2010 Evo Tyre Test - now with added KU31.

[Kenai]

Because they cost twice as much money but don't provide anywhere near twice as much performance. Everyone has a value point they are happy with. The Kumhos are a long long way from a dangerous tyre. In fact, they get closer than I would first have expected a tyre half the price of a premium to get.

Evidently some people expected an £86 tyre to be equal to a £175 tyre and now that it isn't seem hellbent on portraying it as a horrendous dangerous tyre, when the reality of things are - it's actually not that bad.

 

[Jamous]

I think that people who buy Kumhos (me included in the past), wouldn't go to the lengths of removing a new set of Kumho's to spend more money on a better set, so they settle for what they have.

 

[Morba]

If you would prefer the best ones why not.... buy them?

This isn't about buying them, it's about your (and some others) opinion that these are crap tyres, on the verge of killing every last man woman and child on the road.

 

[Type_R]

Well this clears up the CSC5 thread then!

However, I'm not entirely impressed by the review. Don't agree with the noise suppression of the Eagle F1s, they are the noisiest tyre on the GTi by far (compared to CSC3s & PS2s). Also don't agree with the review of the PS2s, don't rate them at all and indeed even in the tests there is a lot of discrepancy between the 'objective' and 'subjective' results!

I subscribe to EVO and have done for a long time, however testing Contis own tyre on their own test track (which I know they have always done in the past) is a little bit hypocritical at best. If this was a Medical paper with a 'conflict of interest' box that had continental listed (or worse), not, it would be binned straight away. At the end of the day no-one knows how to win a test if they can't win it in their own back yard!

 

[TomO]

I agree with the ever decreasing returns argument, but equally if you apply the ' well they are 90% as good for 50% of the money' argument then I am pretty sure the cheapest tyres would win out.

Full run tyres are available for £55 each from camskill, two thirds the price of the Kumho's in 235/35 19. I am sure they will be less than a third slower round a track etc. than the Kumho's!

It's down to everyones own personal opinion of what is worth the trade off in cost /performance, but Fox's original point was that this test was to show people who were genuinely saying that the Kumho is as good as these other premium tyres.

 

[MikeHiow]

Missed this until now, but a few things disappoint me here.

I would like to see the Hankook RS2 tested, and the CS5 is only available in silly big sizes.

Also, hasn't the KU31 been replaced by the KU36? Seems a bit unfair comparing new tyres vs. Kuhmo's old tyre (that also featured in the 2007 test!).

 

[Kenai]

I agree with the ever decreasing returns argument, but equally if you apply the ' well they are 90% as good for 50% of the money' argument then I am pretty sure the cheapest tyres would win out.

Full run tyres are available for £55 each from camskill, two thirds the price of the Kumho's in 235/35 19. I am sure they will be less than a third slower round a track etc. than the Kumho's!

It's down to everyones own personal opinion of what is worth the trade off in cost /performance, but Fox's original point was that this test was to show people who were genuinely saying that the Kumho is as good as these other premium tyres.

That'd be why I said everyone has their own preferred value point. Some people can happily spend £700 on a set of tyres, for other people that's just not going to happen but a £350 set of KU31s is hardly slapping on plastic tyres and being unable to afford to run your car.

As for the OP, I agreed with the point anyone who genuinely thought a KU31 was equal to a premium tyre was dreaming but apart from Janesy's assertion that 'everyone' thought this, i'm not sure who actually ever claimed such a thing.

Also, hasn't the KU31 been replaced by the KU36?

I think the KU36 is a more track day oriented tyre, rather than a replacement KU31 road tyre. Seems to even be described as a 'semi slick' by some places, though I think that's taking it a bit far

 

[Berger]

What about all the rep mobiles on the road, they will be fitted with a more economical tyre suited to longer milage and lower wear rates....

Why don't you suggest to your employer that they swap all the fleets tyres for Eagle F1s as it may save them money through possible insurance claims against them due to accidents caused that could have been avoided through better tyres....

 

[[TW]Fox]

I agree with the ever decreasing returns argument, but equally if you apply the ' well they are 90% as good for 50% of the money' argument then I am pretty sure the cheapest tyres would win out.

Full run tyres are available for £55 each from camskill, two thirds the price of the Kumho's in 235/35 19. I am sure they will be less than a third slower round a track etc. than the Kumho's!

It's down to everyones own personal opinion of what is worth the trade off in cost /performance, but Fox's original point was that this test was to show people who were genuinely saying that the Kumho is as good as these other premium tyres.

This person gets it. I'm glad some people do

The KU31 was held up by many as some sort of champion of the tyre world, offering big brand performance for cheap.

 

[Gibbo]

Hi there

Are some of you missing the whole point? Yes its quite important that the best tyre is 9s a lap faster than the worse but highly regarded internet chat tyre on a wet lap.

Why is it important, well come on what is EVO Magazine? Its a magazine that car enthusiest read, the kind of people who lets face it do push their cars, whether it be on road or track they do push them and what this review prooves is that certain tyres will not only be a lot more sure footed in the wet but also a lot more predictable and provide more feedback resulting in improved driver confidence.

Now having gone through god knows how many tyres and yes I do drive my car everyday and even push its limits, I did not buy an EVO to just sit at a steady pace everywhere and therefor I want my car to perform the best but also at the same time give me plenty of feedback and progressivness.

Thats why for Summer months I've been running Yokohama AD08's and they are absolutely sublime in dry/damp warm conditions, no tyre comes even remotely close, for example the tyres on the car previous with Vredstein Ultrac Sessanta which is no bad tyre but I can tell you now the AD08 I can push an extra 5-8mph in some corners, not only that they give incredible feedback, fantastic steering response and are very progressive which all in all makes the car so much better to drive and enjoy.

The chap with the R26.R on this forum has the same tyres, I believe he too is equally impressed.

However they are pants in cold/wet conditions, very progressive and predictable but severley lacking in grip in sharper corners.

So because performance and driver feedback is important to me if I change my tyres for some more orientated all season tyres for colder weather than the ContiSport 5's or F1's look an ideal choice for me as I will get great wet grip, great feedback which means I can still push on in the wet and enjoy the car.

On a car like mine the difference between a set of Contisport 5's and Kumho's would be night and day Im sorry.

As EVO is a magazine which is read surprisingly by many car enthusiest than such things as wet timed laps is important as that will transpire into road driving performance, feedback and grip/progressivness.

 

[Kenai]

The KU31 was held up by many as some sort of champion of the tyre world, offering big brand performance for cheap.

Well it gets closer than I would have expected a tyre that costs half the price of the premium tyres to get. I'm not sure who (if anyone) was really holding it up as some kind of equal but it's clearly not a bad tyre.

Unfortunately, we can't know if it offers performance above and beyond a typical £85 tyre or not though, seeing as it was effectively thrown in as wildcard amongst tyres well above its price range.

Edit - in fact, given there is £50 per tyre price gulf from the Kumho to the next tyre, I think it did pretty well just to not be flat out last in every single test there.

 

[Morba]

Gibbo, I have no objection to the tyres used in the test for the evo readers.
This place is not evo though, fox has brought the results here so we are talking about them in the context of relevence to this forum

 

[mjt]

I'd actually really like to see a proper test like this with only mid-range tyres. The ku31 against the Toyo T1R, Falken fk451 etc. And at the same time throw a Chinese ditch-finder into the mix. Would love to see the results of that.

The Germans do the whole range, from Contis down to Wanlis...

http://www.adac.de/infotestrat/test...R17.aspx?ComponentId=29784&SourcePageId=31821

I think the Wanlis failed during high-speed testing, which I believe is where they take it over the speed rating. Only the Chinese tyres failed at 10-20km/h over.

 

[The_Abyss]

....testing Contis own tyre on their own test track (which I know they have always done in the past) is a little bit hypocritical at best. If this was a Medical paper with a 'conflict of interest' box that had continental listed (or worse), not, it would be binned straight away. At the end of the day no-one knows how to win a test if they can't win it in their own back yard!

I see the point, however I very much doubt tyre manufacturers make their tyres to perform best on their own test track, even if that is of course where they do most of their testing.

However, having a position where I control the media buying for our business, I'd be very interested to see the advertising spend of the participants of this survey for this publication over the course of a year. Advertising dominates print media, even the 'independents'. And believe me, the publishers of Evo cover hundreds of different titles and subjects worldwide, and big brand accounts such as the premiums listed here are hugely important to them.

 

[snowdog]

I see the point in not having the cheapest most rubbish tyres, I had an emergency situation in the dry, now a couple of months ago I think, and I literally avoided something by inches at high speed ( only has about a second to brake before having to avoid/swerve into the grass, and after that only a couple of yards to get back on the road before a concrete pillar was in the way). Every inch counted during braking and then evading someone and then going back from the grass into the road ( only a couple of yards further I'd hid a concrete pillar). If I didn't slow down as much as I did in that one second braking I'd hit the front left of a van at 40-50 mph and after that I doubt I'd manage to get it back from the grass on to the road at a higher speed.

 

[jon-]

This person gets it. I'm glad some people do

The KU31 was held up by many as some sort of champion of the tyre world, offering big brand performance for cheap.

It's the KU31 this year, it was the Falken FK452 last year, the Toyo T1R the year before. Perhaps it will be something different next year.

There will always be a "champion" mid range tyre that everyone on the forums rave about being "XX cheaper but even better than..." yet they never quite are.

Good tyres no doubt, but if you want the best in motoring you need a premium tyre. The only tyre that's troubled the premium guys recently is the Hankook S1 Evo (check out the placements) but guess what happened to that tyre as soon as it was recognised as being of premium quality... yep, it wasn't so cheap anymore

I look forward to EVO landing in the shops.

 

[The Running Man]

i have these khumo's on my motor and they are okay. they were cheap and so far ive not noticed any specific issues in wet or dry. they are better than the turanza's they replaced by a long way which used to spin in all conditions.

for the money i paid im reasonably happy. had i seen this specific review beforehand i would have weighed up spending the extra on a better set.

 

[shauncr91]

Gibbo, I have no objection to the tyres used in the test for the evo readers.
This place is not evo though, fox has brought the results here so we are talking about them in the context of relevence to this forum

So we aren't allowed to discuss performance cars/components on OcUK? Come on, if you have no problem with this test (As you just clearly said), why have you come wading into this thread knocking people who want to discuss it?

 

[Eliot]

Lol please none of you hurt me
but......

I have Chinese ditchfinders on the back
LOL
I know its bad but they came with the car and I need to buy some (hopefully within a day or so)

they are AUSTONE whoever the hell they are lol
either way there made in China

 

[Matt82]

those kumhos are great. with regard to the stopping distances etc thats something theyve done really well on with in other tests but long and short of it, theyre part of a top ten performance tyre test. theyre amongst the best there is