2012 Summer Tires
Dec 10, 2011, 09:33 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2012 Summer Tires
Need to purchase new Summer tires for next year (2012), I'm stuck between these three brands:
1. DUNLOP DIREZZA SPORT Z1 STAR SPEC
2. HANKOOK VENTUS R-S3
3. KUMHO ECSTA XS
Does anyone have experience with the tires listed, lmk!
*Why these? I'm thinking of doing AUTOx and heard these are sticky tires. True?
1. DUNLOP DIREZZA SPORT Z1 STAR SPEC
2. HANKOOK VENTUS R-S3
3. KUMHO ECSTA XS
Does anyone have experience with the tires listed, lmk!
*Why these? I'm thinking of doing AUTOx and heard these are sticky tires. True?
Dec 10, 2011, 10:28 AM
#2
I did lots of research on all of these tires, since I'm planning on getting a set for autocross/summer as well. Here's what I found (from other sites, people in Street Touring, and people in A-Street Tire):
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s. The RS-3s, however, will wear slightly quicker, but will grip more. It may sound black and white, but it's not. The differences in these tires depend on the cars they've used on, and how they've driven. I would put the differences down to 2-3% in grip and treadwear. Though everyone clearly agrees the starspecs are better for wet conditions.
I am personally going with the StarSpecs; since I'm moving from 18" down to 16", the stiffer sidewall will be better for me, and I want them to last as long as they can.
Goodluck with your decision, and remember that whether you choose the RS-3 or the Star-Spec, you'll come out a winner.
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s. The RS-3s, however, will wear slightly quicker, but will grip more. It may sound black and white, but it's not. The differences in these tires depend on the cars they've used on, and how they've driven. I would put the differences down to 2-3% in grip and treadwear. Though everyone clearly agrees the starspecs are better for wet conditions.
I am personally going with the StarSpecs; since I'm moving from 18" down to 16", the stiffer sidewall will be better for me, and I want them to last as long as they can.
Goodluck with your decision, and remember that whether you choose the RS-3 or the Star-Spec, you'll come out a winner.
Dec 10, 2011, 11:03 AM
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did lots of research on all of these tires, since I'm planning on getting a set for autocross/summer as well. Here's what I found (from other sites, people in Street Touring, and people in A-Street Tire):
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s. The RS-3s, however, will wear slightly quicker, but will grip more. It may sound black and white, but it's not. The differences in these tires depend on the cars they've used on, and how they've driven. I would put the differences down to 2-3% in grip and treadwear. Though everyone clearly agrees the starspecs are better for wet conditions.
I am personally going with the StarSpecs; since I'm moving from 18" down to 16", the stiffer sidewall will be better for me, and I want them to last as long as they can.
Goodluck with your decision, and remember that whether you choose the RS-3 or the Star-Spec, you'll come out a winner.
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s. The RS-3s, however, will wear slightly quicker, but will grip more. It may sound black and white, but it's not. The differences in these tires depend on the cars they've used on, and how they've driven. I would put the differences down to 2-3% in grip and treadwear. Though everyone clearly agrees the starspecs are better for wet conditions.
I am personally going with the StarSpecs; since I'm moving from 18" down to 16", the stiffer sidewall will be better for me, and I want them to last as long as they can.
Goodluck with your decision, and remember that whether you choose the RS-3 or the Star-Spec, you'll come out a winner.
Thanks for the help, bro! I appreciate it.
Dec 10, 2011, 11:32 AM
#4
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One more thing:
I'm currently using tire size: 245/45 17 on my 17x8 wheels (I like wide tires). The RS-3's do not come in that size, so if I go down to a 235/45 17, how much of a stretch will happen on the sidewall, if any? Will stretched tires affect my handling/ performance? *Keep in mind, I'm looking for MAXIMUM handling in corners for track/ street use (my dd).
-or-
Should I just move down on the sidewall and get 245/40ZR17?
I'm currently using tire size: 245/45 17 on my 17x8 wheels (I like wide tires). The RS-3's do not come in that size, so if I go down to a 235/45 17, how much of a stretch will happen on the sidewall, if any? Will stretched tires affect my handling/ performance? *Keep in mind, I'm looking for MAXIMUM handling in corners for track/ street use (my dd).
-or-
Should I just move down on the sidewall and get 245/40ZR17?
Last edited by nick9g4b1; Dec 10, 2011 at 11:51 AM.
Dec 10, 2011, 10:03 PM
#5
I'd say move the sidewall down. 245/40 will put you at 4% too fast, which isn't terrible, and you'll have more torque available (which if you're below 3000rpm, you'll need it). It also looks like it'll drop your car half an inch hahaha.
As for whether there will be much stretching at 235/45... no, probably not.
As for whether there will be much stretching at 235/45... no, probably not.
Dec 13, 2011, 06:49 PM
#6
Balls of Steel
I just put the Star Specs on my car. It started raining shortly after I bought 'em and they seemed to pass the "ford a that's-not-a-river-but-drainage-is-fail-here" test just fine. 
Lots of people use the RS-3s, too. I know they got kinda greasy after a while on a friend's ChumpCar, but that was a freakin' endurance race. If you're just doing shorter HPDE runs or autocross, that shouldn't even be much of an issue.
I'm not sure about the size issue since I'm still a tad of an autocross n00b (and annoyed the crap out of various friends with questions when I saw the Z1s didn't come in the stock 215 size), but I do know that I sometimes hear about autocrossers fitting as wide a tire as they can on their rims. More width = more grip, I think. TBH, I'd change the sidewall size before I'd go with a narrower tire, even if the narrower one is probably fine.
Lots of people use the RS-3s, too. I know they got kinda greasy after a while on a friend's ChumpCar, but that was a freakin' endurance race. If you're just doing shorter HPDE runs or autocross, that shouldn't even be much of an issue.
I'm not sure about the size issue since I'm still a tad of an autocross n00b (and annoyed the crap out of various friends with questions when I saw the Z1s didn't come in the stock 215 size), but I do know that I sometimes hear about autocrossers fitting as wide a tire as they can on their rims. More width = more grip, I think. TBH, I'd change the sidewall size before I'd go with a narrower tire, even if the narrower one is probably fine.
Last edited by ninjacoco; Dec 13, 2011 at 06:53 PM.
Dec 14, 2011, 07:27 PM
#7
Hmm... I guess there's another question here that got skipped... What class are you planning on going into? Because 17" rims are technically illegal for us in Stock class.
Trending Topics
Dec 16, 2011, 03:44 PM
#8
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dec 16, 2011, 05:25 PM
#9
Balls of Steel
I'm not sure if they've come out with the ones for 2012 yet, since they just released PAX numbers for '12. There's a whole new classification that Lancers can run in (STF), but I'm not sure what it allows for and what it doesn't yet.
If your autocross group goes by the SCCA regulations, here's last year's: http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...lo%20Rules.pdf
If your autocross group goes by the SCCA regulations, here's last year's: http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...lo%20Rules.pdf
Dec 16, 2011, 07:36 PM
#11
The 2012 SCCA solo rules haven't been released yet.. but they've changed a lot. Chances are, you'll want to look at the new STF class (which I think is street touring fwd??), which is populated primarily by civics, and allows light modifications, like different springs, sway bars and different wheels.. But the kicker is the limitation on size. There's a maximum width that you'll be allowed to use in a class. I looked around a little, and found that STF will have a 225 width limitation. http://forums.clubrsx.com/showthread.php?t=801004
Just some things to consider before making the plunge. The limitations SCCA puts on some things can be disappointing, as it can conflict with the best interest of your car, and be a PITA. But before autocrossing, you should put thought into which class you want to shoot for.
I also just looked at the PAX (indexing to standardize times) for 2012, and STF is a better choice than H-Stock (unless you use race tires). Maybe I should consider switching. hahaha. I have an intake anyways, and that makes me illegal :-P Idk. 2012 will be an interesting year for solo.
http://www.gotcone.com/blog/2012-scca-solo-pax-783.html
Another edit (i should really take more time to think about what I post before-hand):
http://www.rmsolo.org/forums/showthr...&highlight=stf
There's a link to the Rocky Mountain solo forum thread on the new ST classes. Turns out that the civics won't be in STF after all... they'll be in STC (which is better for all of us, since they're uber light).
Its very possible that I'll be doing STF next year... but we'll see... There's still time for it to pan out. Just make sure you consider all your options before making a hard decision.
Just some things to consider before making the plunge. The limitations SCCA puts on some things can be disappointing, as it can conflict with the best interest of your car, and be a PITA. But before autocrossing, you should put thought into which class you want to shoot for.
I also just looked at the PAX (indexing to standardize times) for 2012, and STF is a better choice than H-Stock (unless you use race tires). Maybe I should consider switching. hahaha. I have an intake anyways, and that makes me illegal :-P Idk. 2012 will be an interesting year for solo.
http://www.gotcone.com/blog/2012-scca-solo-pax-783.html
Another edit (i should really take more time to think about what I post before-hand):
http://www.rmsolo.org/forums/showthr...&highlight=stf
There's a link to the Rocky Mountain solo forum thread on the new ST classes. Turns out that the civics won't be in STF after all... they'll be in STC (which is better for all of us, since they're uber light).
Its very possible that I'll be doing STF next year... but we'll see... There's still time for it to pan out. Just make sure you consider all your options before making a hard decision.
Last edited by gik0geck0; Dec 16, 2011 at 07:46 PM. Reason: Looked up 2012 SCCA PAX, and an rmsolo forum
Feb 4, 2012, 07:38 AM
#12
Evolving Member
You've might have made your decision on tires by now, but I'm researching tires too, and have some more info on this.
^ What he said.
I tried the Ecsta MX, and it lasted for 11,000 miles and made my AWD car slower in the rain. After that I tried the Star-Spec, I started winning, and they lasted 16,000 miles. I was thinking of buying the RS-3s next.
There was an article in the SCCA's magazine (SportsCar, Oct 2009) where they tested a bunch of Street Touring tires. For the RS-3s, they said these tires needed more heat to fulfull their potential. Their test car was an RX-8: RWD, so steering and propulsion stresses are on different tires, and it was only 2800lbs. I have a 3600lb Evo X, and I can heat the f*** out of my front tires.
With the MXs or the Star-Specs, I usually started to lose steering traction 2 or 3 turns from the finish.
I'm considering NT-05s right now. They were in the same article in SportsCar, where the writers said they were very durable (Also, not as sticky as most of the other tires tested). I need something to last me until I have another job, so "durable" sounds good.
My current tires are NT555s (Treadwear 300), and at 20,000 miles they have some tread left, but are starting to feel slick on wet pavement. Someone warned me that NT-05s won't do well in the rain, either. When Nitto calls these "summer tires", maybe they mean "summer in a desert" and not "summer in Florida".
If I could afford an all-out assault on the local STU championship, I'd buy the RS-3s for sure. But since I need tires to last I'm looking for "Max Performance" summer tires, which aren't as sticky as the "Extreme Performance" category.
Ecsta MX was in the "Max Performance" category, which lines up with what everyone is saying about them not being as sticky as the others mentioned here. In "Max Performance", Kumho now has an Ecsta LE Sport that I want to investigate. It's supposedly in the same class as the MX as far as grip, but has a much higher treadwear rating.
SO, can anyone tell me about the Ecsta LE?
I did lots of research on all of these tires, since I'm planning on getting a set for autocross/summer as well. Here's what I found (from other sites, people in Street Touring, and people in A-Street Tire):
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s...
Kumho XS is nothing compared to the RS-3s or the Star Specs. Wears faster, with less grip. Unless that's your only option, no one recommends it above the other 2.
There's a VERY close tie between the RS-3s and the star specs. The general, yes still slightly contested consensus I found is that the StarSpec is made of a stiffer rubber, so has a little more structural rigidity for larger sidewalls, and will last a bit longer than the RS-3s...
I tried the Ecsta MX, and it lasted for 11,000 miles and made my AWD car slower in the rain. After that I tried the Star-Spec, I started winning, and they lasted 16,000 miles. I was thinking of buying the RS-3s next.
There was an article in the SCCA's magazine (SportsCar, Oct 2009) where they tested a bunch of Street Touring tires. For the RS-3s, they said these tires needed more heat to fulfull their potential. Their test car was an RX-8: RWD, so steering and propulsion stresses are on different tires, and it was only 2800lbs. I have a 3600lb Evo X, and I can heat the f*** out of my front tires.
With the MXs or the Star-Specs, I usually started to lose steering traction 2 or 3 turns from the finish.
My current tires are NT555s (Treadwear 300), and at 20,000 miles they have some tread left, but are starting to feel slick on wet pavement. Someone warned me that NT-05s won't do well in the rain, either. When Nitto calls these "summer tires", maybe they mean "summer in a desert" and not "summer in Florida".
If I could afford an all-out assault on the local STU championship, I'd buy the RS-3s for sure. But since I need tires to last I'm looking for "Max Performance" summer tires, which aren't as sticky as the "Extreme Performance" category.
Ecsta MX was in the "Max Performance" category, which lines up with what everyone is saying about them not being as sticky as the others mentioned here. In "Max Performance", Kumho now has an Ecsta LE Sport that I want to investigate. It's supposedly in the same class as the MX as far as grip, but has a much higher treadwear rating.
SO, can anyone tell me about the Ecsta LE?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sullysnet
04-06 Ralliart Tires/Wheels/Brakes/Suspension
2
Jan 4, 2016 04:39 PM
FS[SouthEast]: FS: TN/KY 1987 Corolla GTS coupe blue 180k miles
Drill_Sergeant
Other Cars - For Sale - Wanting To Buy (WTB) Or Trade (WTT)
0
May 26, 2014 12:59 PM
okyu5632
Evo Tires / Wheels / Brakes / Suspension
15
May 23, 2014 10:31 PM
justin81
For Sale - Wheels / Tires
3
Nov 7, 2012 05:18 PM
