Anyone running these tires? How do u guys like em? Any feedbacks would be great...

 

I have a set in 275/35R18 F ~ 275/40R18 R for the past 3500 miles and like mine so far, they have done better than stock in every respect. Grip (wet and dry), noise and ride.

Chris

 

im choosing from these these two tires: KUMHO ECSTA SPT or Sumitomo HTRZ II, which tire would u guys go with?

KUMHO ECSTA SPT


Sumitomo HTRZ II


by the way, its going on a 255/35/20 front wheel...

 

I had that choice and went with the SPTs, but wet weather is a priority to me here in NorCal. I do love them in the rain over stock setup.

This might help some
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/survey...ll&sortValue=0

In the end, both tires seem fairly close in performance and at least they are both on the higher side of the survey, unlike the stock re040 (see #45)

Chris

 

If you're considering Kumho's, go with the MX. It cost a little more, but is an overall better tire.

 

Ummmmmmmm, NO. I have these tires on my CL-S and absolutely hate them. Hard as a rock, hydroplane, long time to break in (felt like I was on ice forever before they seemed to start to grip), flat spot almost overnight giving you a rough ride the next day. NOISY! I would never, ever recommend this tire to NE1.

 

That's funny, I absolutely love mine. I have not hydroplaned once & have driven in a down pour several times. They grip very well & are very predictable at the limit.

 

Dead last out of 11 tires tested: http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ead-page3.html

 

We have these on our Altima and they are great. Nothing to complain and have very high reviews on tire rack.

 

Please, you're going to believe what car & driver says. Word to the wise, never put a whole lot of stock in what a car mag says.

I've owned PS2's, KDW's & SO3's. These tires perform very close to those for almost 1/2 the price.

 

Why not listen to what a reputable car magazine says? Sure they have sponsors but a magazine like Car and Driver does not run for decades doing reviews that simply echo what their advertisers say. Especially since they are testing the same size tire on the same car back to back, something few of us would ever get the opportunity to do.

On the other hand, how much weight should we give to one particular person (myself included) that has experience with a limited amount of tires, run at different levels of wear on different cars at different times of the year?

It's not all about price anyway, check out the Tire Rack testing of these tires, the MX gets a 7 and the SPT gets a 6.92, even then, you need to look at what you want the tires to do. They both do different things and depending on what you use your car for, it could make a big difference.

MX test
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...ova_ad07_c.jsp

SPT test
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...laim_uhp_c.jsp

Chris

 

For the price--the Kumhos are unbeatable but you have to lower your standards as a result :2cents: I've owned too many different types of tires to recount but these tires were far and away, the single biggest letdown performers of them all. That's all I was saying in a much shorter way.

 

I guess we'll agree to disagree.

 

did use SPT or MX, but I used Kumho ASX, which is opposite end of SPT (SPT is summer tires, ASX is all season). Not so good on the dry, but wet performance is pretty good, but what really got me into buying this tire is the tread wear rating. 420.

 

I have used the SPT's before but on my SRT4.They tend to have quite a bit of tread squirm on hard cornering for awhile.I would say the SPT's start getting more responsive after running about 3-4/32 off them,but thats pretty much true on all tires.These just are loose feeling untill they settle in under load then stick pretty damn good.I would recommend getting these if you want good performance for very little $$.I'm also using the MX's on my 350z right now and I'm extremely happy with them but thats just me I have never worked for a car magazine before.It really is a shame when they do these test they get to factor in all the variables wet/dry handling,price,treadwear,road noise, etc.But its not pratical in these type of tire test to see how long they actually lasted and how they performed after 5000-10000 miles are on them.In the real world we have to live with a tire for quite a while.So how do they know that tires that handle better in their test are not just great out of the gate and vise versa.Some people get all siked about buying the pricey kick *** performance tires that wear out in 12,000 miles.Great tires non the less but I perfer to settle for a very good performance tire that will get me some more miles on my normal daily commutes.Also the numbers are usually very close but out of 10 tires someone is going to be on the bottom and people just automaticlly think those tires suck,but thats really not true.

 

this is the tire I was thinking of getting (very soon b/c my wear bars are clearly visible on the ****enzas). how many miles did you get out of these? Im not concerned with crazy performance (I never go to the track and rarely do any kind of street racing). this is my daily driver, and I mainly want something that will last and isnt completely ugly and is pretty safe in the rain.

 

THANK YOU!!!