For 1-2 track events a year, not competing for times, I'd probably go with the Hankook V12. The wet grip is right up there with the Dunlops (which are phenomenal in the wet), they should have greater hydroplaning resistance (particularly when near the wear bars), and they will last longer.

I'm on StarSpecs because I sometimes compete in time trials on my street tires.

I'm seeing $586 for the StarSpecs and $406 for the V12s for AP2 sizes. What are you, on 20s or something?!

 

I notice that the tread width of the 255/40's is shown as 9.1" vs 9.6" for the 245/40's. Makes me wonder about the accuracy of these specs.

Anyone have any feedback on the 255/40's mounted on the stock 17x8.5" wheels? Any comment on how/whether they affect the infamous tail-happiness accelerating out of tight slow-speed turns in low gears?

I really need to decide and order one or the other today.

Thanks, all.

Bob

 

Not yet.









(Hahaha, I kid, not ever )

I'm on SSR Comp-C in 18", and I'm currently running a +1 width, so a 225/40-18 (f, 8" wheel width) and a 255/35-18 (r, 9"). Pirelli P-Zeros that came with the wheels.

Even in pretty common 18" sizes the price difference really starts to increase between the two and/or I'm getting my prices from the wrong place.

 

Tread width spec is necessarily somewhat arbitrary. How much around the radius toward the sidewall do they include? A tire with a more squared-off profile might show greater "tread-width", but in reality not offer any greater contact patch width under hard cornering. IMO, just go by the section width spec for a decent general width number.

Regarding 255/40-17s on AP2 wheels, it's totally OK, and in fact that's the size Honda put on the CR model (which has identical size wheels to all other AP2's).

dan

 

Well I ordered the Cont ExtremeContact DW, in 215/45 & 255/40 for my stock AP2 wheels. Shipping them to a local TR-approved installer. Will get them mounted early next week. I'll post my opinion after I've had some miles on them.

Thanks Jim & all for your inputs.

 

I'd love to hear your thought. I'm getting some of these for my DD wheels here in the next few weeks.

 

Well, I got my new Conti ExtremeContact DW tires mounted yesterday, in the oem CR sizes, 215/45-17 front & 255/40-17 rear, on my original stock wheels. From the little driving I've done on them so far, they feel great. The steering is noticeably lighter compared to my worn original RE050's. My few cautious bursts of acceleration out of low-speed turns show less tendency for the rear end to slide out, but I haven't yet had time to explore this behavior further in safe circumstances. I have 39psi all around right now; will probably go to 40psi all 4 next time I stop in at an air station.

One concern I have is how they will do in long-term wear as DD tires. They have a 340 wear index, but the inside ribs have more void gaps, presumably for aquaplaning control, and the outer ribs are where most of the rubber is. Given that my original tires wore out most on the inside, I wonder how these will do long term. But I think this is the case with most tires.

I'll post again when I've had more miles on them.

BTW I was very happy with this procedure of buying from TR and having them shipped directly to an approved local installer.

 

Any update on these conti's?? thinking about getting a set of rears...

 

What's the reason for the higher than normal tire pressures?

 

>>What's the reason for the higher than normal tire pressures? <<

More stability, especially noticeable on turn-in (I can notice the difference when psi drops ~ 5lb.), and in fact better tire wear. I ran 40psi all around on my original RE050's, and when worn out they did not show more wear in the center - fronts showed inner ribs worn most; rears were pretty even but more wear on inner. I run stock alignment F & R, except I set toe from observance of wear.