When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
UK & Ireland S2000 CommunityDiscussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it in the UK and Ireland. Including FAQs, and technical questions.
And that's a reason to stick with an inferior tyre? Isn't that a little beligerant? So far anyone moving from S02s to RE050A have all said it performs as well in the dry and better in the wet.
But is the RE050A's footprint comparable to the S02?
The 245 rear "rule" was only ever to reflect that a lot of the routine replacements for S02s didn't have a comparable footprint in 225, and so to get a degree of equivalence 245s were fitted.
It started off as an observation by someone on here - not sure who - but seems to have worked its way up to become canonical wisdom. I think there's actually a pretty large school of thought over on the US side of s2ki that would not agree that 245 was the proper fitting for ANY rear tyre.
I'd be interested to try a car fitted with the RE050s and one with SO2s to make a comparison and I strongly suspect that the car will be better balanced with the SO2s. I would rather have the back end slide earlier in a predicatable way than have a little more grip. The thing to remember is that the ESO2JZs were designed for the early S2000, the RE050s were not (if 225 is the correct width in RE050 why then do the later cars with larger diameter wheels come fitted with 245 width?).
The RE050s may well have more grip overall but narrower rubber on the rear will surely make the car less well balanced and more prone to oversteer. Personally, if I can't get S02s next time around I'll be looking for a replacement tyre that has a 245 width on the rear (and there aren't many about so that could mean "downgrading" to S03s with even less grip in the dry but keeping the car balanced).
(if 225 is the correct width in RE050 why then do the later cars with larger diameter wheels come fitted with 245 width?).
Presumably because the wheel is wider as well as larger in diameter....? I don't know, is the honest answer, but that seems like a reasonable supposition.
Horses for courses, I guess. Tyres are all about compromise - the best trade off of wear rate, dry grip, wet grip and noise. I've never disputed that the S02 is probably up there with the best in terms of dry grip. I have, however, been generally sceptical as to whether it was the best overall tyre for the UK's prevailing conditions.
You say a 225 would be more prone to oversteer than 245. Perhaps. But the narrower tyre would be commensurately less likely to aquaplane. Again, all about compromise.
There's no "right" answer to this question - just the best trade-off to fit a person's own circumstances.
Originally Posted by Lurking Lawyer,Sep 27 2007, 09:54 AM
Presumably because the wheel is wider as well as larger in diameter....? I don't know, is the honest answer, but that seems like a reasonable supposition.
Horses for courses, I guess. Tyres are all about compromise - the best trade off of wear rate, dry grip, wet grip and noise. I've never disputed that the S02 is probably up there with the best in terms of dry grip. I have, however, been generally sceptical as to whether it was the best overall tyre for the UK's prevailing conditions.
You say a 225 would be more prone to oversteer than 245. Perhaps. But the narrower tyre would be commensurately less likely to aquaplane. Again, all about compromise.
There's no "right" answer to this question - just the best trade-off to fit a person's own circumstances.
You may have more trouble with aquaplaning in a badly balanced car because any variation in speed or direction is going to put you in serious trouble in these circumstances, and the last thing you will want is a "twitchy car" entering standing water. I'll concede that the S02s are prone to trouble in these circumstances and that they are really a "summer tyre" (OK for me though as my S2000 is not a daily driver and I'd rather have more dry grip and just slow right down if I should get caught out in the wet).
My point with all this is that the car was designed to run with 245 rear / 205 front width tyres (albeit with the rear confusingly labelled 225) and I strongly suspect this aspect has not been considered in the Honda/Brdigestone recommendation to run 225 RE050s (or prehaps it was deliberately overlooked as Bridgestone don't make a 16" 245 width RE050).
Will it make a difference in practice? Without driving a 225 RE050 shod car I couldn't say but I do know that when running S03 205/225 v 205/245 it made a very noticeable improvement to run the wider rears, and I suspect the same may apply with RE050s whatever the relative level of grip offerered by these.
Only a small difference possibly, but a bit like playing a guitar, you can still make a noise with it whatvever the state of tune but in tune is better
Tire racks comparison puts the RE050As above the S02s and the RE050s but beating them all hands down is the Goodyear EagleF1 GSD3s
So that's what'll be going on the CTR when the RE070s wear down.
Danny, the GS-D3's have also been discontinued. I tried to get a set when I upgraded my alloys but had to go with the T1R's instead. Apparently they've been replaced by run flats...
09-27-2007, 01:17 AM
