Hence why I put quotes around compromise. I've found the limits of Extreme Performance tires the hard way before. My Miata is my first venture into RWD, so I didn't want to be tempted to push my boundaries.
They really do feel fantastic and I'm sure what helped me post some pretty impressive times on my first AutoX. I'm interested to see how they stack up next to the XP class tires.
As David said...June issue has the first set of real tests...Rival vs ZII vs R1R. If you remember the last time we did this, the autocross tests mirrored the track tests we did (except for the Toyo which was not good on the track.).
We have also done testing on the RE-11A, which should end up in the July issue.
Once I get back from One Lap, we'll do some track testing with the Z11 and Rival against the RS3 (which is now 200tw and legal for crapcan). We'll also test some wheel/tire sizing things to verify/deny urban legends.
For now...I'll be running Rivals on the CRX for One Lap...if that tells you anything. :)
In reply to Andy Hollis:
Quick update to this thread...
July issue should be in your hands now with the second autocross-style test that includes the RE-11A.
Track test is completed, written and submitted for the August issue (under construction now). In that one, we put all the 205's on 8's to maximize performance (no rules!) and compared them. Then, we compared two sizes of Rival (205 and 225), first on the same rim (8) and then with the 225 on 9 to see if "bigger is always better". And finally, we added the winner of our last track test (2010) to the mix...the 225 Hankook R-S3 on a 9, compared to the 225 Rival on a 9. Lots of great data for your reading & bench racing pleasure.
Thinking now about r-comps...
Fantastic - I'm looking forward to reading it!
I want to see the Pilot Super Sport up against the extreme performance tires (I.e. the Dizerra ZII), I bet it would be close. The Volvo I'm buying is coming with the Fuzion UHP which has an identical compound to the ZRI and it looks like they started with the same tread and then gave a 3 year old a tire carver to cut across the tread horizontally and then hilariously decided to brand the sidewall M+S; we'll see how they do.
Swank Force One wrote: I want to run the Federal 595rs-r so bad... but GARBAGE SIZES. The Primewell is interesting... it's available in my magic 245/45-16 size and is about 40% the price of the only other options.
Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: Must check these out. That's the size I've been looking for!! EDIT: Wow they are cheap for 245/45R16 . . .
Ahem
I'd check these out. Made by Bridgestone, looks similar to the RE960/RE970. Heavy as crap though. $78. I bet you can find them elsewhere for the same price.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Fuzion&tireModel=ZRi&sidewall=Blackwall&partnum=445WR6ZRI&tab=Specs
In reply to beans:
I run ZRi on my 318is on M3 wheels. The 235s run really narrow (look like 215s). If they were available, the $10 less per tire would be instantly eaten up with shipping.
It's a decent tire though . . .
Looks like they had a price increase across the pz900 line . . . Primewells in that size went up from $69.99 to $88.99 
I may have to try the federals. They have Federal 595 Evo on sale for $70 a tire in a size I can live with for my 924s. Even cheaper if I go form a 55 to a 50 aspect ratio.
In that one, we put all the 205's on 8's to maximize performance (no rules!) and compared them. Then, we compared two sizes of Rival (205 and 225), first on the same rim (8) and then with the 225 on 9 to see if "bigger is always better". And finally, we added the winner of our last track test (2010) to the mix...the 225 Hankook R-S3 on a 9, compared to the 225 Rival on a 9. Lots of great data for your reading & bench racing pleasure.
Wow, cant wait to see that one.. Good work!
Andy Hollis wrote: In reply to Andy Hollis: Quick update to this thread... July issue should be in your hands now with the second autocross-style test that includes the RE-11A. Track test is completed, written and submitted for the August issue (under construction now). In that one, we put all the 205's on 8's to maximize performance (no rules!) and compared them. Then, we compared two sizes of Rival (205 and 225), first on the same rim (8) and then with the 225 on 9 to see if "bigger is always better". And finally, we added the winner of our last track test (2010) to the mix...the 225 Hankook R-S3 on a 9, compared to the 225 Rival on a 9. Lots of great data for your reading & bench racing pleasure. Thinking now about r-comps...
Can't wait for the results of that Andy!
So, I am not seeing the track test in the October issue. Is it pushed back another month?
I am also missing the Kumho Ecsta XS from any recent test. Yes, I know it is being replaced...
Matthew Huizing wrote: So, I am not seeing the track test in the October issue. Is it pushed back another month? I am also missing the Kumho Ecsta XS from any recent test. Yes, I know it is being replaced...
Yup...pushed back. I blame David W. 
As for older tires, we only use them for baselines. The goal is to test new stuff against the previous benchmarks (in this case, RS3 and R1R). It is hard enough as it is to get these things done w/o introducing additional variables through logistical complications.
Yay! the article finally appears.
It definitely confirmed my decision to get wider wheels.
One glaring omission: The 205/50s weren't tested on the 9" wide wheels. It seems likely that they would also be a bit faster on the wider rims, so there is still doubt about the benefits of the 225/45s.
A hypothetical 245/40R15 may not be useful without >9" wheels.
Matthew Huizing wrote: One glaring omission: The 205/50s weren't tested on the 9" wide wheels. It seems likely that they would also be a bit faster on the wider rims, so there is still doubt about the benefits of the 225/45s.
You're kidding, right? The 8 is already a half-inch beyond the max recommended rim of the manufacturer. A 9 is way out there for a 205, suitable only for hard-parkers. That's a ridiculous amount of stretch for any performance use on a radial tire (bias-ply are another story).
Question for you, Andy - did the change in handling balance with the staggered 9"/8" versus the 8"/8" setup with the same sizes have any effect on the times? Seems like it would be an unavoidable side effect of altering wheel width (and thus grip levels) at one end only. Or is the CRX one of those cars where the rear wheels are simply tasked with holding up the rear bumper?
It was a very good article. The rim width comparison was revealing. Unfortunately it seems there is no free lunch with a true dual purpose street tire. The Rivals are very quick and seem to handle heat well. The RE-11As seem to diminish with heat which makes me wonder about their longevity as well, but they can actually be used in the wet (see Tire Rack Results: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartDisplay.jsp?ttid=172).
ZOO wrote: The Primewell website sucks . . . Any leads on finding pricing info. I've heard really good things, too.
Firestone sells them in their stores and online.
In reply to Keith Tanner:
Indeed, the rear is tasked way differently than the front on the test vehicle. It isn't quite as extreme as just holding up the bumper, but those tires are rarely even close to saturated. On my track CRX, the weight distribution at rest is 65/35, as opposed to something like a Miata that is way closer to 50/50. So changes made at the front make all the difference with the CRX, and changes made at the rear are irrelevant. In fact, we usually have it set up just a touch pushy for testing just to make it a non-factor in the results.
In reply to Andy Hollis:
The test in the latest GRM was well done, and made for an interesting article. One thing I could not find: Were all the tires shaved to the same tread depth, or tested at full tread?
I'm an idiot and let my subscription lapse. Is the article available to read online?
BTW, we've been pretty happy with the Kumho Ecsta XS on our E30 ChumpCar.
I just ordered another set of 225/50R16 XSes (<$300!). They have really floppy sidewalls. I am planning on putting this set on 16x9s, but those might still be too narrow. There is a noticeable difference in grip and feel between them mounted 7.5" and 8" wide rims.
If you want to go the other way and stick 275s on 9.5" wide wheels, Hot Rod/Tire Rack did this test.
Matthew Huizing wrote: I just ordered another set of 225/50R16 XSes (<$300!). They have really floppy sidewalls. I am planning on putting this set on 16x9s, but those might still be too narrow. There is a noticeable difference in grip and feel between them mounted 7.5" and 8" wide rims.
What?!?!?!
How is that price possible? Dammit. I just blew $200 on a set of used 225/45-16 Star Specs. I would have ponied up another $100 for a new set of XSs and dealt with the potential fitment issues.
I'd be really curious to see how the Primewells hold up against the more well known tires.
I am willing to trade some XSes for Star Specs. I could use some G Street tires for 7" rims. Though, I am still wondering if 15" or 16" wheels are the way to go, and 205s are probably wide enough.
e_pie wrote: I'd be really curious to see how the Primewells hold up against the more well known tires.
Me too
You'll need to log in to post.
