Falken ZE912 or Kumho KU31

Leeum · 28 Aug 2010 at 14:46

I posted up an identical thread a few months back. I ended up going for the Falken ZE912s and have been very impressed with them for the money.

Coming from Pilot Exalto 2's, the grip in the dry isn't a million miles away from them. The ride is a bit better with the Falkens, which I'm assuming is due to the softer sidewalls.

I haven't pushed them much in the wet, but I'd say the PE2's excell in this category. I'm not expecting them to last anywhere near as long as the Michelins, but the Falkens are only 1/3 of the price.

Would most likely buy the Falkens again.

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 14:55

Leeum said:
for the money

And thats the thing really. Why compromise? They might be good 'for the money' but if you wanted something that was good 'for the money' then you'd have purchased a Focus Zetec.

Lopéz · 28 Aug 2010 at 14:58

[TW]Fox;17257944 said:
And thats the thing really. Why compromise? They might be good 'for the money' but if you wanted something that was good 'for the money' then you'd have purchased a Focus Zetec.

Almost every purchase choice you will ever make is going to be a compromise of some sort. Be sensible

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 14:59

You see my point though, technically a Linglong is great for the money, I bet no other tyre offers the same grip per £ ratio eh

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 14:59

[TW]Fox;17257778 said:
It's the 452's that are the half decent Falkens.

Only half decent? best left alone then really eh?

But seriously, the 452's are what I would call a sharper tyre than the 912, and almost certainly favour a more aggresive driver, the 912 is more a comfort tyre and suited to legal levels of speed and a really good all weather tyre.

Both are an excellent value for money mid-range tyre, it really depends what you want from your tyre.

JamesRJ · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:00

You also had the option of proper tyres as well - Michelin Pilot Sport 3, Continental ContiSport Contact 3/5, Bridgestone Potenza RE050, Goodyear Eagle F1 Assymetric and Falken 452 yet you seemed not to take these options even though they are all better tyres.

Unfortunately for just over £200 for two fitted I didn't

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:01

Well if you try and budget under 100 quid fitted for rear tyres on an E46 when the decent brands cost £150-£170 each its hardly suprising you don't get offered decent tyres!

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:10

[TW]Fox;17257944 said:
And thats the thing really. Why compromise? They might be good 'for the money' but if you wanted something that was good 'for the money' then you'd have purchased a Focus Zetec.

Why are you saying a BMW isn't good for the money?

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:11

Dr Who said:
Why are you saying a BMW isn't good for the money?

BMW's are rubbish value for money. They are many things but value for money isn't one of them.

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:11

JamesRJ said:
Just got back, went for the Falkens in the end. Will soon see how they are in the wet with the normal August weather

My guess is you will be a lot happier with them than Fox is with your choice xD

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:12

[TW]Fox;17258039 said:
BMW's are rubbish value for money. They are many things but value for money isn't one of them.

So buying a BMW is then wasting money?

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:15

Dr Who said:
So buying a BMW is then wasting money?

Well that entirely depends on the reason for your purchase. If you just want something thats decent for the money and does a job, then yes, buying a BMW could well be argued to be a waste of money.

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:17

[TW]Fox;17258069 said:
Well that entirely depends on the reason for your purchase. If you just want something thats decent for the money and does a job, then yes, buying a BMW could well be argued to be a waste of money.

So then the same could be argued for premium tyres when you don't require the extra performance of a premium brand?

Double Standards much?

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:19

Dr Who said:
So then the same could be argued for premium tyres when you don't require the extra performance of a premium brand?

Double Standards much?

But of course the problem is that you never know when you might need the performance of a premium brand. It might not be when you are out for a hoon, it might be one day coming home in the wet at the speed limit when you round a bend to find somebody has had an accident right in front, or something... Plus whats the point in paying the premium involved with owning a car with 255/35/18 inch tyres if you don't really give a stuff about the performance advantage this offers and are happy to compromise this to save a few quid on tyres :confused:

DM · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:20

Dr Who said:
So then the same could be argued for premium tyres when you don't require the extra performance of a premium brand?

Double Standards much?

No there is a difference, one affects the car you drive, the other affects how quick you stop in the wet.

I could suffer a **** car but id rather not have **** tyres.

But that aside, just buy the best tyres you can afford, thats all you can ever say to someone about tyres isnt it, look for special offers.

Wicksta · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:26

Dr Who said:
So then the same could be argued for premium tyres when you don't require the extra performance of a premium brand?

Double Standards much?

This must be one of the worst ever arguments I've ever read on here.

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:27

[TW]Fox;17258090 said:
But of course the problem is that you never know when you might need the performance of a premium brand. Plus whats the point in paying the premium involved with owning a car with 255/35/18 inch tyres if you don't really give a stuff about the performance advantage this offers

Yes you must be confused, maybe because they chose that size wheel for looks and that size tyre ensures the speedo is accurate?

Why buy a 140mph car when you are only gonna drive at 70mph?

What is the performance improvement of the premium brand if any?

Is a more responsive tyre for example more or less tiring to drive on a long motorway journey? what impact does that have on driver fatigue? Does that make it less safe?

Now, tell me, what is the performance advantage of 18 inch wheels over 17inch wheels at safe legal speeds?

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:28

DiamondMark said:
No there is a difference, one affects the car you drive, the other affects how quick you stop in the wet.

I could suffer a **** car but id rather not have **** tyres.

But that aside, just buy the best tyres you can afford, thats all you can ever say to someone about tyres isnt it, look for special offers.

Nobody said **** tyres other than Fox, reel your neck in

Dr Who · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:29

Wicksta said:
This must be one of the worst ever arguments I've ever read on here.

Oh do quantify? don't leave it at that?

[TW]Fox · 28 Aug 2010 at 15:30

Dr Who said:
Now, tell me, what is the performance advantage of 18 inch wheels over 17inch wheels at safe legal speeds?

I'm more referring to the width of the tyre - and the 17's on the E46 are only 10mm narrower so have similar benefits.

My point being why buy a car with plenty of compromises made in the name of performance only to then fit cheap tyres to it etc? Why not just buy a car in the first place without these compromises having been made if they are not important to you? You'll save a load of money for a start. If you get the model without the big wheels you can spend your £100 a corner tyre budget and end up with decent premium rubber, not trying to sort the wheat from the chaff at the budget end of the market.

I ignored the rest of what you posted as it was amusing. Perhaps you ought take a drive in a car with a top speed of 90mph and then pop back and explain why you might chose one with a higher top speed if you wanted to do 70mph.