Tires, Wheels, & Brakes Discussion about wheels, tires, and brakes for the new MINI.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: CARiD

Hankook Ventus V12 Evo review

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 2, 2012 | 07:28 PM
  #1  
navybsn's Avatar
navybsn
Thread Starter
|
3rd Gear
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
From: NW Fla
Hankook Ventus V12 Evo review

Recently discovered my Conti DWS's were on there last legs (actually about 1000 miles past that), so I set off in search of a suitable replacement. The Hankook's came up in a lot of searches. I figured it was worth a shot.

First impressions: quiet. Noticeably quieter than the Conti's. I'm amazed at how much quieter they are. I have a lot of sound deadener in the car to begin with, but it was still a dull roar. No more.

Smooth. Definitely smoother over the rough roads out here.

Handling, not as sharp. But they haven't broken in yet either.

Look very nice on the car.

We'll see how they hold up over the long term, but so far, so good. Definitely would recommend them to any one on the hunt for new tires.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 12:40 AM
  #2  
walk0080's Avatar
walk0080
6th Gear
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,800
Likes: 2
I just had these mounted the other day but can't make use of them until the weather warms up. I've read about the slightly 'softer' feeling but then I guess most non run-flats do feel that way if you try them back to back with an RFT. Several tire reviews put them at or above tires costing much more.

I figure since I've never driven my JCW with run-flats on (took delivery with 17 non run-flat winter tires), any summer tire will feel more sporty come spring time.

I also considered some Michelins but read about iffy wet driving - I've had tires with crummy wet handling and definitely want to avoid that.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 05:05 AM
  #3  
davisflyer's Avatar
davisflyer
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 8
From: Knoxville, TN
I had those Hankook's before the Conti DW's I now have. I like the Conti's slightly better overall, but mine are not the DWS. For me, the Hankook's only lasted 12k miles. They are a good tire overall though.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 06:26 AM
  #4  
navybsn's Avatar
navybsn
Thread Starter
|
3rd Gear
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
From: NW Fla
I certainly hope I get more than that (12K) out of them. Any particular reason they wore out so fast?
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 06:58 AM
  #5  
davisflyer's Avatar
davisflyer
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 8
From: Knoxville, TN
I got rid of them when the wet weather traction had deteriorated to the point of hydroplaning a lot. As far as tread depth went, it technically had some life left in all probability. I might have been able to eek another 6k miles out of them, but they just didn't feel safe anymore in the rain. I think the compound is pretty soft, leading to higher tread wear. Just for comparison to my Conti DW, both are rated max performance tires with Tire rack, the Hankooks have a 280 tread ware and the Conti's have 340. I did track the car one day with the Hankook's, but it was in the rain, so I doubt it impacted the tires as greatly as a dry day would have.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 07:35 AM
  #6  
walk0080's Avatar
walk0080
6th Gear
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,800
Likes: 2
I don't know if anybody rates Consumer Reports reviews highly here, but they indicated the DWs had worse tread life than the Hankook's despite the manufacturer ratings.

I sure hope mine last longer too! The DWs were also more expensive locally so not sure if that offsets the tread life.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 12:09 PM
  #7  
martinb's Avatar
martinb
6th Gear
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,237
Likes: 8
From: Silicon Valley
I've been running the Ventus V12's for a while now on my JCW cabriolet. In my opinion, they are a fantastic tire. Of course, any non run flat will not have as direct and as immediate a steering feel as a run flat. That 's a result of the hugely stiff and rigid sidewalls on the run flat. You'll notice a difference when switching from run flats to any conventional tire. But you get used to it very fast.

The Ventus (I'm running 215/40-18's) sticks extremely well and when you finally do reach the limit (and it's way out there), it gives way predictably with plenty of notice. And wet weather performance is remarkable as well, especially since it's a summer tire. But, as with any tire, when the tread wears, wet weather performance goes down. Car and Driver gave it a second place in their 2009 summer tire test. It was second only to the Dunlop Dirrazo and the only reason I didn't go with the Dunop was because it isn't available in my size.

I will be unhappy if Hankook ever stops making this tire.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 02:15 PM
  #8  
miniblucabrio's Avatar
miniblucabrio
5th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 796
Likes: 8
From: Lemoore, CA
^+1! I've been running this tire for a couple years now and love them. Good quiet ride and excellent amount of grip dry or wet. Never have a problem with hydroplaning either.
 
Reply
Old Mar 3, 2012 | 08:23 PM
  #9  
davisflyer's Avatar
davisflyer
6th Gear
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,097
Likes: 8
From: Knoxville, TN
Don't get me wrong, I liked the Hankook's alot, I just like the Conti's slightly better. A comparison of the two tires on the Tirerack of customer survey data shows a very slight nod the Conti as well. So, in the real world, very comparable tires. There is a $27 difference per tire in the Hankook's favor. I simply decided to try something different. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Hankooks or the Conti' DW.
 
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
OutMotoring
Vendor Announcements
1
Nov 16, 2015 07:04 AM
theblackfalcon
JCW Garage
11
Oct 19, 2015 05:22 AM
eMINI of the State
1st Gear
3
Oct 2, 2015 03:12 PM
XsV
R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006)
24
Sep 30, 2015 03:17 PM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:19 AM.