| Durmiente | 12-23-2006 01:45 AM |
235/40/17 Hankook Ventus vs. Falken Azenis - which should I get?
�
�
Well you all convinced me to get 17x8 wheels and 235/40/17 tires (for my dedicated auto-x set).
Now I just need to decide between the Falken Azenis RT615 or the Hankook Ventus RS2 Z212s.
I was hoping that some of you have tried out both of these tires and would have a recommendation for me as to which you feel is better. [B]I [I]really [/I]want to hear from those of you who have tried [I]both[/I].[/B]
The falken is more $$ but is close enough to the 'kook that it doesnt matter much. I think they are $105 and $119, respectively, last time i checked.
So.... which one should I go with?
FWIW, it is for an 02 wrx wagon, almost stock suspension save for strut bars and sway bars. Alignment is stock in the rear and stock up front with the exception of camber being set at -0.9 degrees.
Now I just need to decide between the Falken Azenis RT615 or the Hankook Ventus RS2 Z212s.
I was hoping that some of you have tried out both of these tires and would have a recommendation for me as to which you feel is better. [B]I [I]really [/I]want to hear from those of you who have tried [I]both[/I].[/B]
The falken is more $$ but is close enough to the 'kook that it doesnt matter much. I think they are $105 and $119, respectively, last time i checked.
So.... which one should I go with?
FWIW, it is for an 02 wrx wagon, almost stock suspension save for strut bars and sway bars. Alignment is stock in the rear and stock up front with the exception of camber being set at -0.9 degrees.
| Mykl | 12-23-2006 01:51 AM |
I've tried both (not the 235/40's) tires and I like the Azenis better. What I prefer is that the Azenis seem to transition better, giving me a better feel of what's going on through the steering wheel. I felt like I had to be really careful with the RS2's because I couldn't get a feel for what they were doing.
Honestly though, you could probably flip a coin and be happy either way. They're both good tires.
Honestly though, you could probably flip a coin and be happy either way. They're both good tires.
| WRXGurl | 12-23-2006 08:30 AM |
We have used both in my family.........the kooks are on my daughters 02 WRX that she autocrosses and also daily drives. She is stock all the way around. She used them for a complete season last year and they are in dire need of replacement. She did one track day in Rockingham on them and that might have been the death of them..........I on the other hand have the Azenis on my 04 Wagon which has some suspension mods and have done about 5 autocrosses on them and my car is a toy and a garage queen. Mine are still in great condition and they are some of the best tires I have ever had for autocrossing. What a huge difference they made over the stock tires. So long story short I would favor the Azenis, but here again.......they are still both great tires!
| SiFuSpEc | 12-23-2006 09:00 AM |
I agree with both posts above.
i've run the Kooks @ 235/40/17 on 17x8 in autocross and
225/45/17 on 17x8 RT-615's in a couple autocross
it is my personal experience that BOTH tires are awesome for autocross and offer merely the same performance. but for that extra stability the RT-615 take the cake.. the sidewalls are amazingly stiff when you want it to be, while the Kooks offer just that slight bit more comfort. just beware of heavy water with the Azenis.
i've run the Kooks @ 235/40/17 on 17x8 in autocross and
225/45/17 on 17x8 RT-615's in a couple autocross
it is my personal experience that BOTH tires are awesome for autocross and offer merely the same performance. but for that extra stability the RT-615 take the cake.. the sidewalls are amazingly stiff when you want it to be, while the Kooks offer just that slight bit more comfort. just beware of heavy water with the Azenis.
| Durmiente | 12-25-2006 04:48 PM |
thanks for the replies thus far.
bump for more opinions! gonna be ordering tires soon, hopefully.
bump for more opinions! gonna be ordering tires soon, hopefully.
| deuce.five | 12-25-2006 08:13 PM |
My experience is that the 'kooks are much more dual purpose friendly...a little more comfortable, less road noise, better in the wet and they don't need the really high pressure to perform.
The Azenis feel more precise and I think are slightly faster on course.
The Azenis feel more precise and I think are slightly faster on course.
| bmxkelowna | 12-25-2006 08:17 PM |
ill be making the same desition come spring time
only it will be 215/45/16 on a 16x7" rim
i will be autoxing all season long and also this the DD
i have looked into both of them and are stuck.
only it will be 215/45/16 on a 16x7" rim
i will be autoxing all season long and also this the DD
i have looked into both of them and are stuck.
| deuce.five | 12-25-2006 09:45 PM |
I use the Hankook RS2's in 225/45-16 on the stock rims (16x7)for DD, and wet auto-x's.
| blue blurr | 12-25-2006 10:12 PM |
I have 225 rt615's they seem to be great tires. I am get 245 kooks next though.
| ratt_finkel | 12-25-2006 10:26 PM |
The kooks run pretty narrow, I'd run the 245/40/17 over the 235. Not only that, i'd wager to guess that the falken, even in 235 flavor is still wider than a 245 kook.
Though, if money were no object, I'd run the yok in 245/40/17 over anything else on the market.
Lastly, don't forget to factor in for optimum perfomance the kooks need to be shaved. The falkens will benefit from this as well, though not nearly as much.
Though, if money were no object, I'd run the yok in 245/40/17 over anything else on the market.
Lastly, don't forget to factor in for optimum perfomance the kooks need to be shaved. The falkens will benefit from this as well, though not nearly as much.
| swede978 | 12-26-2006 09:31 AM |
I have had kooks on the Legacy and was not impressed. I have now a set of Kohmos that suck and after the rims are refinished, I will be placing the Azenis in 225/45/17
| 2superblus | 12-26-2006 12:20 PM |
Azenis are the clear winner if you are autocrossing for the season and only want to buy one set of tires. The kooks work well but need a shave before they will be fast.
| blue blurr | 12-26-2006 12:54 PM |
[QUOTE=ratt_finkel;16440435]The kooks run pretty narrow, I'd run the 245/40/17 over the 235. Not only that, i'd wager to guess that the falken, even in 235 flavor is still wider than a 245 kook.
Though, if money were no object, I'd run the yok in 245/40/17 over anything else on the market.
Lastly, don't forget to factor in for optimum perfomance the kooks need to be shaved. The falkens will benefit from this as well, though not nearly as much.[/QUOTE]
I found it the opposite actually, my 225 azenis ran really skinny compared to other 225's.
Though, if money were no object, I'd run the yok in 245/40/17 over anything else on the market.
Lastly, don't forget to factor in for optimum perfomance the kooks need to be shaved. The falkens will benefit from this as well, though not nearly as much.[/QUOTE]
I found it the opposite actually, my 225 azenis ran really skinny compared to other 225's.
| the_poser | 12-26-2006 01:34 PM |
those of you who used the azenis for both daily driver and the occasional auto-x, what kind of milage did you get out of them?
| afpdl | 12-26-2006 03:03 PM |
[QUOTE=blue blurr;16443996]I found it the opposite actually, my 225 azenis ran really skinny compared to other 225's.[/QUOTE]
What are these other 225s you are comparing it to? Hoosiers, neovas and 710s?
What are these other 225s you are comparing it to? Hoosiers, neovas and 710s?
| Tilt | 12-26-2006 04:03 PM |
I think a lot of people overlook the tire specs and rely too much on hearsay. Instead of saying ___ is wider/taller than ____, here are the specs from Hankook and Falken's websites for the Ventus R-S2 Z212 and RT-615. I just reformatted them so it's easier to read. As you can clearly see, the tires are noticeably different despite the given tire profile. For example, both the 235/40/17 RT-615 and the 245/40/17 Z212 have the same tread width of 8.7 inches and both are mounted on 8.5 inch wide wheels. The 245/45/17 RT-615s has a whopping 9.1 inch tread width on a 8 inch wide wheel. HTH
[code]Falken Azenis RT-615
Load / Meas. Approved OD Section RPM Tread Tread Weight Max Max
Size Speed Rim Rims* Width Width Depth PSI Load
195/60R14 86H 6 5.5 - 7.0 23.2 7.9 900 6.6 8/32 18.7 51 1,168
205/50R15 89W 6.5 5.5 - 7.5 23.2 8.2 895 7.6 8/32 20.8 50 1,279
225/50R16 92W 7 6.0 - 8.0 24.8 9 881 8.2 8/32 25.2 51 1,389
215/45R16 86W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 23.6 8.4 768 8 8/32 21.7 51 1,168
205/40R16 83W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 22.5 8.5 911 7.2 8/32 18.2 50 1,074
215/45R17 87W 7 7.0 - 8.0 24.7 8.3 871 8 8/32 23.1 51 1,201
225/45R17 94W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 25 8.9 822 8.3 8/32 25.3 50 1,477
245/45R17 99W 8 7.5 - 9.0 25.6 9.6 806 9.1 8/32 28.7 50 1,709
205/40R17 84W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 23.4 8.5 875 7.2 8/32 19.4 50 1,102
215/40R17 87W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 23.9 8.7 861 7.4 8/32 21.2 50 1,202
235/40R17 90W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 24.4 9.6 836 8.7 8/32 24.3 51 1,323
255/40R17 94W 9 8.5 - 10.0 25 10.3 825 9.4 8/32 27.5 51 1,477
275/40R17 98W 9.5 9.0 - 11.0 25.6 10.8 806 10 8/32 28.8 51 1,653
225/45R18 91W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 25.9 8.9 794 8.3 8/32 26.1 51 1,356
255/45R18 99W 7 7.0 - 8.0 27 8.3 840 8 8/32 30.4 51 1,201
225/40R18 92W 8 7.5 - 9.0 25.1 9.3 818 8.3 8/32 24.5 50 1,389
235/40R18 95W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 25.5 9.6 806 8.7 8/32 25.5 50 1,521
245/40R18 97W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 25.6 9.8 803 9.1 8/32 28.4 50 1,609
255/40R18 95W 9 8.5 - 10.0 25.9 10.3 794 9.4 8/32 27.8 51 1,521
295/40R18 103W 10.5 10.0 - 11.5 27.2 11.9 763 10.9 8/32 34 51 1,929
265/35R18 93W 9.5 9.0 - 10.5 25.4 10.7 852 10 8/32 28.7 50 1,609
275/35R18 95W 9.5 9.0 - 11.0 25.6 10.8 803 10 8/32 28.6 51 1,521
315/30R18 98W 11 10.5 - 11.5 25.6 12.4 813 11.7 8/32 32.3 51 1,653
Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212
195/60R14 86V 6 5.5-7.0 23.2 7.8 895 6.9 8.5 51 1,168
225/45ZR15 87W 7.5 7.0-8.5 23 8.9 903 8 8.5 51 1,201
195/50ZR15 82W 6 5.5-7.0 22.7 7.8 915 6.9 8.5 51 1,047
205/50ZR15 86W 6.5 5.5-7.5 23.1 8.4 899 7.2 8.5 51 1,168
225/50ZR15 91W 7 6.0-8.0 23.9 9.2 869 8 8.5 51 1,356
205/45ZR16 83W 7 6.5-7.5 23.2 8.1 895 7.2 8.5 51 1,074
215/45ZR16 86W 7 7.0-8.0 23.6 8.4 880 7.6 8.5 51 1,168
225/45ZR16 89W 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.9 8.9 869 8 8.5 51 1,279
245/45ZR16 94W 8 7.5-9.0 24.6 9.6 844 8.7 8.5 51 1,477
205/50ZR16 87W 6.5 5.5-7.5 24.1 8.3 862 7.2 8.5 51 1,201
225/50ZR16 92W 7 6.0-8.0 24.9 9.1 834 7.6 8.5 51 1,389
205/55ZR16 91W 6.5 5.5-7.5 24.9 8.3 834 7.2 8.5 51 1,356
215/40ZR17 87Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.8 8.6 873 7.6 8.5 50 1,201
235/40ZR17 94Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 24.4 9.5 851 8.3 8.5 50 1,477
245/40ZR17 95Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 24.7 9.8 841 8.7 8.5 50 1,521
215/45ZR17 91Y 7 7.0-8.0 24.6 8.4 844 7.6 8.5 50 1,356
225/45ZR17 94Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 25 8.9 831 8 8.5 50 1,477
245/45ZR17 99Y 8 7.5-9.0 25.7 9.6 808 8.7 8.5 50 1,709
215/35ZR18 84Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.9 8.5 869 7.6 8.5 50 1,102
265/35ZR18 97Y 9.5 9.0-10.5 25.3 10.7 821 9.4 8.5 50 1,609
225/40ZR18 92Y 8 7.5-9.0 25.1 9.1 828 8 8.5 50 1,389
235/40ZR18 95Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 25.4 9.5 818 8.3 8.5 50 1,521
*U.T.Q.G. 200/A/A
[/code]
[code]Falken Azenis RT-615
Load / Meas. Approved OD Section RPM Tread Tread Weight Max Max
Size Speed Rim Rims* Width Width Depth PSI Load
195/60R14 86H 6 5.5 - 7.0 23.2 7.9 900 6.6 8/32 18.7 51 1,168
205/50R15 89W 6.5 5.5 - 7.5 23.2 8.2 895 7.6 8/32 20.8 50 1,279
225/50R16 92W 7 6.0 - 8.0 24.8 9 881 8.2 8/32 25.2 51 1,389
215/45R16 86W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 23.6 8.4 768 8 8/32 21.7 51 1,168
205/40R16 83W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 22.5 8.5 911 7.2 8/32 18.2 50 1,074
215/45R17 87W 7 7.0 - 8.0 24.7 8.3 871 8 8/32 23.1 51 1,201
225/45R17 94W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 25 8.9 822 8.3 8/32 25.3 50 1,477
245/45R17 99W 8 7.5 - 9.0 25.6 9.6 806 9.1 8/32 28.7 50 1,709
205/40R17 84W 7.5 7.0 - 8.0 23.4 8.5 875 7.2 8/32 19.4 50 1,102
215/40R17 87W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 23.9 8.7 861 7.4 8/32 21.2 50 1,202
235/40R17 90W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 24.4 9.6 836 8.7 8/32 24.3 51 1,323
255/40R17 94W 9 8.5 - 10.0 25 10.3 825 9.4 8/32 27.5 51 1,477
275/40R17 98W 9.5 9.0 - 11.0 25.6 10.8 806 10 8/32 28.8 51 1,653
225/45R18 91W 7.5 7.0 - 8.5 25.9 8.9 794 8.3 8/32 26.1 51 1,356
255/45R18 99W 7 7.0 - 8.0 27 8.3 840 8 8/32 30.4 51 1,201
225/40R18 92W 8 7.5 - 9.0 25.1 9.3 818 8.3 8/32 24.5 50 1,389
235/40R18 95W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 25.5 9.6 806 8.7 8/32 25.5 50 1,521
245/40R18 97W 8.5 8.0 - 9.5 25.6 9.8 803 9.1 8/32 28.4 50 1,609
255/40R18 95W 9 8.5 - 10.0 25.9 10.3 794 9.4 8/32 27.8 51 1,521
295/40R18 103W 10.5 10.0 - 11.5 27.2 11.9 763 10.9 8/32 34 51 1,929
265/35R18 93W 9.5 9.0 - 10.5 25.4 10.7 852 10 8/32 28.7 50 1,609
275/35R18 95W 9.5 9.0 - 11.0 25.6 10.8 803 10 8/32 28.6 51 1,521
315/30R18 98W 11 10.5 - 11.5 25.6 12.4 813 11.7 8/32 32.3 51 1,653
Hankook Ventus R-S2 Z212
195/60R14 86V 6 5.5-7.0 23.2 7.8 895 6.9 8.5 51 1,168
225/45ZR15 87W 7.5 7.0-8.5 23 8.9 903 8 8.5 51 1,201
195/50ZR15 82W 6 5.5-7.0 22.7 7.8 915 6.9 8.5 51 1,047
205/50ZR15 86W 6.5 5.5-7.5 23.1 8.4 899 7.2 8.5 51 1,168
225/50ZR15 91W 7 6.0-8.0 23.9 9.2 869 8 8.5 51 1,356
205/45ZR16 83W 7 6.5-7.5 23.2 8.1 895 7.2 8.5 51 1,074
215/45ZR16 86W 7 7.0-8.0 23.6 8.4 880 7.6 8.5 51 1,168
225/45ZR16 89W 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.9 8.9 869 8 8.5 51 1,279
245/45ZR16 94W 8 7.5-9.0 24.6 9.6 844 8.7 8.5 51 1,477
205/50ZR16 87W 6.5 5.5-7.5 24.1 8.3 862 7.2 8.5 51 1,201
225/50ZR16 92W 7 6.0-8.0 24.9 9.1 834 7.6 8.5 51 1,389
205/55ZR16 91W 6.5 5.5-7.5 24.9 8.3 834 7.2 8.5 51 1,356
215/40ZR17 87Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.8 8.6 873 7.6 8.5 50 1,201
235/40ZR17 94Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 24.4 9.5 851 8.3 8.5 50 1,477
245/40ZR17 95Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 24.7 9.8 841 8.7 8.5 50 1,521
215/45ZR17 91Y 7 7.0-8.0 24.6 8.4 844 7.6 8.5 50 1,356
225/45ZR17 94Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 25 8.9 831 8 8.5 50 1,477
245/45ZR17 99Y 8 7.5-9.0 25.7 9.6 808 8.7 8.5 50 1,709
215/35ZR18 84Y 7.5 7.0-8.5 23.9 8.5 869 7.6 8.5 50 1,102
265/35ZR18 97Y 9.5 9.0-10.5 25.3 10.7 821 9.4 8.5 50 1,609
225/40ZR18 92Y 8 7.5-9.0 25.1 9.1 828 8 8.5 50 1,389
235/40ZR18 95Y 8.5 8.0-9.5 25.4 9.5 818 8.3 8.5 50 1,521
*U.T.Q.G. 200/A/A
[/code]
| Durmiente | 12-26-2006 06:21 PM |
wow, that table is very helpful. Thanks!
What is the difference between tread width and section width? Am I correct in saying that tread width is the width of the tread pattern on the tire itself whereas section width is the literal width of the tire from sidewall to sidewall?
If so what is the advantage of spreading out the treadwidth (i.e. making it bigger)?
I'm leaning towards the Azenis right now, sounds like they are all around better... this is also for a dedicated auto-x set, so I don't care about daily driving or wet performance as much as dry performance.
What is the difference between tread width and section width? Am I correct in saying that tread width is the width of the tread pattern on the tire itself whereas section width is the literal width of the tire from sidewall to sidewall?
If so what is the advantage of spreading out the treadwidth (i.e. making it bigger)?
I'm leaning towards the Azenis right now, sounds like they are all around better... this is also for a dedicated auto-x set, so I don't care about daily driving or wet performance as much as dry performance.
| FTD | 12-26-2006 07:08 PM |
I can't compare and contrast since I have only run the Hankooks. I do know that they must be shaved in order to get the last .5 seconds on a 60 second course.
Tread width should give you some idea of the ultimate grip of the tire, however there are other critical variables (different compounds, construction, and treadpatterns). The tread pattern on the Hankook is very open which makes it great in the rain and not as good in the dry. I can see why you are leaning toward the Falken.
Have fun! :)
Tread width should give you some idea of the ultimate grip of the tire, however there are other critical variables (different compounds, construction, and treadpatterns). The tread pattern on the Hankook is very open which makes it great in the rain and not as good in the dry. I can see why you are leaning toward the Falken.
Have fun! :)
| blue blurr | 12-26-2006 09:33 PM |
[QUOTE=afpdl;16445078]What are these other 225s you are comparing it to? Hoosiers, neovas and 710s?[/QUOTE]
The older rt215's
If You want a good track tire that last, I have heard good things about the Kumho MX's, anyone have anymore info on these?
The older rt215's
If You want a good track tire that last, I have heard good things about the Kumho MX's, anyone have anymore info on these?
| afpdl | 12-26-2006 09:38 PM |
They are not as wide as the rt215s but they are still wider than just about all street tires in production excluding yokos.
| WgnWheel | 12-27-2006 12:10 AM |
i've used both in that size, on my wagon, street and track. for sheer performance, the 615 is the superior tire. Rs2 was a little more street friendly, but not that noticeable. I prefer the Azenis and will stick with it.
| Durmiente | 12-27-2006 02:09 AM |
[QUOTE=WgnWheel;16449234]i've used both in that size, on my wagon, street and track. for sheer performance, the 615 is the superior tire. Rs2 was a little more street friendly, but not that noticeable. I prefer the Azenis and will stick with it.[/QUOTE]
awesome, was really hoping for input like this for someone using 235/40/17.
Now just gotta muster up the courage to drop $1k+ on new wheels and tires!
awesome, was really hoping for input like this for someone using 235/40/17.
Now just gotta muster up the courage to drop $1k+ on new wheels and tires!
| STFU STi | 12-27-2006 12:11 PM |
Kooks FTW
I have used both, and much prefer the kook's
the 245/40-17 kooks have an extra load side-wall, which is stiffer than some of their other sizes..
I've not been beaten by anyone on street tires since using the kooks.. (one guy in a boxter, on 245 front, 275 rear hoosiers got me by just under 2-10ths.. on a 47 sec course.. dam r-compounds.. )
what wheels are you looking to purchase??
Todd at frisby tire has been great to work with for Hankooks... as is my guys at my local tire-barn.
I average 3-sets of tires/year... so I've tried them all..
I have used both, and much prefer the kook's
the 245/40-17 kooks have an extra load side-wall, which is stiffer than some of their other sizes..
I've not been beaten by anyone on street tires since using the kooks.. (one guy in a boxter, on 245 front, 275 rear hoosiers got me by just under 2-10ths.. on a 47 sec course.. dam r-compounds.. )
what wheels are you looking to purchase??
Todd at frisby tire has been great to work with for Hankooks... as is my guys at my local tire-barn.
I average 3-sets of tires/year... so I've tried them all..
| Durmiente | 12-27-2006 07:25 PM |
hmmm... 245/40/17 is something i havent considered before. It's still smaller than stock OD but I was considering 235/40/17 because a lot of people have success with that tire in STX and the gearing and width advantages are the best you can get, according to a lot of people here on the forums.
Do you suppose the 245/40 would fit inside the rear fenders of a wagon? I am very specifically looking at the 235/40 mounted on a 17x8 et 48mm wheel.
More specifically, I am looking at the Raze R74 for $134 each (20.5 lbs each) or the 5Zigen FN01R-C at $168 each (17 lbs each). Both are 17x8 and I have been undecided if I want to save money or weight... leaning towards the 5Zigens though, as they are more well-known than Raze wheels, and the weight saving is considerable at 3.5 lbs per wheel...
now that you throw out the 245/40 size I am a little uncertain... it has the same tread width as the 235/40 falken but greater section width (9.8 versus 9.6). But the Falken certainly has the gearing advantage, and is smaller in diameter which will probably help a lot with clearance.
I would be happy to see "245" written on the side of my tires though.... :)
Do you suppose the 245/40 would fit inside the rear fenders of a wagon? I am very specifically looking at the 235/40 mounted on a 17x8 et 48mm wheel.
More specifically, I am looking at the Raze R74 for $134 each (20.5 lbs each) or the 5Zigen FN01R-C at $168 each (17 lbs each). Both are 17x8 and I have been undecided if I want to save money or weight... leaning towards the 5Zigens though, as they are more well-known than Raze wheels, and the weight saving is considerable at 3.5 lbs per wheel...
now that you throw out the 245/40 size I am a little uncertain... it has the same tread width as the 235/40 falken but greater section width (9.8 versus 9.6). But the Falken certainly has the gearing advantage, and is smaller in diameter which will probably help a lot with clearance.
I would be happy to see "245" written on the side of my tires though.... :)
| STFU STi | 12-27-2006 08:16 PM |
on a wagon. I don't think they'll fit ... a local Wagon owner we autoX with is always angry because of all the grip I have in the STi on my 245's... I think he is using the MX's.. in a 235
stick with the 235, in a hankook.. you'll be fine!
Forget the Raze wheels... for that little bit of difference in price... take the 5Zigen...
My roommate (with his 'O3 WRX and I) will be sporting FNo1R-c's shod with 245/40-17 Hankooks this season..
talk to your local Tire-barn.. if they are unable to help you, PM me, and I can get you in contact with some people who can...
stick with the 235, in a hankook.. you'll be fine!
Forget the Raze wheels... for that little bit of difference in price... take the 5Zigen...
My roommate (with his 'O3 WRX and I) will be sporting FNo1R-c's shod with 245/40-17 Hankooks this season..
talk to your local Tire-barn.. if they are unable to help you, PM me, and I can get you in contact with some people who can...
| Durmiente | 12-28-2006 02:43 AM |
I just read a lot about wagons and 235s and 245s. I think I'm gonna go with the Falken in the 235/40. it is wider than the hankook in the 235/40. I think the hankook is a great tire, especially in 245/40, but if I am limited to the 235/40, it seems like the falken is just ever so slightly better. I think I might try the 'kook in the future, maybe after I do suspension and get some more camber.
Few more thoughts/questions:
1. from reading, it sounds like a 235/40/17 will not rub on the wagon, if you are on stock suspension... I have sway bars (27mm front and rear) and stock springs/struts, so I am thinking I won't need to roll my fenders, at least for now... ideas/thoughts?
2. with such a wide tire, what type of camber can I get before the tire touches the strut? I am hoping in the future for decently aggressive numbers, and wasn't sure how much camber I can run until I start rubbing inboard... anyone know? Hopefully I will be able to achieve -3 front and -2.5 rear?
Few more thoughts/questions:
1. from reading, it sounds like a 235/40/17 will not rub on the wagon, if you are on stock suspension... I have sway bars (27mm front and rear) and stock springs/struts, so I am thinking I won't need to roll my fenders, at least for now... ideas/thoughts?
2. with such a wide tire, what type of camber can I get before the tire touches the strut? I am hoping in the future for decently aggressive numbers, and wasn't sure how much camber I can run until I start rubbing inboard... anyone know? Hopefully I will be able to achieve -3 front and -2.5 rear?
| afpdl | 12-28-2006 03:26 AM |
If you cant get as much as you want in the front with camber bolts just get some camber plates and its a non issue, I have seen people get -3 through camber bolts but that was on a sedan. Why would you want -2.5 in the rear for autox?
| Mind | 12-28-2006 08:17 AM |
[QUOTE=Durmiente;16461031]1. from reading, it sounds like a 235/40/17 will not rub on the wagon, if you are on stock suspension... I have sway bars (27mm front and rear) and stock springs/struts, so I am thinking I won't need to roll my fenders, at least for now... ideas/thoughts?[/QUOTE]
I AutoX with someone that has an '06 Wagon... he's running wagon pinks, konis, 22mm sways, and OZ Ultraleggerras (17x8 +48), and 235/40 Azenis, with no rubbing, even with four people in the car. Stock-ish camber in the back as well... no camber plates or bolts. BUT, people seem to get pretty inconsistent results when it comes to wagon rubbing.
I agree with your tire assessment... seems like Hankook's get generally great reviews with a few here and there that aren't great... but the Azenis always seem to get pretty rave reviews.
I AutoX with someone that has an '06 Wagon... he's running wagon pinks, konis, 22mm sways, and OZ Ultraleggerras (17x8 +48), and 235/40 Azenis, with no rubbing, even with four people in the car. Stock-ish camber in the back as well... no camber plates or bolts. BUT, people seem to get pretty inconsistent results when it comes to wagon rubbing.
I agree with your tire assessment... seems like Hankook's get generally great reviews with a few here and there that aren't great... but the Azenis always seem to get pretty rave reviews.
| Butt Dyno | 12-28-2006 09:36 AM |
[QUOTE=Durmiente;16446562]I'm leaning towards the Azenis right now, sounds like they are all around better... this is also for a dedicated auto-x set, so I don't care about daily driving or wet performance as much as dry performance.[/QUOTE]
I would edit your first post to include this :)
I would edit your first post to include this :)
| Student Driver | 12-28-2006 10:07 AM |
The R-S2 requires a lot of camber to show their strength. I run PDE camber plates at something just over 3* neg camber with some toe out. They are very, very fast like this. If you can't support that much neg camber, then get the Azenis.
| waktasz | 12-28-2006 10:12 AM |
[QUOTE=Student Driver;16462898]The R-S2 requires a lot of camber to show their strength. I run PDE camber plates at something just over 3* neg camber with some toe out. They are very, very fast like this. If you can't support that much neg camber, then get the Azenis.[/QUOTE]
My RS-2s didn't last very long at stock-ish alignment settings either...I attribute that to lack of neg camber and cave-man like steering wheel inputs. Haven't tried the Azenis yet...ask me again in March.
My RS-2s didn't last very long at stock-ish alignment settings either...I attribute that to lack of neg camber and cave-man like steering wheel inputs. Haven't tried the Azenis yet...ask me again in March.
| Turn in Concepts | 12-28-2006 10:31 AM |
[QUOTE=Student Driver;16462898]The R-S2 requires a lot of camber to show their strength. I run PDE camber plates at something just over 3* neg camber with some toe out. They are very, very fast like this. If you can't support that much neg camber, then get the Azenis.[/QUOTE]
I run 3.4* with the rt615's and love it more!!!
I have autox both and prefer the 615's hands down. They are both good tires though. The RS2's are much better on the street and in rain than the 615's, but to me just don't seem to have the same amount of grip.
I use 615's on track as well and have never had problems with them. I was running 255 40 17's last year and may again this year.
I run 3.4* with the rt615's and love it more!!!
I have autox both and prefer the 615's hands down. They are both good tires though. The RS2's are much better on the street and in rain than the 615's, but to me just don't seem to have the same amount of grip.
I use 615's on track as well and have never had problems with them. I was running 255 40 17's last year and may again this year.
| Scooby921 | 12-28-2006 11:27 AM |
Lateral grip of both tires is similar. Falken has a stiffer sidewall giving you better transition handling and a more responsive feel. The Hankook works very well and is the hands down winner in the wet. Hankook is actually better than the Yoko Advan Neova in the wet as well!
I've run all three for autocross and for the price, either Falken or Hankook is a good choice. I also agree with the above post regarding camber. The Kook's do like a bit more camber, but then pending spring stiffness any tire may want more camber.
I've run all three for autocross and for the price, either Falken or Hankook is a good choice. I also agree with the above post regarding camber. The Kook's do like a bit more camber, but then pending spring stiffness any tire may want more camber.
| Durmiente | 12-28-2006 01:20 PM |
[QUOTE=afpdl;16461185]If you cant get as much as you want in the front with camber bolts just get some camber plates and its a non issue, I have seen people get -3 through camber bolts but that was on a sedan. Why would you want -2.5 in the rear for autox?[/QUOTE]
Well I've been reading around, and I could be wrong, but I believe you always want to keep the rear camber about 0.5 degrees less than the front... so if you have -3 front you run -2.5 rear. If you have -1.5 front you run -1 rear, etc... the added camber in the rear allows for increased rear grip, and the 0.5 degree difference is seemingly a good neutral balance. I could be wrong but I think that is what most of the great auto-x guys are running.
lol, didn't think about camber plates.... sounds like I should get a set, front and rear, just to be safe when I do the rest of my suspension.
Hopefully it won't rub... there is an auto-x I am planning on testing these out on January 20, so we'll see. Hopefully the tires won't be damaged if they do rub? my buddy's legacy's fenders cut grooves into his sidewalls during a rally-x because they were rubbing... of course his fenders don't have any protective molding or anything... well i guess there's only one way to find out if they rub or not.
Well I've been reading around, and I could be wrong, but I believe you always want to keep the rear camber about 0.5 degrees less than the front... so if you have -3 front you run -2.5 rear. If you have -1.5 front you run -1 rear, etc... the added camber in the rear allows for increased rear grip, and the 0.5 degree difference is seemingly a good neutral balance. I could be wrong but I think that is what most of the great auto-x guys are running.
lol, didn't think about camber plates.... sounds like I should get a set, front and rear, just to be safe when I do the rest of my suspension.
Hopefully it won't rub... there is an auto-x I am planning on testing these out on January 20, so we'll see. Hopefully the tires won't be damaged if they do rub? my buddy's legacy's fenders cut grooves into his sidewalls during a rally-x because they were rubbing... of course his fenders don't have any protective molding or anything... well i guess there's only one way to find out if they rub or not.
| afpdl | 12-28-2006 01:52 PM |
Things may have changed recently, but every fast stx wrx I have seen has had less then -1 degree in the rear. Yes more camber would give you more rear end grip, but the wrx does not have a problem with rear end grip.
| Kostamojen | 12-28-2006 02:24 PM |
[QUOTE=Scooby921;16463861]Hankook is actually better than the Yoko Advan Neova in the wet as well!
[/QUOTE]
I'm finding that the Khumo MX's I had before were better in the wet than my Kooks... The kooks just loose traction rather suddenly in the wet, while the MX's were very progressive and controlable. Although I didnt get to wear down the MX's much to find out how they did with less tread.
[/QUOTE]
I'm finding that the Khumo MX's I had before were better in the wet than my Kooks... The kooks just loose traction rather suddenly in the wet, while the MX's were very progressive and controlable. Although I didnt get to wear down the MX's much to find out how they did with less tread.
| STFU STi | 12-28-2006 02:33 PM |
^^ I disagree..
what is the rest of your set-up?
what size kook's??? what tire pressures???
what is the rest of your set-up?
what size kook's??? what tire pressures???
| waktasz | 12-28-2006 02:41 PM |
Also disagree. Hated my MXs, especially in the wet.
| Aaron B | 12-28-2006 03:37 PM |
[QUOTE=waktasz;16466326]Also disagree. Hated my MXs, especially in the wet.[/QUOTE]
x3
-Aaron
x3
-Aaron
| STFU STi | 12-28-2006 03:59 PM |
[IMG]http://holgarth.com/sccashowpic.asp?image=%2Fscca%2FDSC00176%2EJPG[/IMG]
[URL]http://holgarth.com/sccashowpic.asp?image=%2Fscca%2FDSC00176%2EJPG[/URL]
Here I had FTD
obviously in the [B]RAIN!!!![/B]
then it stopped raining after rmy run group.. my room-mate (also on Kooks) got the FTD, and pushed me to 3rd on FTD...
here's another cute pic
[URL]http://www.photoreflect.com/scripts/prsm.dll?eventorder?photo=0DZ90017000411&start=0&album=0&adjust=-1[/URL]
[URL]http://holgarth.com/sccashowpic.asp?image=%2Fscca%2FDSC00176%2EJPG[/URL]
Here I had FTD
obviously in the [B]RAIN!!!![/B]
then it stopped raining after rmy run group.. my room-mate (also on Kooks) got the FTD, and pushed me to 3rd on FTD...
here's another cute pic
[URL]http://www.photoreflect.com/scripts/prsm.dll?eventorder?photo=0DZ90017000411&start=0&album=0&adjust=-1[/URL]
| Kostamojen | 12-28-2006 04:55 PM |
[QUOTE=0000-09-0233;16466247]^^ I disagree..
what is the rest of your set-up?
what size kook's??? what tire pressures???[/QUOTE]
MX's were 225/50/16's, the kooks are 225/45/17's. I tried several tire pressures on each, right now my Kooks are around 34psi.
Im not sure which one I could consider "faster" in the rain, but the progressive nature of how the MX's pushed on wet surfaces was more controlable than my Kooks now. The MX's scrubed off speed better while the hankooks grip until the last moment and its all over...
The big difference is i'm not in a 3300lbs STI though, so its hard to compair.
what is the rest of your set-up?
what size kook's??? what tire pressures???[/QUOTE]
MX's were 225/50/16's, the kooks are 225/45/17's. I tried several tire pressures on each, right now my Kooks are around 34psi.
Im not sure which one I could consider "faster" in the rain, but the progressive nature of how the MX's pushed on wet surfaces was more controlable than my Kooks now. The MX's scrubed off speed better while the hankooks grip until the last moment and its all over...
The big difference is i'm not in a 3300lbs STI though, so its hard to compair.
| STFU STi | 12-28-2006 05:08 PM |
um, yeah.. the weight of the car may have ALOT to do with it..
the kooks are VERY predictible.. closest thing to an RA1 there is.. IMHO..
I run alot higher pressures... in my 245's... in the heavier chassis/ too-bad you're in norcal, or i'd some play, maybe help each other get teh fast4r
the kooks are VERY predictible.. closest thing to an RA1 there is.. IMHO..
I run alot higher pressures... in my 245's... in the heavier chassis/ too-bad you're in norcal, or i'd some play, maybe help each other get teh fast4r
| Kostamojen | 12-28-2006 09:56 PM |
I figured the kooks were loosing the lateral traction in the wet faster due to the tread design... The tread along the edge of the tire is practically a solid band while the MX's are not like that. But having that tread with more width (245 vs. 225) might make a difference in how it acts in the wet as well...
| Durmiente | 12-29-2006 01:48 AM |
well I went ahead and got my wheels and tires ordered today, got a great deal by getting the guys at discount to throw in a lot of extra stuff and weilding printouts from edgeracing.com as my weapons :)
Went with the 5Zigen FN01R-Cs in gloss black/polished lip with the Falkens in 235/40/17. They won't be in for a while but I can't wait to see them on the car and take it for a spin!
What tire pressures do you all use for the Falken's as a starting point for auto-x? I've never had a high performance tire before so I am used to running high pressures (40-44) in my all seasons to prevent the sidewall from wearing down... i imagine this wont be as much an issue with the falkens... so suggestions?
Went with the 5Zigen FN01R-Cs in gloss black/polished lip with the Falkens in 235/40/17. They won't be in for a while but I can't wait to see them on the car and take it for a spin!
What tire pressures do you all use for the Falken's as a starting point for auto-x? I've never had a high performance tire before so I am used to running high pressures (40-44) in my all seasons to prevent the sidewall from wearing down... i imagine this wont be as much an issue with the falkens... so suggestions?
| Sideshowbob | 12-29-2006 08:35 AM |
Purely for AutoX, I would go kooks for rain/wet, Azeni's otherwise. I FTD'd a wet NER event on the Kooks last year, but in the dry they are a little more vague in transistion than Azeni's are.
I DD and AutoX on the same set most of the time, so I went RS2's. They are very good on wet roads and in heavy standing water, where the Azeni is a little less competent in the same conditions. They are also quiet at highway speeds.
Just FYI, lowered (alot) 235/40R17 RS2's on 17x8 ET48 wheels rubbed on my wagon.
EDIT- See you already purchased.
I would start off 40/40 and see what that feels like, then what 36/36 feels like, and finally try out 44/44.
EDIT2- Looks like they now make the azeni in 225/50R16.... hmmmmmm
I DD and AutoX on the same set most of the time, so I went RS2's. They are very good on wet roads and in heavy standing water, where the Azeni is a little less competent in the same conditions. They are also quiet at highway speeds.
Just FYI, lowered (alot) 235/40R17 RS2's on 17x8 ET48 wheels rubbed on my wagon.
EDIT- See you already purchased.
I would start off 40/40 and see what that feels like, then what 36/36 feels like, and finally try out 44/44.
EDIT2- Looks like they now make the azeni in 225/50R16.... hmmmmmm
| motorcitywrx | 12-29-2006 09:36 AM |
If you had some time to do some searching you could pick up a set of Evo o.e. tires with low mileage and be better off in my opinion. They would probably cost just as much as these new tires though. But I think it would be worth it if I was you. The stock tire is a Yokohama Advan A046. These tires are amazing. Incredibly stiff sidewall that give great turn in. In most peoples opinion they are the best summer tire period in the size 235 45 17. So most evo owners like myself change to another tire to run a larger size. I went with the Falken 615's in 255 which have great traction but lack the sidewall stiffness I had with the ao46's. new these tires are crazy expensive. Something to think about...
This guy is asking 700 shipped for take off's you could probably get them for 650 or so... Pretty good deal IMHO
[url]http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=241188[/url]
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Yokohama&tireModel=ADVAN+A046&vehicleSearch=false&partnum=345WR7046&fromCompare1=yes&place=2[/url]
This guy is asking 700 shipped for take off's you could probably get them for 650 or so... Pretty good deal IMHO
[url]http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=241188[/url]
[url]http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Yokohama&tireModel=ADVAN+A046&vehicleSearch=false&partnum=345WR7046&fromCompare1=yes&place=2[/url]
| Butt Dyno | 12-29-2006 10:17 AM |
[QUOTE=motorcitywrx;16474269]If you had some time to do some searching you could pick up a set of Evo o.e. tires with low mileage and be better off in my opinion. They would probably cost just as much as these new tires though. But I think it would be worth it if I was you. The stock tire is a Yokohama Advan A046. These tires are amazing. Incredibly stiff sidewall that give great turn in. In most peoples opinion they are the best summer tire period in the size 235 45 17. So most evo owners like myself change to another tire to run a larger size. I went with the Falken 615's in 255 which have great traction but lack the sidewall stiffness I had with the ao46's. new these tires are crazy expensive. Something to think about...[/quote]Problem with the Evo tires is, aren't they 235-45/17? That's a gearing disadvantage that is (IIRC) equivalent to the gearing *ad*vantage of 235-40/17.
But takeoff RE070's are never a bad choice because they're usually about $350 or so and they are excellent tires and pretty much keep stock diameter.
john
But takeoff RE070's are never a bad choice because they're usually about $350 or so and they are excellent tires and pretty much keep stock diameter.
john
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét