Falken RT-615 vs Kumho MX Results!
#18
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
This goes against what others have found. The MX does not compare to the RT-615 in dry handling, and I highly doubt you abused them like you claimed. You don't autocross or road race, and there's simply no way to push them to the limit without having a race course to use. You have to be at the utter limit to know how they perform, and you have to know how to drive at that limit. You don't have experience with this type of driving, so it's hard to believe the first part of what you said.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
#19
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SoFla
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This goes against what others have found. The MX does not compare to the RT-615 in dry handling, and I highly doubt you abused them like you claimed. You don't autocross or road race, and there's simply no way to push them to the limit without having a race course to use. You have to be at the utter limit to know how they perform, and you have to know how to drive at that limit. You don't have experience with this type of driving, so it's hard to believe the first part of what you said.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
Autocross
but live in sofla where it rains hard.
I was really considering the Falken RT615 - are they really bad in the wet?
I have invested in coilovers (buddyclub) so I dont want to un-due that perfomance with poor tires =)
#20
Evolving Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ATL/ CHATT
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have put about 14,000 miles on my 615's in the past few months and they are fine in the rain. I drive 60-70 in the rain and haven't had a problem yet. And I also cut back to back 1.6 60's with my 615's in 39-45* weather.
#21
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
i would rum the mx over the falkens just because they can be had in stock size. your cant get the falkens in 235 45 17. 245/45/17 on stock ride heigh looks like the car is raised and look like baloon tires. 255/40/17 ppl say are too wide for the stock rims and are smaller then stock size.
so i vote MX for DD on stock rims and ride height
so i vote MX for DD on stock rims and ride height
#22
This goes against what others have found. The MX does not compare to the RT-615 in dry handling, and I highly doubt you abused them like you claimed. You don't autocross or road race, and there's simply no way to push them to the limit without having a race course to use. You have to be at the utter limit to know how they perform, and you have to know how to drive at that limit. You don't have experience with this type of driving, so it's hard to believe the first part of what you said.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
As for launching, the only reason the MX would grip better would be because it has a softer sidewall...not because it's some amazingly grippy tire. RT-615s are like the stock Advans in that they have a very stiff sidewall for amazing handling, which is not good for launching. A good tire for drag will have soft sidewalls that crinkle, which is not good for carving corners. I do believe this part of your analysis, because you do know how to launch, and it makes sense that the MXs have a softer sidewall...this is why they don't handle as well as RT-615s.
i have pushed both tires to the limit in an auto cross setting. my dad owns a large property with a huge parking lot where friends and myself go have our own fun.
and it doesn't take much to make a tire slide out. if ya go fast enough and turn hard enough it will slide. but like i said before as far as autocross the falkens were lasting a little longer before overheating. so for some1 who's hard core into road racing or auto crossing then the falkens would be the better choice.
at the same time these tires main job is keeping you safe during normal driving, and i dont think the falkens do that job well.
#24
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SJ, CA.
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had the Kumho MX's.
A good tire for straight line and wet traction, but not so good when turning.
Initial turn-ins and mid corrections around a corner felt a little "sloppy" due to the softer side walls compared to RT-615's.
IMO for track or aggressive street duty(dry) stay with the RT-615's.
A good tire for straight line and wet traction, but not so good when turning.
Initial turn-ins and mid corrections around a corner felt a little "sloppy" due to the softer side walls compared to RT-615's.
IMO for track or aggressive street duty(dry) stay with the RT-615's.
#25
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Both of these tires need to be sprayed down thoroughly after each autocross run. The only exception is when the temperature is below 50 F , then you'll need blankets to keep the heat in and do everything you can to heat them up before the next run.
Warr is right. The MX has a softer sidewall, will launch better than the RT-615. The stiffer sidewall of the Rt-615 will show up at 95% on the autox course. It does suck at launching. Unless you drop the pressures way down, and then the footprint goes away a bit so you lose traction anyway. :-)
For street use the MX would probably be a bit better.
milburn
Warr is right. The MX has a softer sidewall, will launch better than the RT-615. The stiffer sidewall of the Rt-615 will show up at 95% on the autox course. It does suck at launching. Unless you drop the pressures way down, and then the footprint goes away a bit so you lose traction anyway. :-)
For street use the MX would probably be a bit better.
milburn
#26
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Cold ass North-east
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a couple of fairly recent threads on the scca autox forums comparing these tires. Even more helpful, Grassroots Motorsports magazine did a comparo test that I think you guys might find interesting. FWIW the 615 came out tops.
http://www.grassrootsmotorsports.com...5_tiretest.pdf
http://www.grassrootsmotorsports.com...5_tiretest.pdf
#28
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.grassrootsmotorsports.com...5_tiretest.pdf
#29
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Cold ass North-east
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yup, and Tirerack also did a test btwn the Advan Neova (which is also in the Grassroots Motorsports test in the previous post), the Bridgestone RE-O1R, the Kumho MX and the BFG KA-TD. No Falken 615 in this test though, unfortunately.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...ay.jsp?ttid=71
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...ay.jsp?ttid=71
#30
When you say you did a back to back to back comparisons that means you had access to both sets of NEW tires and would make a timed run then swap tires and make another timed run with the other tire? Then you looked at the data logger for grip data? Something like what was done here?
http://www.grassrootsmotorsports.com...5_tiretest.pdf
http://www.grassrootsmotorsports.com...5_tiretest.pdf
the falkens could have taken the beating for much longer than the mx's.
i have my avic n1 which shows G's. it may not be a super accurate reading but its the same type if reading everytime. the mx's were .1 g's better consistently.
the stock advans we're .3 better than the mx's
cheers!