Tyres for a S2k
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Chris Dennis
oops I'm talking about wheel alignment
oops I'm talking about wheel alignment
Are you sure you don't mean wheel balance, which is actually a property of the wheel itself? In that case it would be better to do it off the car.
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: melbourne
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I havent really used the FALKEN AZENIS RS myself, but from the compound, it seems like it is just the compound for a street use with Semislick style patern block, while Bridgestone RE540S and Dunlop D01J has the latest compound for semislick with a very good drain patern block for wet weather.
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DC2SpecR
I havent really used the FALKEN AZENIS RS myself, but from the compound, it seems like it is just the compound for a street use with Semislick style patern block, while Bridgestone RE540S and Dunlop D01J has the latest compound for semislick with a very good drain patern block for wet weather.
I havent really used the FALKEN AZENIS RS myself, but from the compound, it seems like it is just the compound for a street use with Semislick style patern block, while Bridgestone RE540S and Dunlop D01J has the latest compound for semislick with a very good drain patern block for wet weather.
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a note. treadwear rating is only comparable against that of the same manufacturer. So if tyre X from Bridgestone has a treadwear rating of 100 and tyre Y from Dunlop has rating of 50, it doesnt mean the Bridgestone tyre is twice as sticky or twice as soft as the Dunlop.
The Azenis are pretty shit imo, my stock RE010 and RE711 were much better.
The Azenis are pretty shit imo, my stock RE010 and RE711 were much better.
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by N1R
just a note. treadwear rating is only comparable against that of the same manufacturer. So if tyre X from Bridgestone has a treadwear rating of 100 and tyre Y from Dunlop has rating of 50, it doesnt mean the Bridgestone tyre is twice as sticky or twice as soft as the Dunlop.
The Azenis are pretty shit imo, my stock RE010 and RE711 were much better.
just a note. treadwear rating is only comparable against that of the same manufacturer. So if tyre X from Bridgestone has a treadwear rating of 100 and tyre Y from Dunlop has rating of 50, it doesnt mean the Bridgestone tyre is twice as sticky or twice as soft as the Dunlop.
The Azenis are pretty shit imo, my stock RE010 and RE711 were much better.
Interesting that you found the RE010 better. I have only ever used Falken tyres once and that was the now very old G series. I put them on an ST162 Celica that previously had some Taiwanese things called Sonar. I was expecting a huge improvement and was shocked when I had notably poorer response and grip. Since then I've been very wary of Falken tyres which I tend to think have been built down to a price with a lot of marketing in mind. They fill a "value" niche in the market that other makers steer clear of. However, I've heard so many good reports of the Azenis RS that I was almost prepared to give them a go. It would have been nice if Motor had included them in their last test, even if a lot of you guys don't trust Motor very much
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well 1blackS2K, has all this discussion helped you with making a decision?
Have you bought any yet? If so, let us know what you got. It's a subject that everybody is interested in.
Have you bought any yet? If so, let us know what you got. It's a subject that everybody is interested in.