Hello everyone.

This is my first post on the site so please break me in gently.

I test drove a MINI Cooper 3 times in the last 2 weeks. Fabulous car. Sold on it. Placing an order in September for a regular MINI Cooper with SS+ and sport seast.

I want to order 15 inch light wheels and 205/50/15 performance tires the same time as I order the Cooper. Tires will be used for street driving (70%) and autoX/driving school (30%).

I was almost decided on S-03s but then found this link and now I am terribly ferklemtp. (sorry if this link is old news)

EVO Magazine Street Tire Test Results

Discuss amongs yourselves :smile:

in the above EVO mag test, S03s look mediocre compared to others, and t1-s look like great performing and super light tires. S03s got really low wet ratins which is shocking to me. (the test car is a front wheel drive, similar driving dynamics to MC and the tested tire sidewall is 5mm shorter than what I plan to buy)

Im confused once again!!! Does this mean t1-s really are better?

How would the Kumho Escta MX comape to S03s and t1-s. I know its not as good in wet but how bad is it? Can I drive 10 miles over speed limit, and take turns like a normal person during average intensity rain without killing myself on MXs? Does the rain performance degrade drastically as the MXs wear? It is my understanding that the dry performance goes up as they wear and approaches that of Azenis RS.

Thanks guys!

 

I too am (was?) considering the Proxes (see my "Why doesn't Tire Rack carry Toyo?" post).
I've also heard that you can only expect to get 20K street miles out of the S-03s. This kind of sucks because now I see that the Proxes has the lowest score for tire wear according to that EVO test. I guess I might be lucky to 15K miles out of the Proxes, and much less with track time.

 

The tread wear on the toyos is definitely scary in the EVO test. They seem like they are the softest of the bunch, or maybe the softer sidwall (which is the main reason they are so light I think) is just not as happy being pushed around the track. On the other hand, they are cheaper than some of the competitors like S-03 and Michelins.

What shocked me the most is that according to the test S0-3 SUCK BIG TIME in the rain in comparison to some other tires that were never complimented for their wet handling on this forum.

It also looks like the Pirelli P7000 are terrible at braking in the wet. A low score like that pretty much eliminates them as even being safe when its not dry.

The question is, how objective and trustworthy is this EVO tire test.

Anyone out there with comments on Kumho MX wet weather driving characteristics?

 

What surprises me is that the Dunlop SP 9000s didn't fare too well either. Low treadwear and dry handling. I wonder if these are the runflats tested.

 

pirelli p7000 are horrible

i had them in 275/40/18s on my lexus...andt hey are super loud....

currently i am running yoko avs es 100 and am VERY happy with them :smile:

 

>>What surprises me is that the Dunlop SP 9000s didn't fare too well either. Low treadwear and dry handling. I wonder if these are the runflats tested.

According to Dunlop, the SP9000 are high-silica compound and designed more for wet weather. In fact I've read other test that said they were the best wet tire tested, but a tire that excels in one catagory often loses in another.

Ryan... do you do any track time in your Yokos? How's the tread wear holding out?
_________________
[img]albums/album25/ama.gif[/img]VinceAndJessica.com
Alta pulley, Stebro exhaust, Pipercross intake, Progress rear anti-sway bar.

 

Very interesting.

I think a few of these tires may not be in the same performance category, like the the Dunlop 9000 and Pirelli P7000.

They certainly liked the Goodyear!

I would be even more interested to look at the tire testing procedure used. That can have a big affect on results.

You can see TireRack's testing procedure here!

Alex

_________________
Alex ext 294

800 522 8473

Tire & Wheel forum moderator

www.tirerack.com

alex@tirerack.com

 

I dunno, I have the S-03's in 205/50/16 and think they're great in dry
AND wet. The TireRack's survey (user driven) and a couple other web based
reviews indicate that the S-03's are great wet and dry tires. My only beef
is that they're a little heavy at 24# in this size, but my wheels are 15# (and
forged) 16x7's, so it's not a big problem.

 

I am checking out http://www.evo.co.uk/

I am not haveing much luck finding this review/ test.

I also would love to find test paramters.

Anyone who can link these to this thread, I would greatly appreciate it!

Alex

 

What is interesting is that they give Subjective and Objective dry and wet handling numbers. In some cases these subjective and objective numbers are quite different. For example, for the Continental Sport Contact tires the wet handling subjective score was 644 while the objective score was 810.

I guess this shows that driver perception has a lot to do with how fast the tire 'is'. While the test driver thought that Continetal Sport Contact tires weren't all that good in the wet, it turns out it was the fastest of them all. That is why I wonder when people on this site give reviews of different tires, how factual are these reviews?

On the other hand the test drivers and factual numbers agreed on one thing: Bridgestone S-03s are mediocre wet handling tires.

It seems that in the wet, Toyo T1-S tires dominated the S-03s. Yet 90% of the people on this site swear by these tires for wet conditions.

Not that I am knocking, I am just trying to really understand which tire is the best for me.

 

Oh,

One thing to note is that the test was conducted on the Goodyear Test Course. Could this fact have any bearing on such a high Goodyear F1 tire score? Hmm...

Are the handling dynamics of the Ford Focus test car similar to the MC? I am asking because I have heard a number of people mention that tire performance varies by the type of vehicle they are used on, such as fwd versus rwd.

 

>>
>>Ryan... do you do any track time in your Yokos? How's the tread wear holding out?
>>_________________


0 track time, but lots of spirited moutain driving. the tread wear is very good so far, the noise is quiet, and great grip

i cant say about wet conditions, because my cars stay home in the rain

 

>>What shocked me the most is that according to the test S0-3 SUCK BIG TIME BUT! ...85-90% of those miles were in weekend-long hardcore canyon rally's.


>>It also looks like the Pirelli P7000 are terrible at braking in the wet. A low score like that pretty much eliminates them as even being safe when its not dry.

Another friend of mine had these Pirelli's on his Volvo S70 and once they weren't new anymore, he avoided driving on wet roads as much as possible. The tires traction would literally go to hell if there was any wetness involved, as if they were some kind of slicks or something. ops: Test driving it once, going over a small stream of water common on the roadway, giving easy gas from the next stop resulted in wheelspin. The traction in the dry was very well but the tire wear was rapid as well. I avoid Pirelli's simply because they are not necessarily cheap and they don't last long. If you have the money to buy new ones often, then they may work great with you.

 

>>Ryan... do you do any track time in your Yokos? How's the tread wear holding out?

I'm not Ryan, but I have tracked in my Yokos... they're decent for the price. Great performance, but you have to take care of them on the track - warm them up well and don't run them for *too* long at a time or you'll get some chumks out of the sides (this is from several sources - here and elsewhere. Mine didn't show this, but I wasn't tracking for more than 25 minutes in cool weather).

I think I got a not-so-good set that I'm running right now. At 5,000 miles and one light track event, I don't really trust them anymore. Severe wear. The tread wasn't really diminished after the track event, but with the warmer weather I think it might have accelerated the wear - which it shouldn't, according to Yoko's heat ratings on the tire.

Interesting to see these results, though... I'd always heard GREAT things about the S-03's...

 

>Oh,
>>
>>One thing to note is that the test was conducted on the Goodyear Test Course. Could this fact have any bearing on such a high Goodyear F1 tire score? Hmm...
>>
Also rather interesting that the PDF of said data showcasing the T1s, is hosted on Toyo's cite.

Another great point on objective vs subjective results.

How many drivers?

We test with +85 plus drivers.

My feeling was that if you were to compair a max performance short life tires, why not use the super low tread depth sticky Azenis?

Lots of interesting unanwsered questions.

Alex

 

Alex,

How would the Kumho MX compare to T1-S and S-03?

I read through the SCCA forums that talk about the MX being about as good as the Azenis in the dry once the tires are a little worn.

I am considering the Kumho MXs for mostly daily use and some school/track use. Would these tires rank higher in dry traction and handling that the S-03s?

Obviously, the wet performance won't be nearly as good, but will the MXs provide enough wet performance do safely drive on public roads during moderate rain?

Or are the Azenis better on the street in the rain?

Also the wear on the MXs, considering S-03s last around 20-22K miles, can I expect MXs to last me around 15-17K??

Thanks.

 

I would say MX may last longer than S-03 - I feel dry is equal, noise is higher on MX, wet goest to S-03.

I unfortuantly have not friven Azenis or T1s to compair.

Alex

>>Alex,
>>
>>How would the Kumho MX compare to T1-S and S-03?
>>
>>I read through the SCCA forums that talk about the MX being about as good as the Azenis in the dry once the tires are a little worn.
>>
>>I am considering the Kumho MXs for mostly daily use and some school/track use. Would these tires rank higher in dry traction and handling that the S-03s?
>>
>>Obviously, the wet performance won't be nearly as good, but will the MXs provide enough wet performance do safely drive on public roads during moderate rain?
>>
>>Or are the Azenis better on the street in the rain?
>>
>>Also the wear on the MXs, considering S-03s last around 20-22K miles, can I expect MXs to last me around 15-17K??
>>
>>Thanks.

 

>>I read through the SCCA forums that talk about the MX being about as good as the Azenis in the dry once the tires are a little worn.
>>
>>I am considering the Kumho MXs for mostly daily use and some school/track use. Would these tires rank higher in dry traction and handling that the S-03s?
>>
>>Obviously, the wet performance won't be nearly as good, but will the MXs provide enough wet performance do safely drive on public roads during moderate rain?
>>
>>Or are the Azenis better on the street in the rain?
>>

The MX is better in the rain than the Azenis, IMHO. I don't think the MX gives up much to the S03 in the wet, actually. With the Azenis on a wet street, you just have to be a bit more careful - they are still good, but not great like some of the other tires out there. On dry pavement, the Azenis has NO equal save maybe the MX, but that's still quite the topic of discussion amongst the STS/STX crowd. The Kumho's are definitely gaining popularity...

I think the S03 is a little over-rated in the rain. Don't get me wrong, they are really great tires, but I think there are better options for less money.

 

Let's just put it this way. On 2 of my cars I have used 4 sets of T1s and one S03.
The S03 are like driving on rocks. I also lost about 30 miles out of a tank of gas.

If you have a bad back S0#s are a waste of $$..

 

I read this article a couple weeks ago on another car site that had scanned it in. The Bridgestones they showed in the article weren't the SO3. Somebody said they thought the pictures were mixed up, but there were defintely no SO3's in any of the pictures in the article. Judging by their results, I'm going to guess they had the worng tire.

 

S03's rule. I have about 2000 miles on my s03's. I just finished a 1200 miles trip down the whole east coast, and even in the wet they flat out stick. The only complaint in the tread block flex. But now it is gone. I went down and old favorite back road and was stupidfied at the difference. Worry not they are great, and anything is better than the runflats. Search on 16x7.5 ssr and you'll see my setup.

 

>>I read this article a couple weeks ago on another car site that had scanned it in. The Bridgestones they showed in the article weren't the SO3. Somebody said they thought the pictures were mixed up, but there were defintely no SO3's in any of the pictures in the article. Judging by their results, I'm going to guess they had the worng tire.

There is definately an SO-3 in the pictures, but the SO3 is vastly different in tread pattern than the SO2. (now discontinued).

I read the EVO article when it came out, and i noticed they got the photos mixed up - the SO3 tyres were under another tyre name and vice versa. I guess they messed up the plates b4 going to press and it wasn't picked up in the pre press proofs. I think their arricle would remain valid despite this.

 

I have 215/45 17 S03's w/ 10k miles & they are much better than the stock all weather run-flats in every way. When I first mounted them I tried a few panic stops from 60 mph - I could barely push the pedal hard enough to activate the anti-lock! Convinced me to upgrade brakes. Wet performance has been outstanding, road noise is minimal, and they're not yet 50% worn. Pricey, but I'll buy them again, unless something better appears.