Barums may be cheap, but they aren't nasty anymore.
They got bought by Continental, for cheap Czech labour. and now the Barums are the budget end of conti tyres. That just more well made, V grippy, V cheap, but heavier than the equivalent spec Conti.
Long gone are the days of standard Skoda fitment only, and Teflon coating to extend tread life.
I can hear an echo?
I reckon P6000s are somewhat variable in quality. I've had a few sets that have seemed fine but not lasted anywhere near as long as the 27k mentioned earlier, yet the current lot seem a bit teflon coated. I'll be interested to see how long they last this time.
These are 205/50R16s on a BM325, but used mostly on the m'way so not given a particularly hard time.
in news: snipped-for-privacy@news2.newsguy.com, "Nom" slurred :
You can drive like a mad bastard and under/over-steer round every corner. Sliding is almost as good as wheelspin for scrubbing off tread.
Also the wheels on the KA were probably 13". Smaller tyres wear out more quickly - 13's should wear approx 25% more quickly than 17's, all else being equal.
Nope, it depends on the outer circumference of the tyre, not the wheel diameter. All else being equal, your average tyre will add 4 inches or more to each side, 8 inches in all. therefore, the 13" wheel will end up with an outside tyre diameter of 21" and the 17" wheel will end up
25". a quick rough calculation using pi as 3 gives a tread length of 63 and 75 inches respectively, about 15% different. with low profile tyres on both, it would be more like 20%. In the real world however, when changing rims, the overall difference will be negligible as the low profile tyres would go on the larger rims to ensure the gearing stays the same and that the wheels still fit within the arches.in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, jeremy slurred :
Yes, obviously.
165-60-13 have a circumference of 1.66m 215-55-17 have a circumference of 2.1mratio = 1.26 By altering the profile and widths you can have anything between 10% and 30% difference with realistic values.
True, but we weren't talking about changing rims, we were talking about tyre wear between different cars.
Didn't really notice the road noise too much, it was the levels of grip that were appalling. I replaced them with Toyo Proxes T1s which were leagues ahead (and I din't notice them being any quieter).
Are all P6000s the same or do they do different compounds?
Paul
Deffo P6000 but they were OEM ones. The car was a euro import - perhaps Johnny Foreigner gets a different P6000 to the UK market. Current car has OEM Bridgestones which really do grip like shit to a blanket, particularly when warmed up.
10K on the rears and they are nearly shot.
You didn't pay attention to maths at school did you? Circumference is pretty bloody dependent on diameter. Width of the tyre is a different thing. Nom's tyres will a) have a wider footprint b) have a larger circumference c) not be fitted to a car being driven around every corner at full pelt.
Not necessarily experiencing great quantities of either in the Ka - it was a pretty neutral thing to drive unless you entered a corner much too fast / press the brakes too hard. It spent pretty much 100% of it's mileage on country lanes, being driven as quickly as it would go. No wheelspins, no locked wheels.
What's Uniroyal now?
Oh, and here was me thinking that all else being equal meant that all else was equal. Now you've gone and given me an example where the widths of the tyres are different, the profile ratios are different, and .. the car is different. will the tyres on the bigger car still last 25% longer if it's a 1000hp supra?
Try Some Michelin Pilots SX or sport jobbies. Or perhaps Bridgestone SO2(SO1 can't remeber which) or even perhaps Goodyear Eagle F1s. IMO all better than the tyres mentioned so far!
Incidentally, I have some A539s on at the min, and they don't seem to wear as fast as people make out. Mind you they don't seem to grip like people make out either! Ok, so I do infact have wider tyres on the rear than on the front (225 and 205 respectively, F1's on the rear) but I seem to be getting really bad understeer from these yokes(im convinced more so than I used to get, but it *could* be psychological)...in the dry, and don't even go there in the wet girlfriend, uh huh!!! Needless to say, it's borderline shit your pants scary!
Andy R
After that statement, I think we can totally ignore anything else you have to say on the subject.
We can just see your signature to ignore everything you might have to say, though.
in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, jeremy slurred :
FFS. I was talking about why the tyres on Doki's Ka might not last much longer than the ones on Nom's 200BHP Ti. There is an implicit assumption therefore that the cars are in fact different. The phrase 'all else being equal' must therefore be qualified by that assumption.
That's right. I've given the case which I started with, and which I've been using throughout.
WTF? Logic chopping is a poor tool.
He's right Albert - 215-55-17 is clearly VASTLY different to 165-60-13 :)
205/40/17 isn't actually *that* different (I can't be arsed to work it out right now) and would be a more sensible comparison :)
Of course it's not !
185/65/14 and 205/45/16 and 205/40/17 all have an almost identical circumference, even though the wheel sizes vary by three inches ! Wheel size is the INTERNAL diameter of the tyre, not the external (and hence cirumference !) !in news: snipped-for-privacy@news3.newsguy.com, "Nom" slurred :
Yeah, fair enough. I had no idea what the width and profile of the Ti tyres was, and was just showing that my statement wasn't naively based on ratio of diameters, as implied.
I reckon 205/40/17's are about 13% bigger (dia/circ) than 165/60/13's, FWIW.
What the f*ck are you on about? Circumference of the tyre is entirely dependent on the diameter of the tyre. Unless you've got some new value of pi.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.