No, the angle won't change.
2010 Evo Tyre Test - now with added KU31.
- Thread starter [TW]Fox
- Start date
No, the angle won't change.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,824
I'm getting mixed up, I used to buy a set of 16's with new tyres and a set of eibach pro kit springs and have everything fitted at one place then i'd take it somewhere for alignment
New springs every tyre change?
Soldato
Still pains me to pay £265/tyre for the Alfa, every ~12k miles x 4, but i suppose PZeros being 3rd is some consolation.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,824
No, I used to mod my cars and part of the process was 16 wheels, tyres and eibach pro kit springs followed by alignment
Apart from once, before all that I bought 17's for a civic and it caused a problem with pulling to the left and an alignment sorted it out hence the confusion
def alignment because it sounds like your past if fully of hondas, therefore no tork steer
Who said torque steer? Pulling to the left suggests the car was going left with no power applied and whilst in a straight line.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 12,824
def alignment because it sounds like your past if fully of hondas, therefore no tork steer
I've owned a couple of turbo charged cars
This was the case yes
This 'ok if you're happy with last place' rubbish is such a useless statement.
http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2010-Sport-Auto-Ultra-High-Performance-Tyre-Test.htm
Oh Dear, Goodyear Eagle F1 Assymetric are 11th out of 11. Going by our 'last place' logic these are obviously completely mediocre and only an idiot would fit them.
http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2010-Sport-Auto-Ultra-High-Performance-Tyre-Test.htm
Oh Dear, Goodyear Eagle F1 Assymetric are 11th out of 11. Going by our 'last place' logic these are obviously completely mediocre and only an idiot would fit them.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
The fact it was actually quite close to hugely more expensive tyres.
The point i'm getting at, which i'm sure is not lost on you as you're not stupid, is that making statements like 'well if you're happy with last place' without any context at all are beyond meaningless. Even the Eagle F1 can place last in a test due to the context but if we just stuck to stupid blankment statements like the above, it must be rubbish because it's last.
The point i'm getting at, which i'm sure is not lost on you as you're not stupid, is that making statements like 'well if you're happy with last place' without any context at all are beyond meaningless. Even the Eagle F1 can place last in a test due to the context but if we just stuck to stupid blankment statements like the above, it must be rubbish because it's last.
Last edited:
Permabanned
Well not everyone is willing to spend an unlimited amount of money on tyres, and do not want the best tyre money can buy, but rather a reasonable performer that doesn't cost the earth.
The KU31 also responds better on some cars than others.
The KU31 also responds better on some cars than others.
I think we are doomed to go round and round in circles because I and a few others do not consider it to be quite close at all. Clearly how close it is comes down to opinion so we'll never agree.
Also, regarding this comment (i've been out all day):
"The reason I posted this thread in the way I did was because over the last few months there has been a definate trend for people to claim that decent tyres are a waste of money and that budget Kumho's are just as good. Oddly enough it seems this particular opinion is now missing from this thread.... which I guess means its served its purpose"
Could you possibly provide some examples of this? I don't really recall seeing such an attitude on this forum. If there genuinely were people saying 'A KU31 is just as good as CSC3' then you have a point but I really don't remember seeing anything of the sort.
"The reason I posted this thread in the way I did was because over the last few months there has been a definate trend for people to claim that decent tyres are a waste of money and that budget Kumho's are just as good. Oddly enough it seems this particular opinion is now missing from this thread.... which I guess means its served its purpose"
Could you possibly provide some examples of this? I don't really recall seeing such an attitude on this forum. If there genuinely were people saying 'A KU31 is just as good as CSC3' then you have a point but I really don't remember seeing anything of the sort.
Associate
Got the Kumho KU31's on my MG ZS180, they replaced the Bridgestone RE040's that where on it when I bought it.
I can push the car just as much in the limited rain we've had, obviously being new tread thickness comes into play. Steering feel hasn't changed much, still a progressive tyre. No sudden OMG moments. So cannot see them as sort of liability and I'm going to go through the pearly gates in a big ball of flames?
What does interest me is the difference between the 2007 & 2010 results for the Kumho's. In the 2007 test it was 2 seconds slower round the wet track than the Eagle F1's and stoped roughly 2 meters more in the wet. Forward to the 2010 results and it's 7 seconds a lap slower in the wet and just over 4 meters to stop in the wet? In fact the Kuhmo's where better in the dry braking than the Eagle F1's?
Is that to do with tyre width or have Goodyear changed the Eagle F1's? All I can gather from the 2007 results is that the Kumho's technically did well just fell down on the 'feel' of the tyre.
Don't get me wrong I could have bought some CS3 (can't get most of the tyres in the 2010 test in my size!) and I am sure they are a better tyre than the KU31's, just couldn't really justify spending an extra £70 a corner on them.
I can push the car just as much in the limited rain we've had, obviously being new tread thickness comes into play. Steering feel hasn't changed much, still a progressive tyre. No sudden OMG moments. So cannot see them as sort of liability and I'm going to go through the pearly gates in a big ball of flames?
What does interest me is the difference between the 2007 & 2010 results for the Kumho's. In the 2007 test it was 2 seconds slower round the wet track than the Eagle F1's and stoped roughly 2 meters more in the wet. Forward to the 2010 results and it's 7 seconds a lap slower in the wet and just over 4 meters to stop in the wet? In fact the Kuhmo's where better in the dry braking than the Eagle F1's?
Is that to do with tyre width or have Goodyear changed the Eagle F1's? All I can gather from the 2007 results is that the Kumho's technically did well just fell down on the 'feel' of the tyre.
Don't get me wrong I could have bought some CS3 (can't get most of the tyres in the 2010 test in my size!) and I am sure they are a better tyre than the KU31's, just couldn't really justify spending an extra £70 a corner on them.
Don
Now they are Eagle F1A, revised model