Orthonormal

They factored in price and wear into the overall rankings, didn't they? If there weren't some pretty significant non-performance factors, there's no way the Goodyear F1 GS-D3 would have been #1. I owned those tires on my Miata, and they are not a great performance tire. They're terriffic if you want a tire with very good performance and excellent ride, noise, and wear. The price is not bad either, in some sizes.

Here is some discussion of the review.

jzr

This statement would be perfectly meritorious outside of the Racing & Competition forum, but not here.

As I mentioned above, the C&D results are perfectly applicable for the majority of their target demographic - people who run factory recommended tire pressures, would never consider tire shaving, and are not competing in timed competition.

The GRM test is geared for those partaking in "Racing & Competition" events on the track or autocross. As such, they shaved the tires, played with pressures, and even cooled between runs the tires they felt needed it.

While the MX's winning National-level events in a deep field of talented drivers all in similar cars is no guarantee of any sort of superiority, it should be evidence enough that it at least has the potential to run with the best and the fastest of the competition in its class.

Nobody

Criteria was:
Dry Performance (600 total points possible)
Wet Performance (300 points possible)
Price (100)
Tread wear (100)

Tread wear is def. a factor in performance for me (though I'd rather see how heat cycles affect the tires), but I agree price is not, though it of course factors into everyone's decision unless you're sponsored or are looking to win at all costs. My priorities are a bit different than the criteria above, though. Price and the dry Autocross course results are how I'd weight my decision and for that reason the #5 overall Hankook would get my $$$.

As I said before, I used to be a huge fan of MXs, but tire technology advances faster than most of us can try out every new compound. And unless C&D and TireRack are scheming to manipulate the data I'm willing to replace what I used to believe with NEW data.

l8brakr

Wouldn't factoring price help the Kumho vs all the other brands besides Hankook? I also doubt they were able to come up with any data to calculate/measure wear. They probably just used the factory ratings which is 220 for the kumho so again not loosing anything against the competition because there is not a considerable difference.

vroom

You're mentioning using the tires as a Daily driver/autocross tire which puts you more in the category of the C&D test than the Grassroots territory. I autocross V710s but use MXs daily on two cars. I've used them at a couple of 'fun' events a year just for kicks. Can't say that I like them there. Remember, in my use (and I assume yours) the tire is not shaved. FWIW I liked my S02s significantly more autocrossing than the MXs but as noted, I did not buy them for autocross.

Any reason you don't want to run S02's (except maybe price)?

As to wet weather - I'm glad to see JRZ and C&D say something I've always felt. They're flat awful, I've never quite understood how so many say they are good wet weather tires. Also, the rating they got in C&D was due to extremely poor wet autocross, braking and other times, as well as overall poor showing in terms of grip in the dry.

I do use them on my E36 for track days (again unshaved) and actually found them to be an excellent street tire under those conditions.

PilotSi

Well - I was talking to a local hot-foot and he said the Kuhmo MX carcass is derived from the V710s and that it was really a good tire once you get them broken in. That's one of my reasons why I chose the MX over the S02s. The other was pricing.

But then I got the mixed opinions on S2ki.com, so now i'm not sure how great it's going to be. Seeing as how the 1st event is coming up in April, I guess I'll have awhile to find out.

Vroom: I think I've heard the same sentiments about the tire being better suited for track days rather then autocross...what reasons would contribute to the difference? Maybe the tires can't generate enough heat in a single autocross run?

vroom

I have no real idea if it's really better on track - I'm just an intermediate level track guy so I might not be pushing hard enough to reveal it's flaws. Just wanted to add 2cents. I love the MX (when new, and when it's dry) as a street tire, though more so on the M3 than the S2000. Could be the 17" street wheels on the S - dumb move

It can be kind of hard sometimes to make a good decision from the net -...you never know the reason someone is high on something and down on another. I'll say this though, if you wanted an intermediate autox tire that you could still drive on the street, just judging from my late season events last year, I'd say some RA1s aren't bad. They feel more like an R-comp but are definitely streetable.