Continental DWS tire negatives
03-28-2014 | 06:49 AM
#41
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,863
Likes: 125
From: Pawtucket, RI
1. I discovered that numbers for alignments cause quite a stir when I asked about that a couple of years ago.
2. You seem to have it simplified more than anyone. I was told I could get it where they would wear well, but it would cause the rear to be dangerous, and did I really want it to drove like an Accord (or something like that).
2. You seem to have it simplified more than anyone. I was told I could get it where they would wear well, but it would cause the rear to be dangerous, and did I really want it to drove like an Accord (or something like that).
It makes some sense that a lot of rear toe-in *should* tend to make the car more stable, but in practice it just makes everything suck.
In my experience, anyway...
6. To have a setting that allows for best handling, and longer life/treadwear seems oppositional, and the settings would have to be different to get those two "opposite" goals. It seems that Honda would have set them from the factory like that since that is the best of both worlds: maximum grip and wear.
It is toe that kills tires, and it doesn't do anything good for handling performance either.
Maximum camber, minimum toe will give good handling AND good tire life. Even 2 degrees of negative camber won't reduce tire life by much.
03-28-2014 | 07:05 AM
#42
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted by doddg' timestamp='1396011717' post='23085497
1. I discovered that numbers for alignments cause quite a stir when I asked about that a couple of years ago.
2. You seem to have it simplified more than anyone. I was told I could get it where they would wear well, but it would cause the rear to be dangerous, and did I really want it to drove like an Accord (or something like that).
It makes some sense that a lot of rear toe-in *should* tend to make the car more stable, but in practice it just makes everything suck.
In my experience, anyway...
6. To have a setting that allows for best handling, and longer life/treadwear seems oppositional, and the settings would have to be different to get those two "opposite" goals. It seems that Honda would have set them from the factory like that since that is the best of both worlds: maximum grip and wear.
It is toe that kills tires, and it doesn't do anything good for handling performance either.
Maximum camber, minimum toe will give good handling AND good tire life. Even 2 degrees of negative camber won't reduce tire life by much.
I'm envious! 
B. When I ran a thread about this 2 yrs. ago there was no such clarity and consensus about changing specs to get better wear w/o losing the grip to unacceptable levels; therefore, I feared to do anything since everyone had a different opinion.
C. There is someone called Billman who is quite the expert in all things S2000 (I'm sure there are many others also); I wonder what his input would be?
03-28-2014 | 10:25 AM
#43
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 2,354
Likes: 1
From: Mukilteo, WA
My general recommendation for street alignments (no numbers to remember!) for best handling and tire life:
Max spec negative camber all around
Min spec toe all around
Caster depends on preference. Many think that more is better, but I like to run minimal caster. More gives heavier steering and more self-centering, less gives lighter steering and (to me) better feel. For autoX, more can be better due to additional camber and some weight-jacking at big steering angles, both of which can give more front grip in very tight corners. If unsure just have them aim for mid-spec caster, it won't affect wear anyway.
Max spec negative camber all around
Min spec toe all around
Caster depends on preference. Many think that more is better, but I like to run minimal caster. More gives heavier steering and more self-centering, less gives lighter steering and (to me) better feel. For autoX, more can be better due to additional camber and some weight-jacking at big steering angles, both of which can give more front grip in very tight corners. If unsure just have them aim for mid-spec caster, it won't affect wear anyway.
EricJTC
When was the last time you've had an alignment, did you have the alignment done last Spring, or thought about it then decided not to?
1. Very odd, when I saw this post in my yahoo inbox and clicked to answer it, it never came back to it here on the site, and I looked and looked; that happens occasionally. I copied and pasted it so I could respond.
2. Since my front tires were wearing properly, and the rears I was told were wearing properly (by Honda's spces), and I bought the car with 8745 miles on it, no, I didn't get an alignment after hearing of stories of those who had more problems after getting one.
3. My Corolla had 65k miles on it, and the tires had worn evenly, so I didn't get one on the Corolla either when I bought the Michelins for it at Disc. Tire (instead of the usual Sams Club offerings, b/c I wanted to move up to 195 from 185 (like on the S moving up to 225/255 from the 215/245), and they wouldn't do it b/c it's not OEM, even though it is for the model above my cheaper CL), even though I had intended to get an alignment, for the same reason.
4. Obviously, I'm not one to run out and get an alignment prematurely, and if I get one on the S, I want to know which specs to tell them to set it at, and when I ran a thread about that a couple of yrs. ago on both sites, I got a dozen different suggestions. Confusing, so I did nothing, and won't until I see a need, or I find a place that will do a righteous job (maybe Honda, but they get bashed so on both sites), and I know what specs to tell them.
When was the last time you've had an alignment, did you have the alignment done last Spring, or thought about it then decided not to?
1. Very odd, when I saw this post in my yahoo inbox and clicked to answer it, it never came back to it here on the site, and I looked and looked; that happens occasionally. I copied and pasted it so I could respond.
2. Since my front tires were wearing properly, and the rears I was told were wearing properly (by Honda's spces), and I bought the car with 8745 miles on it, no, I didn't get an alignment after hearing of stories of those who had more problems after getting one.
3. My Corolla had 65k miles on it, and the tires had worn evenly, so I didn't get one on the Corolla either when I bought the Michelins for it at Disc. Tire (instead of the usual Sams Club offerings, b/c I wanted to move up to 195 from 185 (like on the S moving up to 225/255 from the 215/245), and they wouldn't do it b/c it's not OEM, even though it is for the model above my cheaper CL), even though I had intended to get an alignment, for the same reason.
4. Obviously, I'm not one to run out and get an alignment prematurely, and if I get one on the S, I want to know which specs to tell them to set it at, and when I ran a thread about that a couple of yrs. ago on both sites, I got a dozen different suggestions. Confusing, so I did nothing, and won't until I see a need, or I find a place that will do a righteous job (maybe Honda, but they get bashed so on both sites), and I know what specs to tell them.
When I had tires put on my Pontiac Firehawk at Costco, the employee at the counter was hesitant to go with the 275/40/17 I told him I wanted to run. This was the way the car came when new, but he couldn't find the Firehawk in the computer. He had been trained not to allow anyone run a size greater than factory, in case this could become a liability to them if something were to happen. So as silly as it may seem for them not to allow you to run a 195 instead of 185 on your Corolla, I am not too surprised.
My recommendation for an alignment every new set of tires for someone, such as yourself who doesn't change suspension setups or drive the car very hard, is on the excessive side, but this is partly because you seem to have a heavy preference toward tire longevity, and this is something I thought that should help with that if anything, if done right.
There are others out there who have gotten away without doing an alignment in years, so I can understand the logic if it ain't broke, don't fix it
However, the S2000 is more precious to me than the average car, so I may go above and beyond what is necessary, whether for my car or in this case giving another member recommendations for the S2000.
As for tire recommendations, I was hoping to get you to consider something a little more geared for aggressive summer driving, in case you truly don't drive like an old man. I also agree with s2000Junky that the car is more geared for an extreme/max performance tire (at least come summer). He's a great guy by the way, and does know what he is talking about, much moreso than me
For the S2000, I see the max performance tire as a compromise between tire wear and performance for "summer" driving (would definitely not run such a tire in snow/ice). This is why I recommended the top two ranked max performance tires for summer driving, and if they do not offer enough tread life for you then I suppose there is no need to change your current setup. The Continental DWS and Michelin Pilot Sport A/S (now A/S 3) are among two of the best A/S tires out there in my opinion, so no need to change if you don't want to take a step up or two in the performance category.
As to the Toyota, DWS would be just fine, if not overkill. Hope you see that I *am* trying to help you in your decision making, rather than the other way around. I'm very hesitant to recommend an A/S tire for someone who already has a winter set up, because I truly think you are missing out not having a more performance oriented tire for the summer.
03-28-2014 | 11:44 AM
#44
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted by ZDan' timestamp='1396000185' post='23085344
My general recommendation for street alignments (no numbers to remember!) for best handling and tire life:
Max spec negative camber all around
Min spec toe all around
Caster depends on preference. Many think that more is better, but I like to run minimal caster. More gives heavier steering and more self-centering, less gives lighter steering and (to me) better feel. For autoX, more can be better due to additional camber and some weight-jacking at big steering angles, both of which can give more front grip in very tight corners. If unsure just have them aim for mid-spec caster, it won't affect wear anyway.
Max spec negative camber all around
Min spec toe all around
Caster depends on preference. Many think that more is better, but I like to run minimal caster. More gives heavier steering and more self-centering, less gives lighter steering and (to me) better feel. For autoX, more can be better due to additional camber and some weight-jacking at big steering angles, both of which can give more front grip in very tight corners. If unsure just have them aim for mid-spec caster, it won't affect wear anyway.
EricJTC
When was the last time you've had an alignment, did you have the alignment done last Spring, or thought about it then decided not to?
1. Very odd, when I saw this post in my yahoo inbox and clicked to answer it, it never came back to it here on the site, and I looked and looked; that happens occasionally. I copied and pasted it so I could respond.
2. Since my front tires were wearing properly, and the rears I was told were wearing properly (by Honda's spces), and I bought the car with 8745 miles on it, no, I didn't get an alignment after hearing of stories of those who had more problems after getting one.
3. My Corolla had 65k miles on it, and the tires had worn evenly, so I didn't get one on the Corolla either when I bought the Michelins for it at Disc. Tire (instead of the usual Sams Club offerings, b/c I wanted to move up to 195 from 185 (like on the S moving up to 225/255 from the 215/245), and they wouldn't do it b/c it's not OEM, even though it is for the model above my cheaper CL), even though I had intended to get an alignment, for the same reason.
4. Obviously, I'm not one to run out and get an alignment prematurely, and if I get one on the S, I want to know which specs to tell them to set it at, and when I ran a thread about that a couple of yrs. ago on both sites, I got a dozen different suggestions. Confusing, so I did nothing, and won't until I see a need, or I find a place that will do a righteous job (maybe Honda, but they get bashed so on both sites), and I know what specs to tell them.
When was the last time you've had an alignment, did you have the alignment done last Spring, or thought about it then decided not to?
1. Very odd, when I saw this post in my yahoo inbox and clicked to answer it, it never came back to it here on the site, and I looked and looked; that happens occasionally. I copied and pasted it so I could respond.
2. Since my front tires were wearing properly, and the rears I was told were wearing properly (by Honda's spces), and I bought the car with 8745 miles on it, no, I didn't get an alignment after hearing of stories of those who had more problems after getting one.
3. My Corolla had 65k miles on it, and the tires had worn evenly, so I didn't get one on the Corolla either when I bought the Michelins for it at Disc. Tire (instead of the usual Sams Club offerings, b/c I wanted to move up to 195 from 185 (like on the S moving up to 225/255 from the 215/245), and they wouldn't do it b/c it's not OEM, even though it is for the model above my cheaper CL), even though I had intended to get an alignment, for the same reason.
4. Obviously, I'm not one to run out and get an alignment prematurely, and if I get one on the S, I want to know which specs to tell them to set it at, and when I ran a thread about that a couple of yrs. ago on both sites, I got a dozen different suggestions. Confusing, so I did nothing, and won't until I see a need, or I find a place that will do a righteous job (maybe Honda, but they get bashed so on both sites), and I know what specs to tell them.
When I had tires put on my Pontiac Firehawk at Costco, the employee at the counter was hesitant to go with the 275/40/17 I told him I wanted to run. This was the way the car came when new, but he couldn't find the Firehawk in the computer. He had been trained not to allow anyone run a size greater than factory, in case this could become a liability to them if something were to happen. So as silly as it may seem for them not to allow you to run a 195 instead of 185 on your Corolla, I am not too surprised.
My recommendation for an alignment every new set of tires for someone, such as yourself who doesn't change suspension setups or drive the car very hard, is on the excessive side, but this is partly because you seem to have a heavy preference toward tire longevity, and this is something I thought that should help with that if anything, if done right.
There are others out there who have gotten away without doing an alignment in years, so I can understand the logic if it ain't broke, don't fix it
However, the S2000 is more precious to me than the average car, so I may go above and beyond what is necessary, whether for my car or in this case giving another member recommendations for the S2000.
As for tire recommendations, I was hoping to get you to consider something a little more geared for aggressive summer driving, in case you truly don't drive like an old man. I also agree with s2000Junky that the car is more geared for an extreme/max performance tire (at least come summer). He's a great guy by the way, and does know what he is talking about, much moreso than me
For the S2000, I see the max performance tire as a compromise between tire wear and performance for "summer" driving (would definitely not run such a tire in snow/ice). This is why I recommended the top two ranked max performance tires for summer driving, and if they do not offer enough tread life for you then I suppose there is no need to change your current setup. The Continental DWS and Michelin Pilot Sport A/S (now A/S 3) are among two of the best A/S tires out there in my opinion, so no need to change if you don't want to take a step up or two in the performance category.
As to the Toyota, DWS would be just fine, if not overkill. Hope you see that I *am* trying to help you in your decision making, rather than the other way around. I'm very hesitant to recommend an A/S tire for someone who already has a winter set up, because I truly think you are missing out not having a more performance oriented tire for the summer.
2. With my Corolla, it will take years before I'm ready for new tires, since the Michelin A/S on them have been on for only 25k miles, and they still look new.
3. When it comes to the S, since A/S last longer, and when I had the OEMs on, there was no difference to me in handling, I'll stick with the tire that will give me 20K+ miles per pair in the back.
4. Just for fun, if I needed tires now, I would do as you suggest, just as a test of how many miles I could get out of the summers that you suggest.
5. Perhaps when my son, who has Sumitomos 3 Z on his that he bought last August, with 10k miles on them, maybe 12k by now (it sat through the winter but we put 800 miles on just driving it back from Raliegh where we bought it), maybe I can get him to get these tires you suggest (or rather, Junky); I'll run it by him. It'll probably be next summer before he needs anything. His lasts car, he only put 31k miles on it since 09.
6. I too, usually get an alignment with a new set of good tires, but didn't see the need since these to cars I bought new (Corolla) or nearly new (8745 miles), and I knew there hadn't been any abuse. The S had been bought by a guy with a warehouse full of cars, and drove it little, obviously.
03-29-2014 | 12:21 PM
#45
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 80
Likes: 10
From: New Jersey
Here's my opinion on Continental DW tires. I HAD them on my 6-6 daily driver Accord. Car has HFP suspension, custom alignment and TL-S bars front and rear. These tires replaced a set of General Exclaim UHP tires, which I had zero issues with, and they were smooth and quiet until I ran them to 2/32".
Size 225 45 17. Installed in July 2011.
First impressions, they stuck like glue, extremely quiet, great wet traction.
After 2 days, what felt like out of balance at speeds over 60 mph, they weren't. Excessive road force variation. This started an odyssey with these tires I would never care to repeat.
Tire Rack's staff couldn't have been more helpful. I first replaced 2. That lasted about a week, then two more began to shake horribly. Got two more tires. Tire Rack requested I have them "road force balanced" I did, which cost over $100 just to balance the tires.
Needless to say, the shaking started again. I called Tire Rack, and replaced, in the end 8 tires. The Tire Rack rep admitted they were seeing a vast number of DW and DWS with road force issues. Conti allows up to 25 lbs of variation (nuts!) before a tire is deemed no good. Do they not understand what 25 lbs of "imbalance" can do?
After the last tire, I had had enough and wrote Continental, the first customer service person who contacted me was an ass who caught me off guard with a nasty attitude and they did nothing for me at that point. Luckily winter came, so I put my winter wheels and tires on so I had a smooth ride through winter 2011-2012.
Spring came, I put the Contis back on, and the vibration returned. I couldn't deal with it and wrote Continental again. The letter was a little more terse in tone, since I was pissed about spending nearly 700 for tires that I can't drive on. In the letter I answered the first nasty persons "Well, what do you want ME to do about it?" How about BUY BACK your defective tires. They did. I got a check for my original purchase price, less the shipping, and bought a set of Bridgestones.
I don't think I'd EVER buy a Continental car tire again. Would I consider them for the S? NO.
Size 225 45 17. Installed in July 2011.
First impressions, they stuck like glue, extremely quiet, great wet traction.
After 2 days, what felt like out of balance at speeds over 60 mph, they weren't. Excessive road force variation. This started an odyssey with these tires I would never care to repeat.
Tire Rack's staff couldn't have been more helpful. I first replaced 2. That lasted about a week, then two more began to shake horribly. Got two more tires. Tire Rack requested I have them "road force balanced" I did, which cost over $100 just to balance the tires.
Needless to say, the shaking started again. I called Tire Rack, and replaced, in the end 8 tires. The Tire Rack rep admitted they were seeing a vast number of DW and DWS with road force issues. Conti allows up to 25 lbs of variation (nuts!) before a tire is deemed no good. Do they not understand what 25 lbs of "imbalance" can do?
After the last tire, I had had enough and wrote Continental, the first customer service person who contacted me was an ass who caught me off guard with a nasty attitude and they did nothing for me at that point. Luckily winter came, so I put my winter wheels and tires on so I had a smooth ride through winter 2011-2012.
Spring came, I put the Contis back on, and the vibration returned. I couldn't deal with it and wrote Continental again. The letter was a little more terse in tone, since I was pissed about spending nearly 700 for tires that I can't drive on. In the letter I answered the first nasty persons "Well, what do you want ME to do about it?" How about BUY BACK your defective tires. They did. I got a check for my original purchase price, less the shipping, and bought a set of Bridgestones.
I don't think I'd EVER buy a Continental car tire again. Would I consider them for the S? NO.
03-29-2014 | 01:30 PM
#46
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, IN
Here's my opinion on Continental DW tires. I HAD them on my 6-6 daily driver Accord. Car has HFP suspension, custom alignment and TL-S bars front and rear. These tires replaced a set of General Exclaim UHP tires, which I had zero issues with, and they were smooth and quiet until I ran them to 2/32".
Size 225 45 17. Installed in July 2011.
First impressions, they stuck like glue, extremely quiet, great wet traction.
After 2 days, what felt like out of balance at speeds over 60 mph, they weren't. Excessive road force variation. This started an odyssey with these tires I would never care to repeat.
Tire Rack's staff couldn't have been more helpful. I first replaced 2. That lasted about a week, then two more began to shake horribly. Got two more tires. Tire Rack requested I have them "road force balanced" I did, which cost over $100 just to balance the tires.
Needless to say, the shaking started again. I called Tire Rack, and replaced, in the end 8 tires. The Tire Rack rep admitted they were seeing a vast number of DW and DWS with road force issues. Conti allows up to 25 lbs of variation (nuts!) before a tire is deemed no good. Do they not understand what 25 lbs of "imbalance" can do?
After the last tire, I had had enough and wrote Continental, the first customer service person who contacted me was an ass who caught me off guard with a nasty attitude and they did nothing for me at that point. Luckily winter came, so I put my winter wheels and tires on so I had a smooth ride through winter 2011-2012.
Spring came, I put the Contis back on, and the vibration returned. I couldn't deal with it and wrote Continental again. The letter was a little more terse in tone, since I was pissed about spending nearly 700 for tires that I can't drive on. In the letter I answered the first nasty persons "Well, what do you want ME to do about it?" How about BUY BACK your defective tires. They did. I got a check for my original purchase price, less the shipping, and bought a set of Bridgestones.
I don't think I'd EVER buy a Continental car tire again. Would I consider them for the S? NO.
Size 225 45 17. Installed in July 2011.
First impressions, they stuck like glue, extremely quiet, great wet traction.
After 2 days, what felt like out of balance at speeds over 60 mph, they weren't. Excessive road force variation. This started an odyssey with these tires I would never care to repeat.
Tire Rack's staff couldn't have been more helpful. I first replaced 2. That lasted about a week, then two more began to shake horribly. Got two more tires. Tire Rack requested I have them "road force balanced" I did, which cost over $100 just to balance the tires.
Needless to say, the shaking started again. I called Tire Rack, and replaced, in the end 8 tires. The Tire Rack rep admitted they were seeing a vast number of DW and DWS with road force issues. Conti allows up to 25 lbs of variation (nuts!) before a tire is deemed no good. Do they not understand what 25 lbs of "imbalance" can do?
After the last tire, I had had enough and wrote Continental, the first customer service person who contacted me was an ass who caught me off guard with a nasty attitude and they did nothing for me at that point. Luckily winter came, so I put my winter wheels and tires on so I had a smooth ride through winter 2011-2012.
Spring came, I put the Contis back on, and the vibration returned. I couldn't deal with it and wrote Continental again. The letter was a little more terse in tone, since I was pissed about spending nearly 700 for tires that I can't drive on. In the letter I answered the first nasty persons "Well, what do you want ME to do about it?" How about BUY BACK your defective tires. They did. I got a check for my original purchase price, less the shipping, and bought a set of Bridgestones.
I don't think I'd EVER buy a Continental car tire again. Would I consider them for the S? NO.
2. I guess I must have gotten lucky with the 2 rear tires I got; they must have had a bad batch, maybe?
3. What a nightmare; I'm really glad Tire Rack refunded you money, but, to me they should have refunded shipping also, another reason I deal with a local shop (D.Tire).
03-30-2014 | 05:25 PM
#47
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 80
Likes: 10
From: New Jersey
Tire Rack replaced in total 9 tires, they paid shipping back and forth (overnight) on the replacements. The poor CS reps I dealt with knew, and admitted that there is a ton of them out there with issues. In the end, Continental USA gave me the full purchase price less the original $42 shipping. At that point, I just wanted to be done with that nightmare.
What's funny, the tires will shake like hell, but show up perfectly balanced. As I did the mounting and balancing where I work, I was able to bring the car in the shop right off the road, when the shaking was worst (hot tires) and see they turned "true" but were also balanced.
It had me questioning myself and the car. As soon as the winter Dunlops went on, "my car" returned.
Same when the Bridgestones went on the following spring, "my car" was back, quiet, smooth as glass at all speeds as it was for the past 8 years previous.
It's possible they have since fixed the issue, but I sure wouldn't take the chance again.
Next set on the 6-6 will be Michelin Super Sports, the S, I keep watch here to see what everyone is running. When I bought the S, I was a bit cash poor and bald/mismatched F to R tires meant I went economical, a set of Hankook Ventus V12 Evo. They're ok, not super sticky, but it makes the car fun to drift around here and there.
What's funny, the tires will shake like hell, but show up perfectly balanced. As I did the mounting and balancing where I work, I was able to bring the car in the shop right off the road, when the shaking was worst (hot tires) and see they turned "true" but were also balanced.
It had me questioning myself and the car. As soon as the winter Dunlops went on, "my car" returned.
Same when the Bridgestones went on the following spring, "my car" was back, quiet, smooth as glass at all speeds as it was for the past 8 years previous.
It's possible they have since fixed the issue, but I sure wouldn't take the chance again.
Next set on the 6-6 will be Michelin Super Sports, the S, I keep watch here to see what everyone is running. When I bought the S, I was a bit cash poor and bald/mismatched F to R tires meant I went economical, a set of Hankook Ventus V12 Evo. They're ok, not super sticky, but it makes the car fun to drift around here and there.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post