My COntis lasted for 20K KM with no blowouts etc Just a couple of punctures. Car was driven quite hard on rough country roads with no incidents.
Keeping the pressure up to manufacturer's standard is essential though.
So they did a test to determine what tyres should be in the test?
Nowhere in that test does it say how they came to choose the tyres that are tested or what style of tyre they were looking for. EVOs demographic gives a clue but the range of tyres in that test aren't what I would describe as "the best from each manufacturer".
Bridgestone do better tyres than the RE050A (RE11, RE070), Dunlop has the Direzza; Kumho has the Exsta MX & XS; Yokohama the Advan range (why you would put the S-drive in there is a mystery & the results show that); The Pirelli PZero (assymetric) might have been a better choice as well.
Conspicuous in their absense are Sumitomo HTR Z-III, Marangoni, Toyo, Falken & Hankook - I think all these brands would have a tyre that would slot into the EVO test and give a fair showing.
Yes, very comprehensive & great for us folk with an A5 chassis VAG car.IMO the EVO test is the most comprehensive and as it uses a Golf GTI (2 in fact) and was conducted under all circumstances is going to be the best way to choose a performance tyre. The whole "my new tyres are great and better than my worn out old tyres" is pointless and the only real way to compare them is on a track under controlled conditions.
There's a good AutoBild test using a GTI as well.
/searches..... Here Translated Third party analysis
I think my CSC2s are great. Progressive & they let you know what is happening between the road & the tyre. Excellant in standing water. They need some heat to grip & they don't like a damp surface. A little noisy.As you can see the CSC (now 3) is an excellent tyre that constantly is near the top of the tyre tests.
Would I buy them again? Probably not.
Last edited by brad; 30-07-2009 at 01:04 PM.
carandimage The place where Off-Topic is On-Topic
I used to think I was anal-retentive until I started getting involved in car forums
My COntis lasted for 20K KM with no blowouts etc Just a couple of punctures. Car was driven quite hard on rough country roads with no incidents.
Keeping the pressure up to manufacturer's standard is essential though.
Expensive tyres will keep you alive, cheap tyres.. well you get what you pay which is a compromise on all fronts.
There's 4 small patches keeping you on the road so why compromise safety?
I'd like to see all the cheap poor performing tyres banned and tyres have to meet a certain standard before being sold, not to protect the stupid people that buy cheap tyres but to protect the others on the road.
Man... have I created a monster, post a topic about tyres, let it stew for a few days, come back and it's turned into a schoolyard Polo-/Golf-bashing thread. I don't know what the average age of Polo/Golf drivers are in the real world, but judging by the quality of some of the posts here 12 seems to be about right.
I think we've established pretty firmly what Maverick has chosen to be in this thread and there's not much point in descending to his level (judging by the attitude he's shown, he would probably think ascending is the better word). Who knows, he might be a good bloke in real life but if that's what he wants to be on the internet, then so be it.
Anyway, back to topic, here's an update on the tyres: they're out of Kumho KU31's so I got a pair of KH11's instead <== (Maverick take note: golden opportunity to do some cheap tyre bashing!!). At that price I'm under no illusion they'll perform as well as the Conti's but they more than fit the bill for my daily 80km commute in traffic, reviews seem to be good as well. They're on the back for now but I'll know how good they are once I rotate them to the front after they've been bedded in. To suggest the Contis are the be all and end all for safety and speaking in absolutes is beyond ridiculous.
If I were serious about performance I'd get a separate set of semi slicks for the track as I used to do for the MX5 (Maverick feel free to fire some cheap shots at my choice of car too!) and have road tyres for the daily grind. But that's a separate discussion.
Tracking the car will reduce the life of:
- brake pads
- petrol in tank
- tyre tread
- other consumables
The Kuhmo's were cheap ($120 each). I got them as I had heard good things about them (for the $$$). I think i'll have a better impression when I swap back to the Kuhmo's after the track day. Conti's are holding much more grip than before with a good alignment, toe adjusters on the rear and RSB, if you think the tyres are crap but have not tried others, maybe there are other places to look to improve the handling...
No tests done AFAIK. There used to be a requirement for a DOT certification but I haven't heard that one for ages.
/searches..... tyres are covered by ADR23. I haven't read it & have no idea what it says.
You realise that you can still buy retreads & remoulds (AFAIK) plus all the imported 2nd hand tyres that have an unknown history; possibly inapropriate rubber compound (for European winter temperatures); AllSeasons/Mud+Snow patterns/compounds; or aged beyond the lifespan designated by other registration authorities.
I bought a set of 2nd hand Japanese Bridgestones that came off a grey import. The tyres weren't suitable to get over the pits but were OK & legal for the tyre place to sell to me - work that out![]()
carandimage The place where Off-Topic is On-Topic
I used to think I was anal-retentive until I started getting involved in car forums
Cheap tyres aren't necessarilly total *****ters. I'd rather someone fit some LingLongs or Nexens than drive around on bald tyres because they can't afford better. At least there is some tread there for when it rains.
A fair rule of thumb for tyres is:
Cheap
Good Grip
Long Lasting
Pick two -all three is impossible.
carandimage The place where Off-Topic is On-Topic
I used to think I was anal-retentive until I started getting involved in car forums
Bookmarks