Zian

Hello folks,
I would like to hear some opinions. I know the RE-11s are a favorite around here, but let me throw some interesting numbers at you. The Conti's are about $400 dollars cheaper, about 8 pounds lighter a tire (seriously), have a 340 treadwear vs 180 for the bridgestones, are Y rated (as opposed to W) and get an AA traction rating as opposed to A for the Bridgestones.

USAGE: Daily driven car, Occasional weekend track days, lucky if I get 4 in a year.

My question is, for my usage, which tire makes more sense? Anyone have experience with the Conti's on the track? Are they waaay less grippy? Tough to justify paying more for a tire that apparently will last about half as long.

Thanks.

POWUH

iTrader: (18)

I believe spike has a thread review on those continentals , and if you scroll down on the first page there's a review on the re-11's

03threefiftyz

iTrader: (25)

If track days are involved........RE-11 by a huge margin of the two.

Zian

Spike's thread has some useful links, but to be clear he is talking about the Conti DWS, not the DW. The DWS is actually a different compound, useable in snow.

03threefiftyz--thanks. Would the conti's be a large step down from the stock bridgestones? I've had plenty of fun at the track on those, so as long as performance is comparable I would be fine.

03threefiftyz

iTrader: (25)

I'd say the RE050 and the Conti's are pretty close, but the RE-11 is in a different league. There are very good and somewhat cheaper extreme summer tires to the RE-11's though.....the kumho XS (not good in the wet), hankook RS3's, and Dunlop star specs are less expensive and all quite good.

Zian

thanks much