Tire Decision

99 996 C2 with Pilot Sport PS2 all around. Front tires have 8mm tread depth left, rears have ~2 mm depth left. Deciding between two choices: 1. Buy new Michelins for the rear $938.21 shipped plus $88 install. 2. Buy four new Sumitomo HTR Z III for $611.58 shipped (less a $50 mail in rebate) and $168 install. Obviously the second option is cheaper and if all four needed to be replaced I would almost certainly choose option 2 as replacing all four would be in the $1500 + $168 install range. But the cost difference of the two options above is about $300. Part of my hesitations with option 2 is that I am basically wasting two perfectly good PS2s that are on the front now. I am headed to a track day in late June at Summit Point but otherwise the car is something I drive to the golf course and for fun. I'll probably have additional track days in the future as I suspect I will enjoy that experience. Thoughts? Impassioned pleas? Wildly off topic criticisms of unrelated issues like oil change intervals?

Summitomo's and sell the front Michelins. I've used both and for the price the performance of them is awesome. Near the same as Michelins. Only real draw back is they flat spot a bit after sitting.

Check the date code on the fronts. If they are more then 6yrs old, or will be before you use them up buy the Sumitomos. They will be fine for your first track event. If you get bitten by the track bug you will wear them out in no time and you can choose a more aggressive tire. As you progress you will end buying track brake pads and tires and rims, and a trailer, and a tow vehicle, and a GT3 and....

Hadn't thought about the age. Here is what I think is the date code from the front. The rears have "2907" where these have 3307 in the picture below. So that would mean they are a month or so from being 6 years old, right? Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I can only say that the Sumi IIIs I have on my C2 are fine on the street. I haven't tracked them so I can't tell you how they perform there. Others will pipe in. You may want to search Sumis vs. Michelins as there are many threads you can review.

I just picked up a set of sumitumo's for my 996.

Nice. How's your set up working out, all the bugs ironed out?

The Sumitomos aren't absolutely horrid on the track, but then again, they're not meant to be a track tire. FWIW, I did a 1:51 at Laguna Seca on the Sumitomos. They just get crazy slick after the 5-6th lap. They're progressive though. I will also say that they lose a lot of grip as they're getting close to being worn out completely. Perfectly fine tire for the street.

Quotes source post: 10482926

Thats good to know. I think so. Cleaning up some wiring tonight.

Quotes source post: 10483364

Think a novice first time DE participant will notice that? I'm betting the tires won't even get to temp the first morning/day.

I've never had Sumis on the track, but I hated them on the street. I'll never buy them again. I just thought I'd throw in one more opinion for consideration!

Quotes source post: 10481695

Don't mix and match brands. If you've got new PS2s in front then just buy new ones for the back OR buy 4 Sumis and sell the front PS2s on eBay. I'm thinking I'd just buy new PS2 rears but I'd also talk to the tire shop to confirm my line of thought and perception of the existing PS2s. I've got Sumis on my car and love them so far but they aren't PS2s. Next time around you can try out a set of Sumis. -Eric

I have Sumis, they are fine on the street and they were fine for my first DE. I did not see any issues on the track. Do not have the issue with flat spotting either.

Sell the fronts on Craiglist, you will get reasonable money from the local "Tuners" or Auto-X folks.

I'm going through a similar issue now. I had a damaged rear tire that needed replacing, Pilot Sport A/S Plus so I replaced them with Toyo Proxis 4 A/S but kept the PS+ on the front. They are showing their age but still have plenty of tread left on them making the decision to replace them difficult. However, not sure that they would pass the next tech inspection with some slight cracking at the tread. So, do I just replace the fronts with the Proxis 4 and suffer for the one or two more DE's I'll do this year or justify spending $1100 putting on Michelin Super Sports all around then switch back to the A/S tires before winter hits. I will say that these Proxis 4's are a much better tire on the back than the PS A/S Plus's were so I would expect an improvement in the front as well if I go that route plus it will make me feel like a champ as I max out the tires in the turns.

Hankook Ventus EVO V12 used here. Nice tire overall, but I don't track car. I have noticed any tire I put on this car is great at first but by 10k miles, road noise and uneven wear becomes an issue. I think its the amount of camber in the back that causes this but not sure.

I was in the same situation. I went with 4 new Michelin Super Sports. I track my car so I never looked back on the decision.

Quotes source post: 10484470

I have the same tire and i agree. To the OP: Yes, those PS2s you have were made on in the 29th & 33rd week of 2007. The fronts with lots of tread left aren't worth much and they are heading towards the end of their useful life as a safe tire. I would definately replace all 4 but you do have other reasonably priced options other than the sumis. I think the sumis are the cheapest you can go before you get into Chinese tire territory and that is a big no no.

Quotes source post: 10481784

Right

Thanks everyone. I've upgraded to member as a way of saying thanks for the existence of this site. I am going to pull the trigger on the Sumis, I know there are other options but the consensus I have seen from reading threads here and other places is that you can get the Pilot Sports which everyone says are great or [any other brand] that some people say are great and some people say are the worst thing ever. If they are terrible I'm only out $600. Would it be irresponsible to sell the fronts on craigslist or ebay?

If the tire was not constantly exposed to the elements, thats simply not true when your talking about a quality tire such as a Michelin. Chinese crap, yes. Michelin, not hardly.

Interesting Article Regarding Tires on Edmunds

Which pretty much sums up what I posted.

Quotes source post: 10484911

I think your plan makes sense. I actually did the same thing when I originally tried the Sumis, also figuring that I'd only be out $600 - $700 if I didn't like them. I didn't like them, but now I know that. I hope you have a better experience.

Quotes source post: 10485145

Thanks. What was it about them that you didn't like, if you are able to put it into words? Loud? Lack of grip (If so, actual experience of losing control/sliding or that you just didn't feel confident in them)? Something else?

Obviously everybody has a different opinion based on their experience. It's a very subjective thing. Here's what I liked about the Sumis: - They were inexpensive - They performed reasonably well for every day driving. I thought they were fine on dry pavement and I thought they were fine in the rain. I wouldn't say they were dramatically worse than other tires I've tried, but they certainly weren't any better. I've heard many people state that they think Sumis perform better than Michelins in the rain. I didn't find this to be true. Here's what I didn't like: - The Sumis I used were 295 width, just like other tires that I have purchased. That being said, they weren't as wide as other brands. They looked "stretched" on the wheel and there wasn't as much rubber overhanging the edge of the wheel. - I found the Sumis to be quiet for the first 5,000 - 7,000 miles. After that, they began to howl. They were very loud towards the end of their effective life. - I found the ride quality on the Sumis to be inferior to Michelins. They felt like a harder tire, and that translated to more vibration and harshness in the cabin. Again - I don't blame anybody for trying them. I'm glad I did, and now I know that I won't buy them again. I never lost control of the car or felt that the tires weren't safe. I simply didn't enjoy my experience with them. I don't have a bias against cheaper tires. My experience with the Pirelli P-Zero N-spec tires for my car was very similar to my experience with the Sumis, and I won't buy Pirellis again either. Hopefully your experience will be better!

I think you will like the Sumi's, i've had mine for 12 months ~ 4k miles & 2 DT's, they are not the best tires, but it your new to DT/DE's they wont be your limiting factor. For the price they are a great deal

Please give me a call if I can help!

Quotes source post: 10485832

I did! A couple weeks ago. You were very helpful. Don't worry, I clicked your link in another thread to order them! If you didn't get credit for it let me know if there is something else I can do to make sure you do.

I ran Sumi IIIs on my 968 and like them. However, they did get noisy long before they wore out. I'm currently running new Conti DWs - and I liked them. But then I drove a friend's almost identical 996 with Michelins. There was a noticeable difference. The rear of the car was more controllable in hard cornering, surefooted in a way my car is not. (of course there are other factors that could influence handling, but both cars are well-cared for). I think the bottom line is simple: you get what you pay for. Next time I'm getting Super Sports.

Got her back today with the Sumis on. Much quieter than the almost bare Michelins. Stay tuned for opinion on performance although it isn't really a fair comparison as I will be comparing used tires against new tires.

Does a 285/30-18 Sumitomo HTRZ3 look correct on a 10" wide factory rear wheel or does it look stretched? Right now I have PZero's and they REALLY overhang the rim to the point where I could probably hit a curb and not damage the wheel. (And I like that look). How is the Sumi in this regard?

Quotes source post: 10501921

I have champion motorsports wheels that are 11" and my sumis are 295/30-18. The pilot sports looked wider but I am not sure if the absence of any discernible tread made them look that way or if they were actually wider.

Quotes source post: 10484935

Just curious as to what Chinese Crap you re referring to?

Quotes source post: 10501921

Not sure about the 285s on a 10" wheel, but the 295s on an 11" wheel were really stretched...

Quotes source posts: 10484935, 10502482

The same thought process that still has him believing Peanut Corporation of America, Enron and Worldcom are stand up companies.

Quotes source post: 10501921

I had the 285/30 on my 18's and they looked great.

Just put on the new dirreza zII's yesterday. Have to say they're quite a bit sticker than my old bald ps2's. The ps2's had a greasy feeling towards the end of it's life. It seems that the road noise is about the same, but the car definitely feels more planted.

I'm hoping to take my winter tires off and put my summers on in the next week! My Blizzaks are just finishing their 4th season and they are shot. We've had a little snow in the last week but we should be done with it now.

I ordered the Michelin tires today, as for the my Sumitomos the ride was not as good. More practically speaking, the Sumi's had a label inside and outside. There was no way to "rotate" the rears like I could with the Michelins. With the camber inner wear, I could switch left and right rear tires onto opposite side, but obviously had to remount on the other wheel. Michelins with "rotation" got better mileage.

Quotes source post: 10503489

Every time I read about winter tires I'm all....wut? Sounds like period panties for your car. You should move back to Texas!

Quotes source post: 10635092

Interesting. Rotate the rears with the Michelins? I have considered that myself but thought it was dangerous since I had heard anecdotally that the outside sidewall was stiffer than the inside. But I haven't found any conclusive evidence on that. When you rotated them did you notice any difference in handling?

Quotes source post: 10635100

Don't knock it until you've tried it! A 911 is great fun in the snow with the right tires! A 911 in the snow with summer tires is terrifying... I do miss Texas sometimes... although it's nice to live in a house without air conditioning (and without a need for it...).

Not sure why people will stand in line to buy Chinese products from Apple but are convinced the Chinese can't make a decent tire. There is no reason to believe a quality brand tire made in Germany or Korea is going to be any better than the same tire manufactured in a Chinese factory. As long as the parent company has a decent QA process, the results are going to be replicable regardless of where the factory happens to be. I personally do not like China's scorched-earth environmental policies, and I don't like the way that workers are treated, but philosophical concerns are tangential to whether or not a Chinese factory can correctly manufacture a tire.

Quotes source post: 10635100

I wish I could unread the term "period panties."

I recently went with Dunlop Dierezza II's on all four concorners. Moving from Toyo Proxies. The Dlaps are quite sticky. I had them on for a track weekend and man what a difference in the level of grip. When they would loose grip it was nice, even and controllable. The street performance has also been good. At first they seemed a bit noisey. but after getting a few hundred miles on them, they have quiteted down. I would highly reccommend them.

Delete

Quotes source post: 10637038

I did not notice any difference. It was interesting, when I had the tire rotated, they actually put the same tires back on in the same location. I had to get down on the ground with the manager to point out the tread wear difference on the inside. Fortunately, they did it correctly the next time and moved the left rear to left right side, keeping the rotation arrow in the proper direction. One of the reason I posted here was to see if there is an inside and outside difference to the Michelin that I missed the first time.

Quotes source post: 10485103

Looks like the Europeans don't agree with the US manufacturers. http://www.safetyresearch.net/safety-issues/tires/ Two independent studies in Germany, using different data sets, concluded that tires failed at a greater rate after six years and recommended manufacturers alert consumers in an effort to prevent potential crashes. In 1989, ADAC, Germany�s consumer advocacy counterpart to Consumers Union and AAA in the U.S., tested 23 unused spare tires ranging in age from five to 12 years old, in a high-speed bench test to determine the level of safety reserves over time. Although the test sample was small, the organization concluded: �Even tires that are just six years old � though they appear to be brand new � can present a safety risk. Tire experts even say that if they are not used, indeed, tires age more quickly.� Overseas, the rubber industry�s acknowledgement of material degradation aging eventually evolved into the concept of an expiration date for tires. European and Japanese vehicle manufacturers including BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, Toyota, and later Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, and GM Europe, among others, included warnings to consumers in their owner�s manuals that tires older than six years should only be used in an emergency and replaced as soon as possible. replaced as soon as possible. Many of these warnings, which were added beginning in 1990, were also included in U.S. owner�s manuals. For example, GM�s European divisions Opel and Vauxhall added warnings to their owner�s manuals as early as 1991: �Tyres age even if they are used only very little or not at all. A spare wheel which has not been used for six years should be used only in emergencies; drive slowly when using such tyres.� Other warnings, such as those in Volkswagen�s 1992 owner�s manuals were more pointed: �WARNING � Tires age even if they are not being used. Tires which are older than 6 years old should only be used in an emergency and then with caution.� In the U.S. it took the Ford Explorer/Firestone Wilderness ATX scandal to push tire aging to the front burner. In the 1990s, America�s most popular and best-selling SUV, the Ford Explorer, equipped with their original equipment Firestone tires, was prone to fatal rollovers after tread separations at highway speeds. The Firestone Radial ATX and Wilderness radial tires met all of the federal regulations at the time. Those standards, however, were written when bias-plies were the norm. There were no federal standards for occupant protection in rollovers and there was no minimum stability standard for Sport Utility Vehicles. Industry fought off any regulations, even as the rollover death tolls in light trucks rose to epidemic levels. Then a series of gruesome high-profile crashes and news stories about the safety of Ford Explorers and Firestone tires triggered Congressional hearings. The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act in 2000 compelled NHTSA to re-write the tire standard and to examine tire aging. While the agency embarked on a tire-aging research and rulemaking, rubber manufacturers overseas were again translating their knowledge of tire aging into policy. In June 2001, the British Rubber Manufacturers Association (BRMA), which represents the same tire manufacturers in the U.S. market, issued a recommended tire aging practice: �BRMA members strongly recommend that unused tyres should not be put into service if they are over 6 years old and that all tyres should be replaced 10 years from the date of their manufacture.� The recommendation noted that environmental conditions like exposure to sunlight and coastal climates, as well as poor storage and infrequent could accelerate the aging process. Aging, the BRMA said could be identified by small cracks in the tire sidewall, however, ��aging� may not exhibit any external indications and, since there is no non-destructive test to assess the serviceability of a tyre, even an inspection carried out by a tyre expert may not reveal the extent of any deterioration.� And yet, there was no such recommendation emanating from the Rubber Manufacturers Association in the U.S. Instead, the RMA was fighting NHTSA�s attempts to regulate tire age. In 2002, NHTSA proposed a tire aging test, only to be met with overwhelming industry opposition. The agency withheld further rulemaking and began additional research. The Ford Motor Company, however, conducted its own research into the material science behind tire aging. Led by former 3M materials scientist Dr. John Baldwin, the Ford team conducted a methodical evaluation of thermo-oxidative aging and its effects on radial tires, and developed more precise tire age test methods. Ford�s conclusions, published in peer-reviewed journals, were based on a series of detailed analyses of field-aged tires. Baldwin�s team devised artificial aging techniques to replicate field aging, and tested tires to failure to determine the effects of age. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) also tested and analyzed field-aged tires and reached similar conclusions in 2006. The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) working group on tire age, which consists of tire, rubber, and vehicle manufacturer�s representatives, also replicated these findings. The most significant data that links tire age to failures was cited in the August 2007, NHTSA�s Research Report to Congress on Tire Aging. In 2005, a provision in the Safe Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act required the agency to report to Congress by August 2007 on tire aging, including potential regulatory testing to evaluate the risk of failure after a tire has been aged. The agency reviewed insurance company tire claims reported from 2002 through 2006 and found 77 percent of the tire claims came from five hot-climate states (including California) and 84 percent of these claims were for tires more than six years old. This is the strongest published evidence to date of the link between tire age and tire failures. And yet, this strong, contemporary research � following in the footsteps left by rubber material scientists more than three-quarters of a century before � have yet to translate into federal regulations, an industry consensus on policy and best practices or consumer or tire technician education. What the U.S. has seen is the slow spread of warnings in owner�s manuals and internal recommendations. In early 2005, Ford concluded that it needed to issue a 6-year replacement �recommendation� for tires, regardless of tread. The warning was placed on their website and appears in all of their 2006 owner�s manuals. DaimlerChrysler also added the 6-year warning. In October 2005 Bridgestone/Firestone broke ranks with other tire makers and issued a �Technical Bulletin� to its dealers advising them that tires should be inspected after 5 years and replaced after 10 years � �even when tires appear to be usable from their external appearance or the tread depth may not have reached the minimum wear out.� Michelin and Continental issued similar bulletins in February 2006. Hankook joined the chorus in 2009. Most � including Bridgestone/Firestone � were actually recommending a 6-year shelf life for tires, because the tiremakers� tire age warnings defaulted to the individual vehicle manufacturers� recommendations. Automakers had, by and large, opted for a six-year tire age recommendation....

Quotes source post: 10640057

Thanks for the info. My Pilot Super Sports are getting a little worn on the inside. I'd like to balance that out with a few track days, but I might just try rotating the tires first :-)

Just got the Pilot Sports today. They have inside outside but no rotation arrows. I must have had a different Michelin type in the past. Please disregard my prior post discussing rotation.

you should just run less negative camber

Quotes source post: 10642953

What kind of change in handling would you expect with the camber change.

check out the new bfg rival tread wear of 200 a bit sticker than PS2's should get same mileage on them. I went with toyo r888 in the rear awesome grip 100 on the tread wear BFG Rival's not available at that time. But will use them when it's time to replace them

Quotes source post: 10642953

Always a big misconception. Toe wears out tires faster than camber. They sell adjustable toe links for our cars.

Quotes source post: 10640103

So you're saying I should replace my tires that are date stamped "458". But they only have 8,000 miles on them.

Yes 458 could be 45th week of 1968-1978-1988-1998 Wasn't it 2000 when they went to 4 digit #s? like 4508 = 45th week of 2008