Jump to content
Do Not Sell My Personal Information


Which tyres?


Zico
 Share

Recommended Posts

After just under 19,000 miles the original Bridgestone Potenza's front tyres are down to approx. 3mm on my Mk7 ST. In the run up to winter I am looking to swap the rears forward (~6mm) and get two new tyres on the back.

The finance PCP for my current ST is up at the end of March 2018 and I am thinking of getting the 2018 ST when they are available. Between now and the end of March, I'm not likely to do more than another ~2500 miles.

Here is my dilemma:

1) Go for quality tyres like Continental/Michelin at approx. ~£100inc fitting but not get the long term value for money if I swap the car in the future.

2) Go for mid range tyres (need some recommendations) that should be good enough for winter. If I keep the car then hopefully they will be in good condition for the spring.

3) Go for budge tyres (again recommendations) that will be cheap and hopefully not kill me over winter. Then if I don't get the new ST I can get some better tyres in the spring.

4) Sod it, keep running the Bridgestone's to the legal minimum. If I get the new ST then I'm not wasting good money on tyres for the dealer. If I make it through the winter and don't go for the new ST then I can get better tyres then.

5) <insert your own thoughts>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Swap them to the back now, they'll last another 2,500 miles.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I’d say mid range or high end depending on your driving style.

  the only things that keep you connected to the road (tires) I personally don’t think are worth skimping out on even though they’re a tad expensive, that might just be me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toyo proxes I always use them brilliant tyres

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd avoid Toyo T1Rs if you drive anywhere when it's remotely damp...  

I'm having exactly the same dilemma, likely to change car in 6 months or less but front tyres are low.  I've decided to stick with them for now, swap front to rear again.  In my experience, new budgets are just as bad, if not worse, than worn premium tyres in the wet.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


As tempting as it may be to put the more-worn tyres on the rear to prolong the need to buy any new tyres do bear in in mind that understeer is much easier to recover from than oversteer (the natural response of applying the brakes helps reduce the former but can make the latter even worse). For this reason, the grippier tyres really ought to be on the rear. The tyre industry and relevant safety organisations all make this same recommendation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shopped around a few weeks and went back to the new Bridgestone as rated very good and i have had them on a week now,got a good deal as well.

As they have been on from day1 i had no problems with them at all and the wet rating is A so i went with them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Option 4. Swap front for rear and carry on. Most of the tyres you see advertised at tyre shops at £15 have 3mm or less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MJNewton said:

As tempting as it may be to put the more-worn tyres on the rear to prolong the need to buy any new tyres do bear in in mind that understeer is much easier to recover from than oversteer (the natural response of applying the brakes helps reduce the former but can make the latter even worse). For this reason, the grippier tyres really ought to be on the rear. The tyre industry and relevant safety organisations all make this same recommendation.

This is exactly what I understood to be the case with front wheel drive cars, rotate older tyres forward and new tyres on the back. It was even discussed in a road safety course that I took part in through work (similar to the course that you would partake in if caught speeding) by a colleague who used to work as a Serious Collision Investigator in the Police.

7 hours ago, jace1969 said:

I shopped around a few weeks and went back to the new Bridgestone as rated very good and i have had them on a week now,got a good deal as well.

As they have been on from day1 i had no problems with them at all and the wet rating is A so i went with them.

 

Didn't specifically mention Bridgestone but the price difference isn't much between that and Continental/Michelin.

Local garage near me:

£103 Continental Premium Contact 6

£98 Dunlop Sport Maxx / Bridgestone Potenza RE050 / Goodyear Eagle F1 3

£96 Dunlop SP Sport Maxx

£80 Uniroyal Rainsport 3

£77 Hankook K120 Ventus V12 EVO2

£58 Kumho ZR17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Uniroyal Rainsport 3.   Drove back from Scotland to Nottingham in heavy rain on Sunday last and they're brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found several people complaining about the Rainsports as being the 'in thing' for tyres and that they are quick wearing. Price wise it would save me ~£40 compared to Goodyear/Bridgestone or Cont's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d stick with what you have for now run them down to 2mm the mileage you’re doing should see you past the new year and you’ll have a better idea if you’re then likely to stick or change.

If you’re keeping it I always put conti sport 5 on my ST best tyres I had by a mile in all weather they never let go


Sent from my iPhone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/10/2017 at 10:29 PM, Zico said:

I've found several people complaining about the Rainsports as being the 'in thing' for tyres and that they are quick wearing. Price wise it would save me ~£40 compared to Goodyear/Bridgestone or Cont's.

They stick to the road like glue in the wet so they are sure to be a 'soft' tyre.   I don't doubt they will wear quicker but the price makes up for the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest issue with the RS3s is that they still have quite soft sidewalls, better than the RS2s but still not great.  This means if you like to take corners briskly you'll find yourself riding the sidewalls a lot and wearing the edges off even quicker than the centres.   If you're more of a 'sedate' driver this is probably less of an issue (but why buy an ST if that's the case?) and they are amazingly grippy in the wet.

The Dunlop SportBluResponse are just as grippy in the wet but have stiffer sidewalls and wear more slowly...but I'm going to assume they aren't made in your size?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunlop Sport BluResponse don't appear to be available for 205/40/17.

I'm interested to know if the Hankook are any good? I can't remember what the spare is for the ST but my previous Zetec had a Hankook spare tyre (Goodyear efficient grip as the mains).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


(Not saying I agree) but changing tyres at 3mm is unnecessary, costly and harmful to the environment, says Michelin

Modern tyre technology makes it possible to provide high levels of performance and grip from new, and through all of the tyre’s life down to the legal tread wear limit.

Michelin says with this in mind, changing tyres early (i.e. before they are fully worn) does not guarantee greater safety, and no current studies have established a direct link between accident levels and tyre tread depth.

The company says that as long as tyres are not damaged in any way, the safety on dry roads actually improves as their tyres get worn. A worn tyre will stop a vehicle more quickly in the dry than the same tyre when new.

Another improvement in performance of a worn tyre over a new one is fuel consumption, says Michelin. As tyre tread depth reduces, the fuel economy of the vehicle will improve, and with one tank of fuel in five being used to simply overcome the rolling resistance of the vehicles tyres, this is a welcome benefit.

Michelin tests at Ladoux have shown that on wet roads, some worn tyres can perform as well as some new tyres, and that although the remaining tread depth is a factor in wet braking, the performance of the tyre, at all stages of its life, is more important.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting that Tiexen - not something I'd seen previously.

The issue now is: who to believe? Michelin (saying 1.6mm is fine) and other parties saying that's too late and 3mm should be the minimum. I suppose, as is often the case, the 'truth' isn't quite so black and white as perhaps we would like so we'll have to make our judgement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

my experience with tyres at or just above 1.6mm in the wet and tyres with 3-4mm are like chalk and cheese. i will stick to changing around 3mm

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

scary thing is a minibus with more than 8 passenger seats can legally have a minimum of 1mm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me laugh with this Fuel economy now on tyres and after asking 3 garages and reading a lot on internet,it all comes down to the miles you do

and the tyres you have on now,i have these Bidgestone on now and not the best for fuel economy but there were on the car from new.

As for miles a lot does a lot per year but as they base it on 10,000 mines a year would save around £100 a year looking at a top rating A to a bottom G.

So how about wet weather/wheel spin as does happen/snow-ice etc.is this all added into the saving as its based on friction between the tyre and road.

If i was you i would stick to the make you have on now unless you don't like them for some reason,i only go off the grip as i do very low miles 2000 to 3000 a year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Zico said:

Dunlop Sport BluResponse don't appear to be available for 205/40/17.

I'm interested to know if the Hankook are any good? I can't remember what the spare is for the ST but my previous Zetec had a Hankook spare tyre (Goodyear efficient grip as the mains).

Ah yes, they're still using that solid, uncomfortable size on the newer STs, hated them on the mk6! :laugh:

Don't forget that a good brand name doesn't necessarily make a good tyre, in the same way as Ford put their name on a Mustang and a Ka...  The Hankook Ventus 3 (I think!) were original on my Focus, they were ok as an all rounder but just didn't have quite as good wet grip as I'd been used to which is why I replaced them with the Dunlops, they also feathered badly which is common with them apparently.  Both are A rated for wet grip though so you can't just go on the ratings.  I've also had Goodyear Effiecient grip a few years ago which I found effieicnt, but not in any way grippy lol.  

10 hours ago, MJNewton said:

Thanks for posting that Tiexen - not something I'd seen previously.

The issue now is: who to believe? Michelin (saying 1.6mm is fine) and other parties saying that's too late and 3mm should be the minimum. I suppose, as is often the case, the 'truth' isn't quite so black and white as perhaps we would like so we'll have to make our judgement.

I'd imagine Michelin probably do know what they're talking about BUT just because they've got the technology to do it, doesn't mean that all tyres will last long.  Personally I like to change somewhere between 2 and 3mm, over 3mm seems like a waste so I'm currently trying to scrub the centres on mine to match the low edges! :biggrin: 

1 hour ago, iantt said:

scary thing is a minibus with more than 8 passenger seats can legally have a minimum of 1mm

And remoulds as well...  They're not even speed restricted on motorways.  It's surprising there aren't more accidents with them really. :unsure: 

1 hour ago, jace1969 said:

Makes me laugh with this Fuel economy now on tyres and after asking 3 garages and reading a lot on internet,it all comes down to the miles you do

and the tyres you have on now,i have these Bidgestone on now and not the best for fuel economy but there were on the car from new.

As for miles a lot does a lot per year but as they base it on 10,000 mines a year would save around £100 a year looking at a top rating A to a bottom G.

So how about wet weather/wheel spin as does happen/snow-ice etc.is this all added into the saving as its based on friction between the tyre and road.

If i was you i would stick to the make you have on now unless you don't like them for some reason,i only go off the grip as i do very low miles 2000 to 3000 a year.

I don't think 10k a year is a lot of miles tbh, the average is 12k a year now.  £100 a year saving is the cost of a pair of premium tyres for 'normal' cars (common 205/55/16 size) so it does make a difference if you do the miles, in your case it's obviously not going to be a problem.  You wont notice going from a C to a B rating, but if you've got something really poor on fuel like Toyo T1Rs and swap to something economy minded it is instantly noticeable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a video recently where they tested 3 Peugeot 308 estates on a wet track with 3 different types of tyres: brand new premium brand, worn down to 1.8mm premium brand and brand new budget brand.

The results were surprising, brand new premium brand stopped in the shortest distance, followed by worn down premium brand and brand new budget tyres took the furthest distance to stop.

Keep this in mind when thinking about budget brand tyres and in the OP sake if you decide to go for them change your driving style accordingly and be careful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

£100 a year saving is the cost of a pair of premium tyres for 'normal' cars (common 205/55/16 size) so it does make a difference if you do the miles [...]

You'd only get a pair of budget tyres for £100 (or do you mean the £100 saving offsets the difference in price between budget and premium?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just swapped the my 3mm fronts to the back of my ST ready for winter. Now have 6mm at the front.

The only issue I had with the low fronts was clearing standing water.... at the front of the car.

I'm in exactly the same position, want the 2018 Fiesta ST, need to get another 3k or so out of the tyres at most. I'm not paying for new tyres I won't see the benefit of.

Unless you drive like a tool, I really can't see the issue of having lower tread at the back of a front wheel drive car with most of the weight over the front wheels.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget it's other people driving like tools that you also need to consider... :wink:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share





×
×
  • Create New...

Forums


News


Membership