 

It could be your alignment as well. If it is out of whack, rear end grip could be reduced significantly.

 

I think "Meat" is corect...more related to cold then wet. The SO2's remind me more of sport bike tires then any other tire I've used. I remember when the NSX came out all the new owners complaining about tire wear....same as here. I have nearly spun mine twice on very dry roads. Both times in the exact same spot shortly after leaving my house heading into the mountains. Since those two "scare the crap outta me" events, I have snaked the car hard on the straight away to get some heat in the rubber. Now Electra sticks like glue on the very curve I found so annoyong when I bouth the car....it's the heat, not the wet.

 

living in California i rarely get a chance to drive the car when it's cold - but have driven it a fair amount in the rain.

my experience to date has been that the car handles quite well indeed in the rain (including torential downpours). it even handled well in a heavy storm in LA (where they have no drains and there was standing water everywhere). the only time i've had the rear end step out in the wet was when i wanted it to occur.

 

Thanks for the responses guys. My car is not even 3 months old so I doubt it's an allignment issue. Also, it can't be temperature as during the day in was about 30C (90F) ... it is colder now but we're barelly out of summer here - it was about 22C (75F) last night. Certainly nowhere close to icy. I don't think there are spacers in my car as it handles well in the dry ... though, how can I check?

I think it could it could be this (keep in mind I was getting the back out at low RPM):

----------------------------
The original post indicated very low RPMs when losing traction. That's not a tire problem - it's a surface traction one. ... Could have been an oily surface or something that managed to coat the tire tread. I've driven where there was an oil spill and it remained slippery for weeks, even months.
----------------------------

As I said before - it has not rained for a long, long time so when it does all the 'grime' floats on top of the road for the 1st day of the rain (ie. until it washes off). I do know the difference between 'slipery' rain and 'normal' rain but not in the S2000 as I have nothing to compare against. It's still wet (and raining on and off) so I'll see what it feels like today (keeping my fingers crossed that S2000 has more wet grip than last night led me to believe).

Colin - totally agree that the S2000 is far more neutral than the MR2, but the MR2 had almost unconditional rear-end grip - it could carry so much corner speed before the back started to step out ... in particular in the wet. MR2 was an awesome track car - the braking and amout of cornering speed that it could carry saw it beat cars that were a lot faster in the straight line. I'm hoping that the S2000 can better that (in the dry I'm already sure it can).

Hiho-silever - lol :-) Where in Melourne do you live? ps. It looks like everyone on this board from Melourne drives 'silver' S2000 :-)

 

Did your MR2 have an LSD?

The weight balance on the MR2 is more rear biased - giving you a bit more traction in the rear, everything else being equal.

 

s2ktaxi - My MR2 had no LSD. Also the weight distribution of the MR2 was 53:57 (front : back). I have a friend who still has an MR2 ('94 model though) and we did some speed comparisions .... bellow 6k revs the MR2 is not that much of the pace of the S2000. It's always slower but not by that much.

Though, it's the rear-end grip of the S2000 in the wet that bothered me yesterday. Today it wasn't that wet so I could not try it out again :-(

 

The lack of ability to get the rear to move on the MR2 makes it more stable for the average driver. The way the S2K is balanced makes it more responsive for the advanced driver. Which one is better? Depends on what kind of driver you REALLY are. Pretty much everyone thinks that they can drive as well as or better than the next guy but the S2K will separate the men from the boys...