| subrew2 | 04-07-2002 11:40 PM |
Auto-X Specific: Kumho E700 vs. V700 info
I had a chance this afternoon to fiddle with my Kumho race tires, both the Victoracer 700 and Ecsta 700 design, in 225/50-16 size. I took some measurements of the overall width of each tire, and measured the clearance between the tire and the strut. I also snapped a few pics for reference.
[img]http://www.subrew.com/library/kumho_comparo/ecsta_sidewall.jpg[/img]
If you've been wondering if the new design will fit, visit here:
[url]http://www.subrew.com/library/kumho_comparo/[/url]
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
[img]http://www.subrew.com/library/kumho_comparo/ecsta_sidewall.jpg[/img]
If you've been wondering if the new design will fit, visit here:
[url]http://www.subrew.com/library/kumho_comparo/[/url]
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| adhowe70 | 04-08-2002 12:46 AM |
Good to know!!!
Still... 35 thousandths is pretty tight! This is pretty compelling information for me. It will probably affect my decision about my next set of race tires.
I scuffed my 205/45/16 E700's yesterday. The car felt like it was on rails. The only thing I would prefer is the better gearing that the 225/50/16 provides.
See ya next weekend, Chris!
Andrew H.
Still... 35 thousandths is pretty tight! This is pretty compelling information for me. It will probably affect my decision about my next set of race tires.
I scuffed my 205/45/16 E700's yesterday. The car felt like it was on rails. The only thing I would prefer is the better gearing that the 225/50/16 provides.
See ya next weekend, Chris!
Andrew H.
| omahasubaru | 08-23-2002 08:17 AM |
I'm digging up this old post
I know that numerous people now are probablly running race rubber. I'm curious how people have liked the different sizes if you'd tried both 205/45/16 & 225/50/16.
I'm about to pick up a set of DMS coilovers and won't have strut clearence issues, but am still on the stock 3.90 gearing so am considering a smaller tire (wish they made 215/45/16). Anyone know a good place to compute what my gearing ratio will change to our atleast how much percent of a difference the 205/45/16's??
Picking out tires for my new Rota Slipstream's
Thanks - Jon
I'm about to pick up a set of DMS coilovers and won't have strut clearence issues, but am still on the stock 3.90 gearing so am considering a smaller tire (wish they made 215/45/16). Anyone know a good place to compute what my gearing ratio will change to our atleast how much percent of a difference the 205/45/16's??
Picking out tires for my new Rota Slipstream's
Thanks - Jon
| Thug | 08-23-2002 08:29 AM |
If you end up going with 225s you're gonna have to be extra careful about what offset wheels you get. DMS have larger strut bodies and look at how little clearance Pat has in [URL=http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=225029&highlight=clearance]this[/URL] thread.
| Patrick Olsen | 08-23-2002 08:46 AM |
I might have some pics on my computer at home similar to the ones in the thread Nate posted, but with my old DMS Golds on the car. I'll try to remember to check when I get home. I think the clearance was pretty similar, although I was running more camber then - like -1.6 or so, compared to less than -1.0 with the stock struts. So, now that I think about it, I think clearance was actually [i]better[/i] than stock with the DMS struts on the car.
Of course, the stock struts don't have to be taken off the car every few months to be refurbished, nor do they bind up and clunk over small bumps. :rolleyes:
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
[i]No more DMS for me, thanks....[/i]
Of course, the stock struts don't have to be taken off the car every few months to be refurbished, nor do they bind up and clunk over small bumps. :rolleyes:
Pat Olsen
'97 Legacy 2.5GT sedan
[i]No more DMS for me, thanks....[/i]
| Scoobie Doogie | 08-23-2002 09:04 AM |
If you want the lower gearing on R-comps you need to go to Hoosiers. They have a 215/40-16. It is about 2" shorter if you set them side by side. Unfortunately the 225/50-16 Kumhos are actually taller than stock so the gearing goes the other way. It is fine if you are going for top end speed instead of shooting out of corners.
Dave
Dave
| Corey | 08-23-2002 09:17 AM |
Dave,
Notice that most of the posts are made by non-WRX owners. Hence why the 215/40/16 hoosiers won't fit... You guys take your big fender flares and go elseware.;)
I have a set of 205/45/16 Hoosiers sitting at ILP performance waiting for me to pick them up. I'm looking forward to the gearing advantage on our tight courses.
Corey #89 SM
Notice that most of the posts are made by non-WRX owners. Hence why the 215/40/16 hoosiers won't fit... You guys take your big fender flares and go elseware.;)
I have a set of 205/45/16 Hoosiers sitting at ILP performance waiting for me to pick them up. I'm looking forward to the gearing advantage on our tight courses.
Corey #89 SM
| Corey | 08-23-2002 09:23 AM |
subrew2,
I didn't read in your review about the clearance to the fender in the rear. Do you have any comments on that? Is it close to fitting or rub city?
Thanks,
Corey #89 SM
I didn't read in your review about the clearance to the fender in the rear. Do you have any comments on that? Is it close to fitting or rub city?
Thanks,
Corey #89 SM
| Draken | 08-23-2002 11:12 AM |
Wow, this is an old thread. BTW, I'm subrew2, just using my original login from back in the day...
Off the page:
---
After measuring the differences between the overall widths, I mounted both tires to the rear of Mr. Subie. It was obvious from the start that the new Ecsta would have more clearance between the sidewall and strut body. Using my handy feeler gauges, I measured 0.035-inch between the strut body and sidewall of the Victoracer, and 0.120-inch between the strut body and sidewall of the Ecsta design.
The gap between the lower spring perch and shoulder of the tires was measured next, with the new Ecsta design giving 0.035-inch clearance. The Victoracer measured only 0.012-inch between the shoulder and lower spring perch, and that was with the worn "bevel."
---
The Ecsta design is narrower, and does not present any rubbing issues on my car. We have test fit on two other RSs with no apparent rubbing.
I do not have experience with DMS, so I can't confirm how they will fit.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
Off the page:
---
After measuring the differences between the overall widths, I mounted both tires to the rear of Mr. Subie. It was obvious from the start that the new Ecsta would have more clearance between the sidewall and strut body. Using my handy feeler gauges, I measured 0.035-inch between the strut body and sidewall of the Victoracer, and 0.120-inch between the strut body and sidewall of the Ecsta design.
The gap between the lower spring perch and shoulder of the tires was measured next, with the new Ecsta design giving 0.035-inch clearance. The Victoracer measured only 0.012-inch between the shoulder and lower spring perch, and that was with the worn "bevel."
---
The Ecsta design is narrower, and does not present any rubbing issues on my car. We have test fit on two other RSs with no apparent rubbing.
I do not have experience with DMS, so I can't confirm how they will fit.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| adhowe70 | 08-23-2002 10:24 PM |
I've run the 205/45/16's on my car throughout the season. I don't have any good things to say about them. I don't think I've had a single course that I was helped by the 4.5% (roughly) gearing change of the smaller tire. And I've been significantly hurt several times.
On the other hand, the increase in grip that the 225/50/16 offers seems to be an advantage. At one of our recent events, I drove the piss out of my car (spun it twice) with a great understanding of the course, driving precise lines and (because of gearing and grip) still finished about 0.5 seconds behind Chris H. (Draken) No offense Chris, but I think I would have beaten you if I'd been on the 225's. There have been a couple times this year that I've felt that way.
I guess the moral of my story is... I won't buy the 205/45/16 tire again. My next set will be the 225/50/16 ('cause I test fit Chris's tires :D)
Andrew H.
On the other hand, the increase in grip that the 225/50/16 offers seems to be an advantage. At one of our recent events, I drove the piss out of my car (spun it twice) with a great understanding of the course, driving precise lines and (because of gearing and grip) still finished about 0.5 seconds behind Chris H. (Draken) No offense Chris, but I think I would have beaten you if I'd been on the 225's. There have been a couple times this year that I've felt that way.
I guess the moral of my story is... I won't buy the 205/45/16 tire again. My next set will be the 225/50/16 ('cause I test fit Chris's tires :D)
Andrew H.
| Corey | 08-24-2002 05:06 PM |
adhowe70,
You ran 205/45/16 hoosiers or some other brand?
Thanks,
Corey #89 SM
You ran 205/45/16 hoosiers or some other brand?
Thanks,
Corey #89 SM
| JER | 08-24-2002 09:39 PM |
What size Kumho Victoracers fit on stock WRX wheels?
| Gary (gg) | 08-24-2002 11:18 PM |
Chris, you forgot one measurement on those and that is the weight difference between the Ecsta and the Victoracer.
| Patrick Olsen | 08-25-2002 12:43 AM |
I was actually surprised at how small the weight difference is between the ECSTAs and Victoracers in my size (225/50-15). It's not even a pound. Lighter is lighter, of course, but I was under the impression the new tires were going to be [i]significantly[/i] lighter than the old V700s. Oh well...
Pat
Pat
| WRXster | 08-26-2002 03:43 PM |
So how do they drive?
I am just a lowly WRX driver, but I am curious for opinions of the differences in performance or set-up between the Ecsta and Victoracer. I originally had Victos, and have switched to the Ecstas and so far can say I am NOT impressed.
I put a bigger front sway bar which I have just discovered to be installed UPSIDE DOWN(!!), so my trouble may not be tire related atall but I'd like to have the discussion anyway :)
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Patrick Olsen [/i]
[B]I was actually surprised at how small the weight difference is between the ECSTAs and Victoracers in my size (225/50-15). It's not even a pound. Lighter is lighter, of course, but I was under the impression the new tires were going to be [i]significantly[/i] lighter than the old V700s. Oh well...
Pat [/B][/QUOTE]
I put a bigger front sway bar which I have just discovered to be installed UPSIDE DOWN(!!), so my trouble may not be tire related atall but I'd like to have the discussion anyway :)
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Patrick Olsen [/i]
[B]I was actually surprised at how small the weight difference is between the ECSTAs and Victoracers in my size (225/50-15). It's not even a pound. Lighter is lighter, of course, but I was under the impression the new tires were going to be [i]significantly[/i] lighter than the old V700s. Oh well...
Pat [/B][/QUOTE]
| Patrick Olsen | 08-26-2002 04:30 PM |
A number of guys in the club I auto-x with, including some of the faster competitors, have switched to the ECSTAs this year. I talked about it with one guy in particular that I battle with (different classes, but we run similar times). He said the big adjustment he had to make was to run quite a bit [i]less[/i] air pressure. The ECSTA's sidewalls are something like 40% stiffer, so if you run the same pressures that you ran with the Victoracers you'll definitely be giving up some grip. His times are as good, if not better, than they used to be now that he's got the air pressures figured out.
Pat
Pat
| Draken | 08-26-2002 07:12 PM |
I was under the impression they (Ecsta) would be significantly lighter than the victos, but in my 225/50-16 size it was about 1.5 pounds. I was told to expect 4.5 pounds. I guess that didn't materialize (or should I say too much materialized?)
I think the Ecstas have as much, if not slightly more grip than the victos. I did not like how they felt on turn-in, how slippy they felt under initial hard braking (lots of abs feedback) and how abruptly they transitioned into understeer. And once they started to understeer, it took a lot to get them back.
I ran both the Ecstas and Victos at the Atwater Pro. I ran the victos in the morning, car felt great. I switched to the Ecstas, car felt ****. Lots of abs input, abrupt switch to understeer, and I could not get it back easily on the long sweeping turnaround. I went from my usual tire pressures and did a run with less and some runs with more pressure, in rather large 4 psi jumps. I also had a co-driver (Sean Ross) who confirmed the same things without my telling him my impressions.
We switched back to victos Sunday morning, and everything went back to normal. I set my fastest times, and managed to make the final round of the challenge. The car was much easier to drive on the limit, and easier to repeat.
I did not get them shaved, but I did run the El Toro Pro on them, which chewed off about 20%. I have also experienced the old "evil groove of doom" like on the old BFG R1s. Andy is not experiencing them on his 205/45, because (wild ass guess) they are a narrow tire on a wide wheel.
FWIW, These feelings and weird treadwear were confirmed by a couple Type R drivers, who seem to be running the victos again.
See everyone in Topeka. Curtis and Pam Eames and I are caravaning out for the Pro together, and intend to get there early afternoon.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
I think the Ecstas have as much, if not slightly more grip than the victos. I did not like how they felt on turn-in, how slippy they felt under initial hard braking (lots of abs feedback) and how abruptly they transitioned into understeer. And once they started to understeer, it took a lot to get them back.
I ran both the Ecstas and Victos at the Atwater Pro. I ran the victos in the morning, car felt great. I switched to the Ecstas, car felt ****. Lots of abs input, abrupt switch to understeer, and I could not get it back easily on the long sweeping turnaround. I went from my usual tire pressures and did a run with less and some runs with more pressure, in rather large 4 psi jumps. I also had a co-driver (Sean Ross) who confirmed the same things without my telling him my impressions.
We switched back to victos Sunday morning, and everything went back to normal. I set my fastest times, and managed to make the final round of the challenge. The car was much easier to drive on the limit, and easier to repeat.
I did not get them shaved, but I did run the El Toro Pro on them, which chewed off about 20%. I have also experienced the old "evil groove of doom" like on the old BFG R1s. Andy is not experiencing them on his 205/45, because (wild ass guess) they are a narrow tire on a wide wheel.
FWIW, These feelings and weird treadwear were confirmed by a couple Type R drivers, who seem to be running the victos again.
See everyone in Topeka. Curtis and Pam Eames and I are caravaning out for the Pro together, and intend to get there early afternoon.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| adhowe70 | 08-26-2002 08:27 PM |
Corey,
I've got the Kuhmo Ecsta V700 in the 205/45/16 size. This narrower tire seems to give up a little in ultimate grip as compared to the 225/50/16 in the same tire. Of course that's my opinion based on running course after course with Chris driving a virtually identical car on the 225/50/16's.
As far as I know, the Hoosiers only come in a road race compound in the 205/45/16 size. And this would be less than ideal for autocross. It would be kind of like the Kuhmos, only more expensive.
Regarding the "evil groove of doom," I've seen it, too. The rumor is that this is caused by roll over and can be fixed with a higher tire pressure. Another rumor is that this is caused by too high of a tire pressure, crowning the tire. Shrug.
As Chris alluded, I haven't had nearly the trouble that others have had. I've got a set of tires with 93 runs on them (including 24 runs on reasonably abrasive concrete) and I still have significant tread life left. My tires are SQUARE on the 16x7 rims and I don't experience much roll over, even as low as 36psi (though the "groove" seems to be worse at lower pressures.) For reference, the rims clunk on the ground when you lay them down flat. That's how square the tire is. The feel is incredible, transitions rock with the lower profile, but long sweepers do not seem to be the forte of this tire. Basically, my tire works harder and should have a lower ultimate grip (and should wear out faster, too!) than Chris's 225/50/16's.
Andrew
I've got the Kuhmo Ecsta V700 in the 205/45/16 size. This narrower tire seems to give up a little in ultimate grip as compared to the 225/50/16 in the same tire. Of course that's my opinion based on running course after course with Chris driving a virtually identical car on the 225/50/16's.
As far as I know, the Hoosiers only come in a road race compound in the 205/45/16 size. And this would be less than ideal for autocross. It would be kind of like the Kuhmos, only more expensive.
Regarding the "evil groove of doom," I've seen it, too. The rumor is that this is caused by roll over and can be fixed with a higher tire pressure. Another rumor is that this is caused by too high of a tire pressure, crowning the tire. Shrug.
As Chris alluded, I haven't had nearly the trouble that others have had. I've got a set of tires with 93 runs on them (including 24 runs on reasonably abrasive concrete) and I still have significant tread life left. My tires are SQUARE on the 16x7 rims and I don't experience much roll over, even as low as 36psi (though the "groove" seems to be worse at lower pressures.) For reference, the rims clunk on the ground when you lay them down flat. That's how square the tire is. The feel is incredible, transitions rock with the lower profile, but long sweepers do not seem to be the forte of this tire. Basically, my tire works harder and should have a lower ultimate grip (and should wear out faster, too!) than Chris's 225/50/16's.
Andrew
| Scoobie Doogie | 08-26-2002 08:58 PM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by JER [/i]
[B]What size Kumho Victoracers fit on stock WRX wheels? [/B][/QUOTE]
225/50/16's in Kumho E and V700. Same in Hoosier. 215/40/16 also fits from Hoosier. Falken Azenis in 215/45-16 and 205/55-16 fit as good street tire class rubber also.
Dave
[B]What size Kumho Victoracers fit on stock WRX wheels? [/B][/QUOTE]
225/50/16's in Kumho E and V700. Same in Hoosier. 215/40/16 also fits from Hoosier. Falken Azenis in 215/45-16 and 205/55-16 fit as good street tire class rubber also.
Dave
| omahasubaru | 08-27-2002 02:55 AM |
What do we got to do to get some better 16" race tire sizes?
jon
jon
| adhowe70 | 08-27-2002 07:43 PM |
For most folks, the 225/50/16 is a "better" size. We're just a small market outcast.
You want more useful 16" sizes for the Subaru? Convince Ford or Chevy to make a car the uses 16's and no room under the fenders. :D
Andrew
You want more useful 16" sizes for the Subaru? Convince Ford or Chevy to make a car the uses 16's and no room under the fenders. :D
Andrew
| briank | 08-28-2002 08:47 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by adhowe70 [/i]
[B]
Regarding the "evil groove of doom," I've seen it, too. The rumor is that this is caused by roll over and can be fixed with a higher tire pressure. Another rumor is that this is caused by too high of a tire pressure, crowning the tire. Shrug.[/B][/QUOTE]
I've been auto-xing on the E700's this season and I definately wore a good "groove of doom" in my front tires after only 2 events because my pressures were too low. I swapped fronts for rears at the next event and ran pressures at 50 psi all around versus the low 40's I had used at the previous two events. MUCH better treadwear and better grip once they heat up.
I'm no expert, but I think with the E700's you HAVE to get them shaved. Otherwise you get stuck with some really non-optimal treadwear. I wish I had ran the higher pressures from the start, but they were new and nobody knew yet. :(
-BrianK
[B]
Regarding the "evil groove of doom," I've seen it, too. The rumor is that this is caused by roll over and can be fixed with a higher tire pressure. Another rumor is that this is caused by too high of a tire pressure, crowning the tire. Shrug.[/B][/QUOTE]
I've been auto-xing on the E700's this season and I definately wore a good "groove of doom" in my front tires after only 2 events because my pressures were too low. I swapped fronts for rears at the next event and ran pressures at 50 psi all around versus the low 40's I had used at the previous two events. MUCH better treadwear and better grip once they heat up.
I'm no expert, but I think with the E700's you HAVE to get them shaved. Otherwise you get stuck with some really non-optimal treadwear. I wish I had ran the higher pressures from the start, but they were new and nobody knew yet. :(
-BrianK
| McGuyver | 08-28-2002 09:09 AM |
E700s Directional?
This is kind of off the topic but while we're on the subject I have a question concerning the E700s being directional specific.
Has anyone had any experience with running the E700s "backwards", or against the specified direction. I just bought a set and I'd like to be able to rotate them both front and back and side-to-side. Most of our courses in our region are heavy on the right-hand turns so my left front tends to see a lot of wear during the season.
Thanks for your help.
Chris
Has anyone had any experience with running the E700s "backwards", or against the specified direction. I just bought a set and I'd like to be able to rotate them both front and back and side-to-side. Most of our courses in our region are heavy on the right-hand turns so my left front tends to see a lot of wear during the season.
Thanks for your help.
Chris
| Draken | 08-28-2002 11:23 AM |
I run them both directions, to help even out the feathering the little angled grooves get. Also, I tend to get a nice thin ridge on the "inside edge" of the first big band of tread. I've been running mine on the street for a week now to get all those ridges and feathered edges flattened out before nationals.
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
Chris H.
[url]www.subrew.com[/url]
| adhowe70 | 08-28-2002 07:38 PM |
Yeah, what Chris said. Either way, unless its wet. Then its better in the designated direction. Of course once you wear them down to the three grooves, it doesn't matter anyway.
For reference, I swap my tires front to rear every weekend. Basically, when I show up at the event, whichever two tires have the most tread go on the front. The others go on the back.
I think 50psi is probably too much, but as I learned in Wendover, 36psi is definitely too little on concrete. ;) I usually run about 40psi in the front and 30-38psi in the rear, depending on course and conditions.
Andrew
For reference, I swap my tires front to rear every weekend. Basically, when I show up at the event, whichever two tires have the most tread go on the front. The others go on the back.
I think 50psi is probably too much, but as I learned in Wendover, 36psi is definitely too little on concrete. ;) I usually run about 40psi in the front and 30-38psi in the rear, depending on course and conditions.
Andrew
| briank | 08-29-2002 09:23 AM |
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by adhowe70 [/i]
[B]I think 50psi is probably too much, but as I learned in Wendover, 36psi is definitely too little on concrete. ;) I usually run about 40psi in the front and 30-38psi in the rear, depending on course and conditions.
Andrew [/B][/QUOTE]
40psi hot? And if so, do you have uneven treadwear across the tire? When I saw that I figured I must not be utilizing all the rubber on the tire and another E700 racer suggested I pump up the pressure more. So far its been an improvement.
-BrianK
[B]I think 50psi is probably too much, but as I learned in Wendover, 36psi is definitely too little on concrete. ;) I usually run about 40psi in the front and 30-38psi in the rear, depending on course and conditions.
Andrew [/B][/QUOTE]
40psi hot? And if so, do you have uneven treadwear across the tire? When I saw that I figured I must not be utilizing all the rubber on the tire and another E700 racer suggested I pump up the pressure more. So far its been an improvement.
-BrianK
| adhowe70 | 08-29-2002 08:22 PM |
Yeah, I've been running 40psi hot (or as hot as auto-x gets tires) with some pretty good results. You WRXers should remember that a heavier car requires higher pressures to get the same contact patch.
The pyrometer said that less than 38psi in the front was definitely not using the tire effectively. 40psi gave good readings, but without camber plates (I run in GS), we'll never use the whole tire. At 40psi, I wear the shoulders down to the top of the wear bar triangles and the tire temps looked evenly skewed across the tire. At 36psi on concrete, I wore off the wear bar triangles.
I hope this helps.
Andrew
The pyrometer said that less than 38psi in the front was definitely not using the tire effectively. 40psi gave good readings, but without camber plates (I run in GS), we'll never use the whole tire. At 40psi, I wear the shoulders down to the top of the wear bar triangles and the tire temps looked evenly skewed across the tire. At 36psi on concrete, I wore off the wear bar triangles.
I hope this helps.
Andrew
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét