stock yoko A046 to falken azenis 245/45/17
Oct 18, 2007 | 01:57 PM
#46
Who cares about road noise, ride quality, or tire wear {excluding r-compound}?
Oct 18, 2007 | 05:47 PM
#47
I personally went with a 245/40/17 because it gives a slight bit more of width and has a smaller overall diameter at 24.7 if I'm not mistaken (memory). This way I can still keep my car lowered without having to worry about the fittament.
Oct 18, 2007 | 05:50 PM
#48
Wouldn't we all. After read alot of posts on this site about the Falken RT615 i was greatly dissappointed with the performace. Unfortantly I'm not made of money or I'd try the Z1's and the RE-01 and give an accurate comparison compared to stock based on pure performance. I'll have to pass since I have a set of stocers sitting in my garage with ~500 miles just waiting to be mouted.
Who cares about road noise, ride quality, or tire wear {excluding r-compound}?
Who cares about road noise, ride quality, or tire wear {excluding r-compound}?
These RE01R's I got from Tire Rack for like $180 I think? The stock sized ones were $186.
Oct 18, 2007 | 06:06 PM
#49
The 255/40/17 has an identical overall wheel diameter as the stock tire (25.3" I think). Although that tire is better suited for an 8.5-9" wheel--you can still do it on a stock 8" wheel.
I personally went with a 245/40/17 because it gives a slight bit more of width and has a smaller overall diameter at 24.7 if I'm not mistaken (memory). This way I can still keep my car lowered without having to worry about the fittament.
I personally went with a 245/40/17 because it gives a slight bit more of width and has a smaller overall diameter at 24.7 if I'm not mistaken (memory). This way I can still keep my car lowered without having to worry about the fittament.
Oct 18, 2007 | 06:54 PM
#50
Pic see post #23:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...=258491&page=2
Oct 18, 2007 | 08:21 PM
#51
Question: I would have thought that you'd WANT the 255's for competition because of the added contact patch...what am I missing here?
I plan on auto-x'ing and bought the 245/40/17--but that's because I was concerned with fittament on a lowered car.
***nevermind*** I did some research and I guess the rules limit the tire section width to 245...
I plan on auto-x'ing and bought the 245/40/17--but that's because I was concerned with fittament on a lowered car.
***nevermind*** I did some research and I guess the rules limit the tire section width to 245...
Last edited by belizelittle39439; Oct 18, 2007 at 08:45 PM.
Oct 18, 2007 | 09:17 PM
#52
Question: I would have thought that you'd WANT the 255's for competition because of the added contact patch...what am I missing here?
I plan on auto-x'ing and bought the 245/40/17--but that's because I was concerned with fittament on a lowered car.
***nevermind*** I did some research and I guess the rules limit the tire section width to 245...
I plan on auto-x'ing and bought the 245/40/17--but that's because I was concerned with fittament on a lowered car.
***nevermind*** I did some research and I guess the rules limit the tire section width to 245...
the SCCA street tire class (STU) limit is 245. I was the first to try 255s and later, probably 1st or 2nd to run 275s on an Evo.
Oct 18, 2007 | 09:37 PM
#54
Evolving Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
From: MA
I think you're missing the point.
A lot of people look for other tires that are not as expensive and have equal qualities or better. The only way to do this is to try them out. True, the manufacturer deemed that Yoko's would be a great choice for this car due to their inherent qualities...but honestly...do you see most SCCA comps where people are running the stockers? What about our aftermarket vendors who pride themselves on improving our cars' performance on the street AND track?
They're great tires...but aren't the only good ones out there made for this vehicle. Sidewall isn't everything--though I too would like to find a cheaper alternative with sidewalls equal to or better our A046's.
FWIW--I'm going to use RE050APP's on my Rota wheels for daily driving, and use the RE01R's on my BBS rims for HPDE's (autocross and the straight track). Hopefully after these there might be something that is proven across the board to be equal to or better than the A046 at a cheaper price.
A lot of people look for other tires that are not as expensive and have equal qualities or better. The only way to do this is to try them out. True, the manufacturer deemed that Yoko's would be a great choice for this car due to their inherent qualities...but honestly...do you see most SCCA comps where people are running the stockers? What about our aftermarket vendors who pride themselves on improving our cars' performance on the street AND track?
They're great tires...but aren't the only good ones out there made for this vehicle. Sidewall isn't everything--though I too would like to find a cheaper alternative with sidewalls equal to or better our A046's.
FWIW--I'm going to use RE050APP's on my Rota wheels for daily driving, and use the RE01R's on my BBS rims for HPDE's (autocross and the straight track). Hopefully after these there might be something that is proven across the board to be equal to or better than the A046 at a cheaper price.
The point, (which you think that I'm missing), of this thread was to compare two tires, the Yoko's and the Falken's. Anyone will be slightly dissapointed going from the stock Yokohama A046's to the Falken RT-615's, that was my point.
Last edited by Rich EVO MR SE; Oct 18, 2007 at 09:49 PM.
