Buntinboy9

Hey,

I noticed yesterday that when it was raining I was experiencing major understeer with the car. I go to check it out and the crappy tires the owner before me put on the car are in need of replacing.

I will be replacing these tires with some BFG KDW2's (best tire for the purpose of this set up) and was wondering if I should go ahead and replace the rears as well.

The rears are BFG G-Force Sports and have ~%70 left in them. G-Force Sports

RedCelica

It's always a good idea to have matching tires f+r

I have g-force sports on my S as well...good tire, but i'd like to have something more sticky (like star specs or AD08s...the R-S3s are good too, but have a softer sidewall) myself.

deepbluejh

If you've got 70% left on the rears, definitely don't ditch them. Those tires should be close enough in performance that it won't matter.

bronxbomber252

in your position I would either get G-force sports for the front, or replace all 4 with something better.

ScandinavianFlick

I'd suggest replacing all 4. It's not a great idea to have mismatched tires; it's a potentially lethal idea to have stickier tires on the front than the back of an S2000.

Please bear in mind that tires are the single most important part on your car, and, as in all things, you get what you pay for. If you can afford better tires, buy them. Personally, I find RE-11s and RE050As are a good bet for both dry grip and water displacement. RS-3s and Star Specs are great in the dry and utterly terrifying in the rain.

deepbluejh

Comments like this confuse me. If you get what you pay for, then you want to avoid RS-3s at all costs. They are cheap tires which are terrifying in the rain. You yourself used the word "lethal" when describing mismatched tires, yet seemed to recommend terrifying rain tires in the same breath. Speaking of cost, the tire he's looking at buying cost nearly as much as the Star Spec. If he's getting what he's paying for, then he should have no worries. At $141 each, the BFGoodrich tires are nearly as much as Star Specs for the front (and more expensive than the RS3s).

I will whole heartedly agree that tires are a great investment and you should run good tires, but a little common sense is in order. For most of the population (people who don't race), UHP or Max Performance tires are perfectly fine for street driving. The UHP tires he's currently running in the back probably aren't as good as OEM, but they're good enough for most purposes. Pairing them with a new set of UHP tires from the same brand in the front isn't exactly the worst idea ever.

I'm currently running a set of Maxxis Victra MA-Z1 tires up front with the RE050s in the back. The car is perfectly stable under heavy cornering and handles like a dream despite the mismatch. It's not something I'm going to continue in the future, but the results are a LOT better than most make it out to be.

ScandinavianFlick

My comments on the RS-3 and Star Spec were meant as an addendum to RedCelica's comment above. They're good tires if you live somewhere it rarely rains, although the RS-3 is really best as a dedicated autox tire- the wet behavior, breakaway characteristics, and wear rate are less than optimal for regular street driving.

Buntinboy9

yeah the thing is, is that I drive close to 10k miles every 4-5 months and WANT harder tires so they last a little longer.

Ik that having stickier tires in the front can be a tad bit worse but at least you can control over-steer easier. If I was looking for tires for ultimate performance and best bang for the buck I would be getting RS-3's.

I plan on getting another wheel/tires set up for racing/ auto cross and those will be equipped with RS-3's.

I have a friend that runs the KDW-2's and says they are some great tires and prove to be stickier than their 300 tread-wear rating, and excellent in the rain. I have rode in his mustang with them and they provide grip like a stickier tire. He actually tracks these tires and runs very competitive times (this is up to debate but not needed for this argument).

I think I will be able to get away with having these different tires because they are somewhat similar and are made by the same company.

They will be a lot better than the ones I have on there right now which are 6 year old master-craft avengers hps.

ZDan

Star specs are FANTASTIC in the wet, and RS-3s are pretty good as well.
I've passed much faster cars on Hoosier wets at the track in the pouring rain, myself on Star Specs. Yee haw!
Also tracked it with star spec fronts and RS-3 rears in the wet, not a problem.

The great thing about both of those tires is that they maintain a lot of grip even when sliding, they don't just let go and leave you with nothing.

Of course with either you lose hydroplaning resistance vs. good "max perf" tires, esp. past about half tread depth, but nothing too alarming.

With reasonable toe-in (i.e., zero front, ~0.2deg total rear), I've gotten good life out of *Specs and RS-3s, too. In fact I'm still on the rear RS-3s that were on the car for the May 2nd/3rd COM event at Mosport, and I commute 520 miles/week. So ~9000 miles on them and still have at least half tread depth remaining. I'll replace them before I get to the wear indicators, so should get another ~4500 miles before then.

Are there better tires for wet/inundated conditions? Yes, but these are actually pretty damn good in the wet

ScandinavianFlick

When I stated that the Star Specs and RS-3s are terrifying, I was referring primarily to hydroplaning characteristics. Most sticky street tires are fairly good in wet (but without standing water) conditions, since they're relatively temperature-insensitive compared to streetable r-comps like the A048 or R888. In my personal experience, hydroplaning is the S2k's achilles heel- blame the aggressive diff and dynamic toe change.