Tyres

[Turbo6man]

rainy> You are perfectly INcorrect - Ford DO design their suspensions around the particular tyre they intend to use on the particular model - as do Ho Hol Hold ... er the other lot.

The SP 9000s are certainly not a cheap as chips tyre - and they will work much better on your Ford than on a Munro. And a Bridgestone will work better on the Munro than on your Ford. Simple, 'cos they were desined to.

I tried Falkens and was not overly impressed despite the rave reports they got from many people.

In the past I've also tried some high performance Yokos and they simply hated being on my EF - the dealer actualy took them off and refunded my money as he admitted they just didn't suit the suspension setup of the car as I had it - I had it built around Dunlops. So tyre and suspension matching is very important to the car's and the tyre's performance.

[rainy]

so when the dunlop is taken out of production our cars will handle like crap!!!! :lol:

while I still think they put out a tender,they would want there cars shod with a competent tyre,dunlop.brigstone,michelin etc,a main brand if u like.that's not to say any other brand is no good but I mean the main players.

Granted,the munro will handle different to the ford,its supposed to,its a different car,however while there may be lap time differences,BRAKING distances should remain fairly static.

Remember,you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine

[Turbo6man]

rainy> opinions are fine - however your statement purporting to be fact had to be corrected.

No, your BA (or AU) designed around a Dunlop SP9000 or SP3000 will not handle like crap if that particular tyre goes out of production. There are other tyres in the Dunlop range with very similar construction characteristics that will do the job. And if a type is superseeded, then the newer version will usual continue with many of the previous version's characteristics anyway so it should still suit your vehicle.

Some other brands also have tyres that will do a good job, and it is a matter of trial and error (and cost) to find which ones. When Ford design their suspensions around a particular tyre they are actually spending their money doing this trial and error testing for you.

[Guest Mr Walker]

  Turbo6man said:

The SP 9000s are certainly not a cheap as chips tyre - and they will work much better on your Ford than on a Munro. And a Bridgestone will work better on the Munro than on your Ford. Simple, 'cos they were desined to.

So if the Monaro is designed specifically with Bridgestones in mind why does it perform better with Falkens?

Why couldn't the Falcon perform better with Falkens?

Those distances aren't small differences. 8.4m (22%) is a huge amount. I bet Dunlop won't use "but our tyres aren't designed to work on Monaro's" as a defence. They produce a high performance tyre to sell to the market - not just to XR & FPV vehicles - and they now look sh*thouse.

Also, was the XR's suspension designed for a 245/45/17 or a 245/40/18? Wouldn't there be a difference in the abilities of these two tyres due to the difference in profile?

[hammer007]

Be interested to read the article and see how they tested. Was it with computer controlled braking ? or with a trained driver ? Too much scope for human error here.

There is a definate difference between tyres but I think you'd be hard pressed to replicate a 22% difference between similar priced or structured tyres ? I'd agree that you get a big difference between a Bob Jane All rounder and some of the tyres tested.

If I was a tyre manufacturer and read that report I'd be concerned - for competing tyres you'd think they would be within 5% of each other.

[Falchoon]

I think it was Neil Bates driving.

[rainy]

  Mr Walker said:

So if the Monaro is designed specifically with Bridgestones in mind why does it perform better with Falkens?

Why couldn't the Falcon perform better with Falkens?

Those distances aren't small differences.  8.4m (22%) is a huge amount.  I bet Dunlop won't use "but our tyres aren't designed to work on Monaro's" as a defence.  They produce a high performance tyre to sell to the market - not just to XR & FPV vehicles - and they now look sh*thouse.

Also, was the XR's suspension designed for a 245/45/17 or a 245/40/18?  Wouldn't there be a difference in the abilities of these two tyres due to the difference in profile?

good to see somebody else is looking at things(statistics)and questioning the facts presented in a logical way

[Guest cul08r]

I have read the article and looked at the details with the thought of which tyre to fit to my 19s when I get the car (25 days to go). I was looking for a middle of the road tyre (pun intended) that has good capabilities in wet braking, and had been recommended the Falken FK 451 by my local dealer. The reason I look at wet performance is because this is when the majority of accidents occur.

I am sticking with my dealers choice, as like the article said, for the $, the Falken are the tyre.

All other crap aside (manufacturer deals etc) I will let you know my thoughts as soon as I have a few k's on them.

I will also be lowering the car with the kings recommended by others here on the same day. low fronts and superlow rears.

Andrew

[rakrzy]

Has anyone had problems with the wheels being out of round?

I had a new set of Dunlop sp3000 fitted by Ford (to their credit)on my 17's after 2 weeks because Ford could not get the body vibrations sorted (Tyres out of round), better, but still far from perfect, and now being told it's the tread pattern problem by the service manager (running at 39 psi). Is this a common problem?Suggestions would be welcome!

[AMoffat]

I've got the standard set up 17's with sp3000's on them and 17000 klms (have just been rotated and balanced and had the wheel alignment redone) no problems at all.

I run 40psi front, 36 psi rear,