Major Disappointment With PSS vs PS2

Did my homework, and took the advice of many, "Pilot Super Sport are a great replacement for Pilot PS2's". Bought the PSS from Tire Rack. I picked up the car for Sunset Porsche, fresh alignment and new tires, expected greatness! Took the back way home to avoid the Interstate, did understand the first 100 miles or so on new rubber they might be a little greasy. Was really surprised at amount of what feels to be sidewall flex. Stopped at a tire dealer on the way home, the pressures were 50 psi HOT rear and 43 psi Hot front, dropped 5-7 pounds. Have modified psi up and down and added about 120 miles to scrub off the new edges. Current psi cold 36 front and 40 rear. Keep in mind the car drove like a laser on the old PS2's, I just wasn't comfortable with the tread depth at wear bars so switched them out. The car has H&R springs, Bilstein Shocks, Porsche Cup sway bars and drop links front and rear, very tight set up... or used to be. What am I missing, read a thread and understand 1.5 mm on worn tires and about 8 mm on new rubber but its a lot of wiggle. The car when pushed doesn't feel safe to me, just way too much mush into a corner as I feel what I think to be the side walls flex, once they roll over they have good bite. In a hard left to right transition, it's actually dangerous. If when driving down a straight stretch of road just wiggle the wheel left and right slightly I feel the weight shift but the car tracks straight. Either I'm missing something, I hope that's the case, or a bunch of people on these forums have a very different expectation or suspension set up then I do. Advice appreciated! (As an aside, very please that Tire Rack has a 30 day warranty and I can send these back and order PS2's if I choose, I'll eat the freight back to me and the second mount and balance, but that will be better than living with these tires for a couple years.)

Why not chat with Damon @ Tirerack and see what he says? 220 miles driven should get rid of the 'greasy' new tire issue. GL, let us know what happens.

I'm no expert, but did you did a printout of the alignment? If something was changed there, if could have at least contributed if not caused entirely the difference in feel. I'd particularly look at front toe, more front toe will slow turn-in and add straight line stability to the front, which seems to be exactly what you're describing.

My front PS2's had plenty of miles left on them had they not been so much wear on the inside edge of both. I posted some pics. and thought I had way too much camber, someone corrected me... I believe Macster, saying my wear was more than likely too much toe out. So burglar you might be on to something. Is there a direct dial line for Damon?

I was amazed at how pliable the MPSS sidewalls feel with your bare hand before mounting but having unquestionable faith in Michelin, when my rear PS2 wore out (threads showing on inside tread block) I replaced with MPSS & have PS2 on front @ wear bars. My car understeers more & I can't get the rear to break loose. I assume you bought the exact same sizes & have worn off the mold release goop. If you did have more toe out in the front & realigned for less, then turn-in will seem sluggish plus some tread squirm. MPSS beats MPS2 on the skidpad!

Doesn't sound right. They should feel like PS2's until they are pushed really hard. Then they should shine.

if your alignment was adjusted it should be suspect. i have ps2, and have not tried pss, but feel it is hard to believe that alone would be cause for your cars behavior.

I would like to see the alignment report as well. I am quite happy with my PSS's and dont find the same problems that you are having. P-cars typically should have a pretty aggressive alignment, if they decreased the aggressiveness making it more akin to a standard vehicle it could account for a sloppy alignment. What looks normal on a printout when compared to 95% of the vehicles on the market is incorrect for a Pcar

I'm checking into alignment tomorrow. The alignment was done at a Porsche dealer, should be correct. I'll keep you all posted.

Here are the alignment specifications, anyone think these seem out of the ordinary? Thanks.

Wearing out the inside of the tire tread indicates an aggressive camber setting which is appropriate for a p-car. While cornering, the centrifugal forces will transfer the weight of the car to the outside (think bodyroll) which will even the load across those out-board treads. Of course you pay for it the rest of the time.

Look at your initial readings, the toes it is out to lunch. The toe is for each side is supposed to be between 0 - .10'. You were at negative .10' on one side and positive .17' even though the total toe is within spec the individual toes are way out to lunch, like double the recommended. It wouldn't be nearly as bad if the toes were out. the changes they made in the alignment were quite dramatic which would account for a very different feel and handling characteristics. Looking at the alignment results they did a fairly conservative alignment, your basic toe and go the rear toe is pretty close to 0 on both sides, you could have it adjusted to be closer to its max allowed front and rear which would improve handling characteristics. tire wear at the max would be slightly worse than where you are now but would be no worse than what is was with your old tires which were way beyond the max. On my own 4S the last time I did my alignment I set my toes to pretty well the the max allowed and cambers to the minimum. I think it feels quite good

Thank you jordanturbo, So perhaps what I'm needing is a more aggressive alignment, what kind of settings would be a better balance?

I'm confused about what's happening here. If you max toe on the rears, you will eat the insides faster than you'd likely want. The fronts are more forgiving. So, honestly, the toe values look like a good alignment to me, and perhaps is little mild on the camber, which while those settings give you better wear, will definitey reduce the sharpness of handling and stability. Why did you lower the rears to 40psi, if you though they were soft to begin with? 44 is Porsche recommended for rear. Some people run higher. I've read that the PSSs are quite pressure sensitive. Also, what sizes did you go with? Are they the same sizes as what you had with your old PS2s?

Good to hear the alignment feedback, I took the PSS to the pressures I used to run in the PS2's. Tonight I'll run the pressures up to 44 rear and 40 front. I'll let you know the results.

Quotes source posts: 9681675, 9681859

My rear toe is 0.06' on each side for a total of 0.12' total toe, front toe is at 0.10' both sides for a total of 0.20' total front toe. Front camber is at -0.40 each side rear is at -1.15 on each side. If you get your alignment redone I would ask them to not just do a "toe and go" alignment and properly adjust the camber as well, look at you left front wheel, you have almost double the camber of the right, both are within spec, but still different. I think with your original toe being so far out in the back is what gave you that solid feeling, so do it again just dont go beyond the maximum. I saw the audi logo on the alignment report so am guessing is is a Porsche Audi VW dealership where they will often give the apprentices alignments to do, and they are used to doing them on VW's and Audi's all day which is why the specs were always closer to the minimum. My fronts are maxed out, but my rears are just beyond the half way point in the range recommended by Porsche, really even going all the way to 0.10 in the rears wouldn't be terrible. He had beyond the recommended toe in the rear on one side prior to his alignment and didn't suffer abnormal tire wear. in the big scheme of things 0.10' is not all that much and for the aggressive feel it offers, the way it seems to bite the road a little harder, and with the negative camber feels a little more like it is on rails and in reality the life of my tires is not much different from that of a way less aggressive alignment. Having my own shop an seeing some of the vehicles people bring in, toe and camber has to be way out before you really notice rapid and uneven tire wear. I find that bad tire wear will be more apparent in vehicles with bad shocks, wheel bearings or tie rod ends.

When you said maxed out earlier, you meant the top of the recommended MAX, not he actual maximum you can adjust them, I assume, then. You CAN adjust way past 0.10'. That will eat your tires faster than camber. -1.15 on the rears is mild, not aggressive, really. Aggressive starts at around -2.00, IMHO. Most I've read try to go -1.3 to -1.5 to balance aggressive and wear.

Quotes source post: 9682174

Correct, I maxed them out at Porsches recommended maximum toe not beyond that to the maximum I can possibly go. I also mistyped on my number pad without noticing, I meant 1.45, not 1.15. Either way, my car does not have the most aggressive set up a porsche has ever seen, but it is certainly more aggressive than the alignment the OP has.

Now I have a choice, tweak the alignment to the slightly more aggressive, and or change the PSS back to the PS2's. The PS2's I had wore perfectly flat on the rear at the old settings, it was only the major wear on the inside of fronts that was a problem. I'm leaning to switch PSS for PS2's and tweak the alignment towards the more aggressive.

I have the PSS's. I love em. They have added track speed I have not experienced before. Have to say that I had mine replaced after a few track days because they wore the outside edges to a cord. It was under warranty where I paid a 1/3 for replacement cost. I think your specific alignment is the reason for the issue you have. I have mine set to X74 spec. I would give the tires another chance.

My PSS's have been excellent. Coming from many previous sets of PS2's I was surprised how much I like them. They have been great at the track also.

Your handling issues remind me of how my Turbo felt with PS2s on the front at 50% and new Sumis on the rear. The car hunted on the freeway and didn't want to go straight, a very small steering change would just about throw me in the next lane. The rear end slid big in a tight off ramp turn at the speed limit and PSM caught it. The car was just plain scary to drive even at the speed limit. I consulted my alignment guy that said he could make it all work out, which I knew could. Instead I just ordered a set of front Sumis where the rolling diameters and rotations/mile are an exact match to the new rears. After doing this the car was transformed and has never handled so good. The HTR-Z lls actually feel and handle better on the street than the PS2s that at 50% came on the car. As an ex racer I can push the car pretty hard in the canyons and get a feel for what the tires are doing. I know the Sumis would grease up pretty quickly on the track but stick like velcro in town.

HTR-Z IIs?? or IIIs? The IIs absolutely suck, in every department, except wear, on my 02 C2. In the wet the rear end was just plain all over the place. The full time 4wd must make a huge difference with those tires.

Keep the PSS and get the proper alignment. I ran PS2 for years and recently went to the PSS. Much better tires, quieter, more grip, better handling, better in the wet, supposed to last longer (and at the price we pay for Michelins that does count) and less expensive. Winners in all ways. Buying PS2 is buying older technology at a higher price.

Thanks Doug. I wonder if I'm to blame for not being specific about my alignment needs or should the dealer have asked. Either way it's under $200.00 for another complete alignment, I just don't want to be too quick to assume responsibility for a very neutral alignment on what is intended to be a sharp handling car... thoughts?

I'm ready to be more specific about my alignment settings with the Dealer doing my alignment. Now that I'm setting the numbers I'd like to be sure I have a good bases for my requests. Jordanturbo has offered some insights into his current alignment, but I'd like a little deeper pool to use as guidance, keep in mind I'm looking for the planted, sharp handling car I had before the alignment and tires not the neutral waffling thing I have now. My conclusion is my tires are fine, tried many different pressures and can't get it right with that alone. Any insights to alignments of other 996 with upgrades to the suspension. I know this is highly personal, just need some insights to build a data set to provide the dealer. Thanks!

RE: MPSS vs MPS2, if you want to keep the rear at the desired 285/30-18, then there is no choice, as MPSS is still not available. I'm quite positive that the MPS2 is a better tire than I am a driver. According to everyone, the MPSS is a better tire, exactly as Dharn summarized, and I'm hoping that they will be avaialble in 3 years when my PS2s should be ready to be replaced. I'd still like to know what size all you installing MPSS are using in the rear. Regarding alignment, there is a small point that is often missed, that is relevant here. When an "as found" alignment is done on new tires, it does not reflect the on road alignment that the driver experienced previously with his old worn tires. The road alignment with the old tires had far more camber, due to inner tire wear, so it would naturally feel far more planted. As an example, I did a simple trig measurement with a level with my old tires after I lowered the car with PSS9s. Previously, the rear fender to road was 26.5", and I ended up at just under 25.25". Putting a level against the wheel, and plumbing it, then measuring the gap to the same part of the wheel at the top, I found my new camber to be ~2�40', fairly aggressive. The tires were definitely worn more on the inside by 3/32", but I had a solid 4/32" left, so still 7/32" on the outside. Not a huge difference, it appeared. In addition, the cross sectional profile of the old Sumis was less than the new PS2s so I am aware the numbers will be skewed some, but nonetheless, the relative numbers are a good indication. Installing new PS2s, same size, the rear fender height is now 25.5" rear, and the same trig shows the rear camber is now only 1� 50", about spec for an X74 level996. Though the car feels great, as soon as I replace the tie rods this weekend, I will have it fully aligned. My front tires are currently ~10' positive camber on the pass side and about the same neg on the drivers side, so not ideal at all. The point is, between the rather large toe out and what the actual camber the OP was driving with on his old PS2s, he likely DID have a more stable alignment and handling with his old tires and alignment. So while I certainly can't tell the OP what the definitive best alignment for his car is, I'd suggest with his lowered car, I'd agree with jordanturbos advice, and go with 10' toe on the fronts and 0 on the rears, and increase to camber to -45' front and -1�45' rear. The MPSS will last longer than the PS2s, and this is a mildly aggressive alignment, similar to what is speced for an X74 height car. The only thing that bothers me, is this does not seem like a significant difference over what he has now, relative to how he says the car handles. Could you possibly have the front ARBs set too stiff on the front? You should be on the softest setting, with those shocks and springs, based on feedback from others. I have M030 sways on mine, and find them excellent on the street, especially over the stock bars, so I didn't feel the need to go larger with Cup or GT sways.

To answer perryinva's question about tire sizes. The previous PS2's 245-40-18 front and 275-40-18 rear. I felt this 275-40 was a little too big and concerned me that I might be close to the 5% front to rear difference that can cause trouble with a c4, so went more towards stock keeping 245-40-18 front 275-35-18 on the rear. The difference in rear tire size is a change that until now I hadn't considered significant because all I changed was the side wall size, the 275 leaves the same amount of contact patch correct? perryinva, you say Jordanturbo said 0 on the rear, I think he said "My rear toe is 0.06' on each side for a total of 0.12' total toe". Here's my some numbers I'm concluding to pass on the Dealer for the second go around: Front Camber L: -40 R: -40 Front Toe L: .10 R: .10 Rear Camber L: -1.45 R: -1.45 Toe L: .06 R: .06 What do you all think and how does that compare to X74. Again, H&R springs, Bilstiens, and Cup sway bars. Thanks.

Yes, I was going by memory, but really, 0 toe and 6' is at the splitting hair line. The tech would shoot for 0 or 10' and then if over or under, do another small adjustment to correct, and get it closer. Just rotating the wheel is likely to change a few seconds. I think the dealer might give you a strange look if you ask for 6' of toe on each side. It is unfortunately, not that easy to dial in that kind of accuracy. For instance, you have -38' camber on one side, IIRC, so the tech is not going to touch it to try for -40'. You can't adjust the strut plate bolts/nuts that little. Just tightening the nuts moves the strut a few seconds. The other side, he would bump in, and get closer because it is a decent amount off. Doesn't hurt to explain what you are trying to achieve, and get their suggestions, too, especially if they are a Porsche shop. And personally, I think front neg camber causes little wear compared to toe, especially for the turn in and corner stability benefit, so I think those are good numbers. I think you will find the "new" as found numbers will have changed a little since the as left. Make sure you have the tires inflated to where you think they are best handling, now. How many miles on the tires now? Also, and this is a long shot, you might have a defective tire. I had a new Michelin (a few years back, different car) with a separated belt, that was not easy to find, and the car was very squirrely until they figured out what it was. Only problem is that the way we found it was to rotate the tires front to back, one at a time, and pin point which tire it was, which we obviously can't do on the 996. Is 245/40-18F and 275/35-18R standard for MKI C4? That just seems a lot larger F/R compared to my C2 where 18" standard is 225/40 and 285/30, as your fronts are 16mm taller and rears are 21.5mm taller than mine. Rough calcs show you went in the right direction for sure, as yours are less than .5% F/R difference where mine is 3.4% smaller circumference and has a 1% F/R differential. The previous tire son my car, the Sumi HRTZ-IIs had an even larger F/R difference.

Thanks perryinva, So you'd recommend revising my rear toe to .10 L and .10 R. Should I go with a slightly more aggressive front camber, since is seems apparent with the old front toe being so far out why they wore so poorly? The tires currently have 180 miles on them. As stated before Tire Rack will take them back in the 30 day window. After my previous research and the followup from others on this forum, I'm feeling pretty confident the tires are good, just need to tweak the alignment. As far as the stock tire sizes, I don't know what size is stock for the 01' C4, and what I meant to say is I've changed the rears "closer to stock", from where the previous owner had gone. Thanks.

Yes, I would say that is decent change to shoot for. Remember there are 60' in a degree, so 0.5� is 30' and 0.1� is 6'. 10' is not much, scrub or wear wise, just like jordanturbo said, but adds a lot to tracking, IMHO. If you ask for that and -45' camber, I think you will notice the difference.

I did speak with him last week and recommended a closer look into alignment also, as the PSS has received overwhelmingly good reviews. I'm very grateful you guys "in the know" can help out so much with recommendations!

many have complained about the sidewall flex of the PSS and the lack of "feel".... it's quite common among aggressive drivers.... go with Bridgestone S04... they have better feel and stronger sidewall

The OEM sizes for early 996 C4's with 18" wheels were 225/40-18 front and 265/35-18 rear. I ran 235/40-18 front and 265/40-18 PS2's (997 sizing) for years with no problems even though the diameter difference was larger than the OEM fitting. With the PSS I went back to the OEM fitting (which I always ran with my winter tires). Sites like Tirerack have tables that show the revs per mile and I did extensive comparisons of different tire combinations to see how much percentage difference there was in rotations per mile when looking at alternate sizes. I have not done it for the sizes you are running, but you might want to. If the later 996 rear sizing (285/30-18) had been available in the PSS I might have gone to them.

Quotes source post: 9690864

Good point, very few if any shops will take the precision that I do when Aligning or maintaining their vehicles in general than I do with my own vehicle in my own shop with my own equipment. When I was adjusting my toe I would take it in to .10 Then go back a c**t hair, then on the locking bolt a little hard to get it down to that 0.06 that I was looking for. Again for camber just tightening that adjustment bolt will affect it that little bit. I think when I last did my alignment it took me close to 3 hours to get it exactly perfect the way I wanted. I would suggest asking the people doing your alignment to shoot for 0.10 in the rear then tap it back a c**t hair.

Why not chat with Damon @ Tirerack and see what he says? 220 miles driven should get rid of the 'greasy' new tire issue. GL, let us know what happens. __________________

Quotes source post: 9692175

I suggest you read the post 3 above your own, he did talk to Damon and feels confident that his issue is with his alignment not his tires. It seems as though comprehension is your issue haha I kid, I kid

Quotes source post: 9691357

No problem, having my own brick and mortar tire shop up here I feel that I have unique insight on certain aspects concerning tires alignments and some other mechanical issues. Even though my shop is primarily a Goodyear dealer (aka goodyear authorized, not in others), I do not hesitate recommending the best product that suits the need of the customer, even if it is not a Goodyear product. The Michelin Pilot Super Sport is a great product, I would hate to see someone get rid of the best suited tire for their needs because of and issue un tire related. Before I had awesome luck with the Dunlop Sport Maxx GT, preferred them to the PS2's I had previously especially at their price point, but now when it is available it is hard not to recommend the PSS. Maybe of Goodyear gets their s**t together and starts offering a larger size range in their new Asymmetric 2 in a broader size range the I will be able to try them out and recommend them like I recommend the PSS, From the Asymmetric 2's I have sold, they have gotten pretty good reviews.

I believe the correct term is CRCH, not c**t hair...lol... Based on what Dharn says, then you are running pretty wide fronts and in between wide rears, so you will have a more oversteer than stock, coupled with a beefier front ARB and springs, adds still more oversteer, so you will be very alignment sensitive. Personally, I figured that Porsche knew what sizes worked best, and while I don't have any issue going +1 F&R, it appears to me that Porsche wanted to reduce over steer by changing the rear to 285/30-18 in later cars, and going with a slightly smaller than front circumference, which increases torque slightly as well, with 10" wide 18"rims, and keeping the fronts the same. The OP has gone in the opposite direction (unintentionally, as he was duplicating the sizes previously on the car, but matching F&R circumferences), so it will be a different handling car, for sure, more sensitive to alignment and pressure. Interesting that jordanturbo liked the Dunlop Sport Maxx over the PS2s, as I had them on a previous BMW, rather than pay the high prcie for PS2, and my initial impressions were very positive, but soured after about 8-12k miles. I hate when the character of a tire changes greatly over it's wear life, something the Michelins seem to do better than most others. That was my second set of higher performance Dunlops, that did the same thing, so I swore I would stick with Michelins after that. Of course, since PS2s on Porsches are not rotatable, they only give them a 10kmile warranty, so I may be eating my words next year!

Quotes source post: 9692673

12k miles? psh ha ha I usually put 5-7000km on a set of tires before I try another sample. I have tried quite a few Dunlop tires, but there have only been a few I liked, the Sport Maxx GT, Direzza Starspec, and Wintersport 3D. I found bang for the buck, these models were quite competetive. But like I said since the release of the PSS I cant recommend the Sport Maxx GT like I used to.

Quotes source post: 9692188

Sounds like you may be the alignment & tire shop I have been searching for! Can you reveal your location & contact info in SoCA ? I want a set of MPSS.

Quotes source post: 9692924

Unfortunately I am no where near SoCA, I am a good 30 hours of spirited driving away, and across a border. Plus I am not a sponsor of this site so don't feel as though it would be right to advertise my services without paying and potentially stealing customers from other sponsors here. Jordan

Quotes source post: 9680304

Porsche will set it to factory spec. Which is not very aggressive. They set it for non sports car drivers.

Quotes source post: 9696208

I always considered Porsches to be sports cars.

All of this discussion just shows how important it is to have your 996 aligned by a dealer or a shop who knows how to properly align Porsches.

Quotes source post: 9697252

+1 + a before & after printout to prove it

Quotes source post: 9697252

I would say more along the know what you want from your alignment and driving style and find a shop any shop that can fulfill the request. Looking at his original reading vs. his finished results, the tech did a decent job, camber was fairly close on both sides, toe was bang on to zero etc. They did good adjustments, just not the adjustments he was looking for. The way I see it is that now a days >80% of porsche drivers drive their car because they have a little money, the badge says porsche and they want a status symbol. Why do you think the Panamera and Cayenne sell so well? Because they are the epitome of sports cars? Because this 40yr old woman taking her kid to the soccer game wants to stop by the track on the way there? Somehow I doubt it. I am guessing that 80%+ of porsche buyers looks for something a little quick off the line, but would rather have a comfortable ride versus a car that rides a little stiffer but handles like it's on rails. So that alignment that the OP received probably would have been acceptable and even wanted by over 80% of the Porsche owning demographic.

Bypro and Dennis C, always good to have input, however if your read the entire thread, specifically post #1 and post #10 you'll see the alignment was performed by a Porsche Dealer, and the before and after alignment readings were not only provided to me, but I posted them in this thread. I might be missing the point to your posts, if so please clarify, again the beauty of these forum... lots of different perspectives and ideas. The car is going back in for an alignment adjustment on the 25th, hope to have final thoughts on the 27th. Thanks all.

I think they meant to point out that you did indeed do it all right, so it was easy for us to have useful input. Without your data, it would all be speculation. I was pretty pissed when I picked up my Mini Cooper Clubman last year, after putting new Michelin Pilot A/S Plus tires on it, and had the BMW dealer do the alignment and some recall work, and AFTER the fact tell me.."Oh, the printer for the Hunter isn't working, so we don't have any before & after numbers for you". So I have nothing to reference to. I'm not sure if Byprodriver read my post about the limited usefulness of the before reading with new tires and the need to compensate camber for wear when looking at the numbers, but I feel jordanturbo correctly added to Dennis post that it is important to use a shop that can actually USE your input and give you what you are looking for, instead of the standard "We do Porsches all day, and this is the right way to do it." The VAST majority (including me on my non Porsche cars) just "get an alignment", not a sporty, or aggressive, or track alignment. Alignment, by default to most Americans is to have a stable safe ride and minimum tire wear. Not high speed cornering or max stability at 100MPH+. Until I did the math and measured my own camber wear onthe 996, I didn't realize that there would be some benefit to getting another alignment when the tires are half worn, and the camber has increased because of that. The wear will keep increasing at a faster rate as the camber increases, so in the case of $900 worth of rear tires, it might make sense to pay $150 for another alignment if that gets you another 5k safe miles. I'll need to discuss this with my indie.

I'm sure your right perryinva, byprodriver has been involved I this post since post #5. Thanks again all!

Got my car back Friday, new alignment, will post the new numbers Monday when I get back in the office. Used more or less the GT3 street alignment numbers found in the FAQ section of this excellent forum! Thank you to all who commented, made suggestions etc.! Final conclusion: Michellin Pilot Super Sports are great, the neutral alignment was to blame for the "dull nose" and "unplanted rear end" feel. I'd say, factoring the thicker new tread block and the need for some additional tire pressure tweaks the car is 85-90% back to normal. Strange to say that I'd have hoped the car with new rubber and fresh alignment would be 100% better. The Porsche dealer did end up charging me full price for the second alignment, i had hoped they would have "worked with me" but, lesson learned, I'll be very clear in the future what my driving intentions are... Wether I'm asked or not. $400.00 of alignment is a disappointment, but I almost shipped the PSS back for more expensive PS2's which would have set me back an additional $800.00 after freight and mount and balancing. Then still would have needed the second $200.00 alignment. Thanks again for the help.

Awesome ending! Glad this worked out except for paying the Pcar dealer again.

Quotes source post: 9724696

Glad to hear the positive results of the re alignment! I knew that would solve a majority of the problems you were having. You say that you are only at 85-90% what is keeping it from being 100%? any ideas for a remedy? How does this setup feel compared to the previous tire and alignment set up?

For those interested, my revised alignment. Jordanturbo, it might relate to a suspension "tuned" for rears that were 275-40-18's with the new tire purchase I changed to a close to stock 275-35-18. If the suspension was dialed in to the larger sidewall and overall more weight, my feeling is the subtile difference I'm feeling is related to that change? I suppose now I might need to look at the sway bar and drop link setup, which is over my head... without this forum for advise. Thanks.

Interesting that all the new initial cambers were slightly more aggressive than the previous finals, yet the toes were all less aggressive, and both at the same dealer. Nice balance on the new numbers, I'll be getting mine done this Friday, and looking at the same numbers to go for.