Do you run N rated tires?

Just thought I would poll and see here who actually uses N-rated tires and if you think they are worth it. I saw an old thread about N rated tires and whether the op should stick with them, but I was more interested in seeing what the ratio of owners is like. Also I was wondering how many users have tires that are not an N rated version of a tire that comes in an N rating. Like the PS2 that you can get in N rated or non N rated. Personally I could care less about the N rating. I care about putting the best tire suited for my driving versus what Porsche approves, as long as it is the proper size, speed rating and load rating I dont worry about the N. Right now I am running the Pilot Super Sport which has been the best summer tire I have driven on yet and it doesn't have an N rating, earlier this summer I was using a Dunlop Sport Maxx GT which again was an awesome tire that lacked N rating I have in prior years used the PS2 and bridgestone RE050 in both N rated and non N rated, and the P Zero Rosso in an N rated only, I was able to tell the difference between an N rated and non N rated in the same model, but even the N rated was not as good as other product offered without an N rating imo.

I am currently running N-spec Michelin PS2s on my C4S. I'm not opposed to trying non N-spec tires. I'd try the Pilot Super Sports if they were manufactured in the appropriate sizes for the C4S, but they aren't at this time. In my opinion, the N-spec PS2 is the best tire I've ever had on the C4S. Until they make the Super Sport in my sizes, I'll keep buying the PS2. FWIW, I am running a non N-spec tire on my Cayenne in the summer. On that vehicle, I run the Continental ExtremeContact DWS. I have found it to be vastly superior to the OE Continental SportContact 4x4 that came on my vehicle from the factory. I'm running N-spec Michelin Latitude Alpin tires in the winter.

Quotes source post: 9914916

I personally run incorrect sizing on my C4S on the factory turbo twists. I run a 235/40R18 in the front and a 285/35R18 in the rear, the difference in overall diameter is about 0.4 inches, but when the rear tire is slightly stretched on the rim the roll out diameter I my alignment machine calculated was almost bang on and with having the car lowered and the spacers I run, the 285 actually fits a little better than the 295 I believe.

Since this is a 996 forum I will assume your C4S uses a VC, Viscous Coupling. Even a relatively small variation in tire circumference front vs rear will cause the VC to unduly stiffen and that might well result in premature failure of driveline components. Chrysler discontinued the F/awd (VC coupling to the rear) T & C minivan since owners would unknowningly install tire chains only on the front. PTO failure results, often in less than 50 miles.

The 996 C4S does, in fact, use a viscous coupling in the AWD system.

Sumitomo htrz3 here I dont think they are n rated. I don't care.

They aren't N-spec. They certainly are inexpensive compared to PS2s!

I have n-spec on the 996 and the Cayenne. I have no idea why I have them on the Cayenne, but the discount tire chain carried them in stock when I needed new shoes.

I believe N-rated tires are specifically designed to match the rear weight bias of the 911. Tire Rack has a good overview. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete....jsp?techid=26 I ran the Sumitomo HTRZIII on my old 968 and was very happy with them. Since buying the 996 I have stuck with N-rated Contis.

Excellent idea for a poll/thread! I am the non-N Porsche brand that starts with M. I would like to try some Nspec M tires again maybe our esteemed sponser TireRack would do a non-N vs. N test on a modern Porsche to show what the differences are.

Quotes source post: 9915384

Same tires, same feeling.

I ran N spec when my cars were stock. Now that both cars have been lowered, shocks, springs, and other suspension components changed, I don't see any value in getting tires tested with the original car. If I happen to choose tires that are N spec then fine. Here's an article on the subject. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete...jsp?&techid=26

Quotes source post: 9915377

Actually the difference in diameter between the 295/30R18 and 225/40R18 is a larger spread than the 285/35R18 and 235/40R18 when fitted onto my rims when I measured the roll out on my alignment rack with I put the tires on.

Quotes source post: 9915490

+1000!! this is your answer You might find the Sumi good and cheap but your car is bias rear weighted and N specs address this issue - If I had a 996 street car I would 100% get N spec tires my 3.2 I run Toyo R888's $ Conti DW's (not DWS's) so like WTF do I know

Quotes source posts: 9914916, 9915384, 9915490

I run the same Continentals on my X5 and really like them, especially considering how much less expensive they are as compared to everything else available in a 315 series tire. +1 I totally believe that this is true, but what it doesn't consider is that the non-N spec tires of the same model meet the same criteria. That is, are there any actual differences besides the "N" stamp on the side of the tire?

Quotes source post: 9917539

Yes there are actually differences between the N rated and non N rated PS2's the side wall looks slightly different, casing is of a different construction load rating is different, and the side wall stiffness is different. That being said from what I recall the PS2 non N rated still meets the load requirements of the 996 with the engine being in the back.

I run N rated Nankangs... and I love them (J/K).

N rated Bridgestones S02 A

As a long time Porsche owner/driver I have watched the evolution of tire technology for Porsche. Few other auto manufacturers seem to expend the amount of energy on tire design and their impact upon the handling of their cars. Since we have always purchased Porsches for their superior handling capabilities we have to depend upon Porsche to work closely with the the tire manufacturers to extract the most they can out of their tire designs and for Porsche, to design the optimal suspensions to exploit those tires. Today, with the most advanced technologies available to these companies, we have grown to expect this from them. Porsche has even pursued advanced brake technology (e.g., PCCBs) to exploit that part of these cars to improve the cars fully. Over the years I have watched owners wrestle with the decision of which tires to buy. We have the whole range of owners. Weekend racers, to daily drivers. Most daily drivers will complain about the relatively short life of their tires, while the racers will brag about the handling the best tires are providing them on today's Porsches. Several years ago when I brought my 06 S back from Germany I took a friend of mine out for a run on my local race track. He's been racing since the early 1960s, everything from 356s to 928s, to Ferraris, Lambos, Maseratis--you name it. (It helps to be wealthy). He owns about 5 race cars today, ranging from GT1 Mazdas, to E-Type Jaguars. With all of the track time he has under his belt (he was in the SCCA finals a couple of years ago for E Production) I was surprised after our little local run to hear him tell me that he was amazed at the handling of the 997S--which I was running at about 7/10s at the time. He said it out handled many of his race cars--on race tires! Why this long story? It's because tires are extremely important to extracting the performance potential of the Porsche, that we need to give great care to the selection of the tires for these cars. But there is always going to be a trade off. How much can we afford to pay for tires? For those of us who like to drive these things, we can easily spend a small fortune on tires in a given year! In the past when my Porsches were not at the peak of their capability (as today's cars are) I would evolve away from the factory recommendations. I started on Michelins, migrated to Pirelli CN36 Cinturatos, ran on Pirelli P7s until I got a little smarter (and switched to Yokohama A008s!) But with the more current cars like the 996, 997 and now 991, I am sticking closer to the factory on tire choices. My 06 997S came with Bridgestones and I have stuck to them ever since. (Why change a proven thing?) With 911 tire wear at roughly 2:1 (rears to fronts) when you decide upon a tire you are committed to them for some time. Therefore, it's important to be sure that you find a tire that works and if not, shop around. This forum is extremely useful because you can interact with others on the 996 and 997 forums and find out which tire types are best. Now back to N rated tires. I believe Porsche is the only manufacturer to develop a unique specification for tires for their cars. This says a lot about Porsche's understanding about the synergistic relationship to the design of their cars and the design of tires, today. As our cars enter the used market many buyers of these things, who would have never considered buying one new because of the cost, are faced with the ordeal of buying tires for these performance animals. It's not the same decision for those who can drop $1500-$1800 for a set of 4 tires for their relatively new Porsche--than for those who got their Porsche with many miles or years on them. We might be more inclined to ration out our tire money in a more frugal manner. After all, the price of a set of high end rubber, e.g., Michelins, Pirelli, even Bridgestone, is a good chunk of change next to the used price of our cars. Just don't sell your car short. Today's Porsches, which I include from the 996 through to the 991, are the most incredible handling Porsches that have ever come out of Bad W�rttenberg. But, you may not be doing yourself a favor if you decide to economize on your tires. You will sacrifice handling for that. Remember, in the grand scheme of things, a set of tires can breath new life into an otherwise dull car! Of course, this is simply my personal opinion. Your experience will differ. I have nearly 350,000 miles in Porsches (mostly 911s) since 1974. About 70,000 miles of that are in my current ride, an 06 S Cabriolet, which I picked up at Zuffenhausen with 7 kilometers on the gauge.

Quotes source post: 9918190

Great post. Tires are no place to save $100-200 if you are using your Porsche as intended. Buy Bridgestone, Continental, Michelin, etc. - and get the N-rated version... And then spend the money on a proper alignment from a Porsche specialist. You might be surprised at how different your car drives.

It's a really good post and a great point. I am running Michelin PS2 N3 tires right now for the summer. After a proper 4-wheel alignment, my C4S drives better than it ever has before.

Yoko advan neova's. Not N. Way stiffer sidewall and far superior on track to ps2. Amazing stick on they Yoko's. 996tt. Track suspension (fully custom), etc. JB

If I was running 130MPH+ for extended time periods on Autobahn - I might want N rated. For US street use - Y/W rated and XL load rated I think are fine. I think I could also run my sumis on track for DE - sure PSP's would lap faster - but can't beat the HTRZIIIs for bang/buck ....

Funny this comes up - I am just getting ready to replace the tires on my C4S. I need rear tires - fronts still have at least 15k miles on them. The fronts are PS2's - and I was planning on buying rear PS2's to match - but I notice I can get all 4 of the Sumitomoo HTR Z III for less then just the two rear PS2's. Thoughts on which way to go? It's my daily driver. Spirited canyon and PCH driving daily...

I am a fellow who buys old affordable yet high quality German cars and keeps cars I enjoy driving. But with 3 cars and 2 drivers the dread 8 year life limit will have me throwing away expensive N rated tires on my two Porches before I wear them out. I drive them - not daily but weekly - and not ever on the tack. And last time I checked there was no place on I-5 405 or I-90 to exceed 100 MPH. SO for me - in the Northwest, a good set of Conti DW on the 968 - and on the C4 DWS suit me just fine. I looked over the Tire-Rack test and picked Wet traction & Price & Ride qualities over Track performance. To each his own, but not every Porsche needs to be raced to be enjoyed.

Quotes source posts: 9918930, 9918930

we need to talk thats what I have on my 3.2 Jack ! I have actually run at the ridge with those in April - they were kind of "fun"

I tried a set of Sumi HTR ZIII tires on my C4S to see what they were like. They seemed fine at first, but they very quickly became loud to the point that I couldn't stand it. I replaced all four at about 14,000 miles and I won't buy them again.

I have N- spec Conti's, which i like alot but I believe are no longer available. Thats ok because the rears are new with probably 1000 miles. I should be good till spring of 2014 before i need new tires. I agree in the USA for street driving non N rated are probably fine. And if my car was a dd I would probably use non N rated tires. I have a good freind who is on his 3rd porsche and he has never replaced tires with N rated. It is a matter of choice. It also depends on how you drive. I want my car to be extream even if it is not driven that way often. Today if I needed tires I would buy N rated, either PS2 or P zero. I would buy continue to buy the conti's if they were still made. The only issue or question I have is as tire technology improves why are the newer tires not made in the size to fit older cars? i.e. there are Conti 3's that are N rated but not in the same size as the 2's were. I would assume that the 3 is a better tire than the 2, more updated testing and technology. I believe the newest tire for early 996's is the PS2. The other tires are all 10 year old technology. One indy advised me to use P zero's over the ps2 he felt the early 996 were not set up for the grip of the ps2 and they were a waste of money. I understood it to mean the tires had more grip then the suspension could utilize.

I put Falken FK-452 all round on my 1999 C2 earlier this year as I didn't feel the whole N thing to be too important to my very mundane driving. Drive to work. Visit friends. Never push very hard or go on track. But I'm not convinced the rears are stiff enough for a 911. The back of the car has always felt a bit "floaty" since fitting them. The car had N-rated Continentals when I bought it so I intend to go back to those once the Falkens are spent. One minor point about the Falkens, the 265 section rears are a good 20mm narrower than the 265 section Contis that came off. Quite odd, and gives them a slightly stretched look that I don't like. The 225s on the front are fine and sit nicely.

Quotes source post: 9915490

You know, I've heard this many times and I have to say it just doesn't make sense to me. I've never heard of tire manufacturers making special tires for front wheel drive cars because of the front weight bias. And if tire manufacturers made different tires to account for where the majority of the weight is on a car, how would they know if the "correct" tire is installed in the right place, most cars don't have different sized tires. Please don't take my reply wrong, I'm not saying that the statement is wrong, I just don't get it. In fact I didn't see anything in the Tire Rack overview that said anything about weight bias either. Mick

Most cars aren't made to serve as a daily driver during the week and then see track duty on the weekend. Just another point of view...

Quotes source post: 9919134

I'm on my second set and I haven't noticed even after nearly cording them at the track. To be fair my hearing is kinda shot so maybe that is why

Quotes source post: 9919403

Right there with you, Mick. These cars have curb weights in the 2900-3100 range--hardly the kind of poundage that should have one scurrying for extra heavy duty tires. I'm sure the N-spec tires are technically better in some ways, just like all the Porsche spec stuff the factory recommends, but I doubt it's anything I need to start losing sleep over, especially when one takes the price into consideration.

I am an N spec believer but understand price being a concern or perhaps an obstacle. When I picked up my first one the service manager spent a lot of time going over the car with me. He didn't start with the interior and how to use the controls. He started with the tires and stated that the car is engineered from the tires up and act as a part of the suspension (that's what he said, I don't know that for sure). Explained not only N spec but the N series as well, he was adament that matching series was as important as N spec tires. That was fine, it had a brand new set of Conti's so I wasn't thinking replacement cost. He did tell me to expect anywhere from 8k to 12k miles on the rears, depending on tire pressure, alignment, and most of all, driving style. Sounded sort of ridiculous to me, but I just wanted to leave and drive. When it was time for new rears I asked the same service manager, then a service writer, then a tech, about which non N spec they would recommend as the price was extreme and with so little service life I was looking for something else. Service Manager would not discuss it. Service writer gave me a "ah well, lot's of guys ask this and some guys go for the cheaper tires, but I honestly can not recommend it". The tech gave me the answer I bought - sure you can buy cheaper, but then you should never have bought this car. And yes some guys do run non N spec and they are still around. But, after servicing your car I know that you do drive it the way it was engineered to be driven. He said when I pulled into the service area he could smell a properly driven Porsche. I laughed, so my car smells? Yes, of heat, brakes, even the smell of the engine. So - you drive this car probably from mild to wild and on edge at times? Well yeah, of course. So when you are wound up and hitting a buck forty where do you want your money to be? The tech convinced me. Enough said - I buy N spec whenever I can. But then again I do crazy and illogical stuff all the time. I still buy OEM tires for all of my cars.