RaNGVR-4

iTrader: (4)

if your on the stock rims get the stock tires, theyre just as good as any out there.

Malick67

iTrader: (3)

Never seen anyone with 245/45/17 wonder why. Was curious myself.

donour

iTrader: (6)

Some people say it's too tall. I see it all the time with people running in the SCCA STU class. It's really not even that tall on a 17x9.

d

tlclee

iTrader: (2)

First set was 235/40/18 on 18x9 Advan RGII +29


Sec set is 245/40/18 on 18x9 Advan RS +29


Tom

RaNGVR-4

iTrader: (4)

^ why the heck are you streching your tires so much? its not a VW... nor is it the safest/best handling setup

tlclee

iTrader: (2)

To be honest, 235 wasn't that streched. Also, I used to work in a wheel shop and you can run 235 with a 9" wide wheel. As far as for the handling, it was actually more responsive because of the stiffer streched sidewall. Not sure if I lost any traction but definately safe to drive on. BTW, I ran 235 because I got those tires for 8.5" rim and then switched the to Advans 2 weeks later.

Tom

holyfrickster

iTrader: (9)

I love the Falkens, I just got them on my car. Car is running great by the way.

cij911

iTrader: (14)

What size tire did you get and what size rim are you on?

RaNGVR-4

iTrader: (4)

thats still pretty streched. there are wheel shops here that will not do 235's on anything wider than 8.5. streching tires gives you less grip as it changes the way the tread interacts with the pavement. the major effect is non-progressive grip loss/breakaway. but the real logical question, is why wouldnt you run something like a 255, something that you can get the most tire on the pavement for your size of rim? illogical...

keevo54

iTrader: (2)

For an occasional track day and a lot of street driving which of the two tires would you'll recommend?

tlclee

iTrader: (2)

I am not going to argue about the 235 since I won't be running that again. As for the 245s, there are much more choices than 255/35/18 hence its cheaper to run 245s. I highly doubt it will make any difference in proformance by switching to 255s.

If you don't track that much and more for everyday, I'd go with the MX since they last longer.

Tom

Erik@MIL.SPEC

iTrader: (94)

Who wants to pay $260 bucks a tire when yo can get a good replacement for much less. I Paid $107 a tire for my Kumhos, not including shipping. I decided against Yokos, and I get vendor pricing on them (about 10% less than Tire Rack).

tlclee

iTrader: (2)

Exactly...screw paying that much for Advan and having them last only a few thous miles. If you want the max performance and don't care about how long they last than go with some A048. I would imagine most of us use their car for DD and want something thats a better value. Kumho MX and 615 are both great choices to replace the stock Advans.

Tom

wrcwannabe

iTrader: (1)

seconded.

milburn

cij911

iTrader: (14)

Ok so last night I had the Kumho MX installed (235/45/17).

A few quick observations compared to the factory Yoks:

(1) Treadware -- 220 vs 160, so hopefully I will get more than the 12K my Yoks lasted, but the tire will likely not be as sticky as the Yoks (I knew that going in)...

(2) Sidewall -- The sidewall definitely feels softer than the Yok and turn in does not feel as tight...I am hoping this improves in a few hundred miles, but doubt the change will be significant...

(3) Tread pattern -- To me it looks like there should be decent wet traction as the tire seems to have good channels for water dispersion. Again, for me, this is important as the car is a street car.


A few observations on the Falken 615:

(1) Tread -- Looks really nice for the weekend car / autox setup

(2) Weight -- Definitely heavier than most I looked at, but everyone says the performance makes ups for the weight....

Had the Falkens that were at the shop (VIP) been the 255/40's, I would have gone that route...Thanks again folks for your advice.