Need new rear Tires 225/50/16
#2
Describe your usage. What tires you want will depend heavily on:
desired dry performance
desired wet performance
AutoX
Track days
snow/cold-weather usage
desired tire life
price an object
etc.
If ultimate grip on the street in the rain is what you want, I'd go with B'stone RE050A Pole Positions.
desired dry performance
desired wet performance
AutoX
Track days
snow/cold-weather usage
desired tire life
price an object
etc.
If ultimate grip on the street in the rain is what you want, I'd go with B'stone RE050A Pole Positions.
#4
IMO better off w/ 225s over 245s if "sucking in the rain" is a concern.
A lot of performance and safety benefit is being made out of the S02's wider "tread width" that I'm not sure is there. S02's squared off profile could be *less* safe than a more rounded profile with similar section width but less absolute "tread width", by whatever arbitrary method that is measured. The "wider tread" squared off tire will only be able to continue to load up the outside edge of the contact patch, while a more rounded profile will provide more shoulder to roll over onto, should be more linear-performing, with less load concentrated on the outside edge of the contact patch.
Theoretically, in my mind at least...
I'd personally feel better with Bridgestone's RE01R's or RE050A Pole Positions in 225/50-16 in back than with OEM S02's or other lesser-grip 245/45-16s.
In the interests of full disclosure, I just got a set of 205/50-16 F, 245/45-16 rear Hankook RS2's (spent too much on track tires to justify +$200 extra to get the best street tires!). Must admit the look of wider tires in back was part of the decision process...
Anyway, I've been wrong before, but imo if you want 225/50-16s in back, or if the tire you want is only available in that size for the rear, I say go for it and don't fricking worry about it. I realize that goes against the conventional wisdom 'round here, so take that into account as well.
A lot of performance and safety benefit is being made out of the S02's wider "tread width" that I'm not sure is there. S02's squared off profile could be *less* safe than a more rounded profile with similar section width but less absolute "tread width", by whatever arbitrary method that is measured. The "wider tread" squared off tire will only be able to continue to load up the outside edge of the contact patch, while a more rounded profile will provide more shoulder to roll over onto, should be more linear-performing, with less load concentrated on the outside edge of the contact patch.
Theoretically, in my mind at least...
I'd personally feel better with Bridgestone's RE01R's or RE050A Pole Positions in 225/50-16 in back than with OEM S02's or other lesser-grip 245/45-16s.
In the interests of full disclosure, I just got a set of 205/50-16 F, 245/45-16 rear Hankook RS2's (spent too much on track tires to justify +$200 extra to get the best street tires!). Must admit the look of wider tires in back was part of the decision process...
Anyway, I've been wrong before, but imo if you want 225/50-16s in back, or if the tire you want is only available in that size for the rear, I say go for it and don't fricking worry about it. I realize that goes against the conventional wisdom 'round here, so take that into account as well.
#6
Former Moderator
Youngjoc...your sig says you have 17" TE37s on order...do what ZDan did and get some Hankook RS2s in the size he got...cheap half way decent tire that will get you through until your 17" rims arrive. Then buy the really good tires...RE050A PP or Michelin Pilot Sport PS2.
#7
After driving to and from Watkins Glen on Kumho VictoRacers, the Hankook RS2's are VERY comfortable and QUIET! Not to mention they don't wander all over. Damn, thass SMOOOVE... All the 16" sizes of interest, great prices, big wide water channels, soft sidewalls, they might be compromised for track usage but for reasonably high-grip street tires they seem to be ideal.
Generally, if you want life, you'll have to give up traction, wet and dry. The Hankook Z212 RS2 treadwear rating is 200, so don't expect more than about 20k out of 'em. If you want more life, Bridgestone RE750's might be a better bet (for more $$).
Generally, if you want life, you'll have to give up traction, wet and dry. The Hankook Z212 RS2 treadwear rating is 200, so don't expect more than about 20k out of 'em. If you want more life, Bridgestone RE750's might be a better bet (for more $$).
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tx
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by negcamber,Apr 29 2007, 07:11 PM
Youngjoc...your sig says you have 17" TE37s on order...do what ZDan did and get some Hankook RS2s in the size he got...cheap half way decent tire that will get you through until your 17" rims arrive. Then buy the really good tires...RE050A PP or Michelin Pilot Sport PS2.
wet traction is my main concern tough. road noise is 2nd
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Irvine, SoCal
Posts: 1,774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by yungjoc,Apr 29 2007, 07:47 PM
wet traction is my main concern tough. road noise is 2nd
#10
The Hankook Z212 RS2s cost about the same from www.edgeracing.com, should have better wet and dry grip. If they're only gonna be used for 3 months, life shouldn't really be a concern, no?
What are the front tires?
What are the front tires?