Bloody Conti's

[G-rig]

Apparently the Michelins have thin walls and they were still excellent for years on my previous cars..

Neither will be as good as semi slicks with reinforced walls.

[Chuck]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool

now am on the Marrangonis (spelling) good dry grip, not so in the wet (compared to the Conti's)

the contis were awesome grip both wet and dry

[Roodosutaa]

OK let's put things into perspective here before you get too carried away with the knee-jerk generalisations - and we all know where that would lead on an internet forum.

I don't need to read reviews to know the tyres are good performance-wise - yes in that regard they're at least on par with the better road tyres I've had in my previous cars (Bridgestone Adrenalins, Toyo Proxes and Yokie A539s - showing my age as well), that was never in question.

The issue here is being road tyres all the same, in my experience they took the kind of wear and tear and general abuse one comes to expect of road tyres very poorly. In 15 years of driving and track days I've only had to replace tyres due to wear or occasional punctures from nails/screws etc. Definitely not from driving over potholes in traffic or rubbing a kerb leaving a car park. If I clipped a kerb hurtling into a corner or rode on the ripple strip and ripped up the tyre, then I copped it fair and square.

I take offence at your suggestion that I "go bounce off gutters" on just one occasion. I'm sure in your divine mightiness you've never hit a pothole or rubbed a kerb in a car park, ever.

Perhaps I should learn to drive better but certainly not as much as you need to learn a little more social etiquette.

[Maverick]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool

I find that very very hard to believe.

There is no way a cats eye would cause a tyre to blow, not at 80kph or 180kph.

[Maverick]

I don't need to read reviews to know the tyres are good performance-wise - yes in that regard they're at least on par with the better road tyres I've had in my previous cars (Bridgestone Adrenalins, Toyo Proxes and Yokie A539s - showing my age as well), that was never in question.

The CSC2's are way above all of those tyres performance wise but I digress.

The issue here is being road tyres all the same, in my experience they took the kind of wear and tear and general abuse one comes to expect of road tyres very poorly. In 15 years of driving and track days I've only had to replace tyres due to wear or occasional punctures from nails/screws etc. Definitely not from driving over potholes in traffic or rubbing a kerb leaving a car park. If I clipped a kerb hurtling into a corner or rode on the ripple strip and ripped up the tyre, then I copped it fair and square.

The tyres are low profile performance tyres, what was the profile on the other tyres that you've had? 60? 70?

How often do you check the tyre pressures, if you weren't running correct pressures (or higher) the tyre will be a lot more susceptible to damage especially from potholes.

I take offence at your suggestion that I "go bounce off gutters" on just one occasion. I'm sure in your divine mightiness you've never hit a pothole or rubbed a kerb in a car park, ever.

Tyres don't just fail, there's always an external influence involved (lack of tyre pressure, careless driving or potholes on roads) and blaming the tyres when clearly that's not the problem is not going to stop it from occurring again.

If you read what I said it was factual and to the point, the sidewall must have been scraped on more than one occasion for it to fail in that way.

Perhaps I should learn to drive better but certainly not as much as you need to learn a little more social etiquette.

Perhaps you should learn not to take offence when being given the facts, the contis are not at fault here, they are an exceptional tyre but like all tyres subject to damage if not treated correctly.

[Roodosutaa]

The CSC2's are way above all of those tyres performance wise but I digress.



The tyres are low profile performance tyres, what was the profile on the other tyres that you've had? 60? 70?

How often do you check the tyre pressures, if you weren't running correct pressures (or higher) the tyre will be a lot more susceptible to damage especially from potholes.

50 profile, and a consistent 32-34psi checked every time I washed the car and topped up from the compressor in the garage if necessary. That is exactly the kind of generalisation I was referring to.

Tyres don't just fail, there's always an external influence involved (lack of tyre pressure, careless driving or potholes on roads) and blaming the tyres when clearly that's not the problem is not going to stop it from occurring again.

If you read what I said it was factual and to the point, the sidewall must have been scraped on more than one occasion for it to fail in that way.

You've done it again.

Perhaps you should learn not to take offence when being given the facts, the contis are not at fault here, they are an exceptional tyre but like all tyres subject to damage if not treated correctly.

I won't take offence at facts but I certainly do with assumptions.

[G-rig]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool

now am on the Marrangonis (spelling) good dry grip, not so in the wet (compared to the Conti's)

I find that pretty hard to believe too, as they wouldn't put Cat-eyes (RRPM's) on the road if you weren't meant to drive over them.

I won't take offence at facts but I certainly do with assumptions.

Didn't mean to assume you or your missus is a bad driver, but perhaps give VW or Continental a call and say you think it's a warranty claim or fault of the tyres... then report back ...

[philthy]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

[Gti Dave]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

I agree with that.

[Maverick]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

Same reason you did.

The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The continentals don't have very soft sidewalls and are not easy to damage. The only recent issue that came up was with a young user on the golfmkv forum who managed to bubble two csc2's in a few thousand km's, turns out the user was hitting kerbs and performing long burnouts.

There are plenty of people out there that never have a problem with the CSC2's and they are used on a wide range of cars from the factory.

And kumhos don't perform as well as the continentals and this is backed up by the tyre reviews which use controlled tests to measure the performance.

The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

I never said he was stupid but blaming a fault with the tyres when the real problem is how the tyres are treated is.