Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Model S' started by Keith909man, Apr 24, 2018.
Which tires would you recommend?
What's there to disagree with my post? the OP is being chastised for tires that compromise stopping distance yet everyone here drives a car with a horrible stopping distance. Seems like if someones concern is stopping distance then they are driving the wrong car.
It's probably because it made too much sense so rather than challenge it with facts since they have none, they hit disagree. Classic cop out.
I’m in the process of investigating tires for summer only. I have been contributing to a thread as I find information. For me low rolling resistance is important as well as dry/wet braking. The Primacy3 in a 245/45r19 102y is my choice - waiting for it to be released ! My second choice is the Pilot Sport 3 “TO” (Tesla acoustic) also low rolling resistance - sportier choice.
Pilot sport 3 vs Primacy 3 these ar
I think maybe you're just trolling?
The Corvette comes with max performance summer rubber to get those stopping distance results. How well does it stop on bargain basement tires? It seems tire choice is independent of car choice and maybe ANY automobile can be made to perform better or worse by changing the one thing that makes contact with the road?
Your argument seems disingenuous at best. That's probably the reason for the "disagrees"
Maybe OPs tires are just fine. But maybe it's worth actually comparing the various quoted metrics in his review using repeatable measurements before deciding one way or the other?
I wouldn’t characterize the model S as having horrible stopping distance - that’s being a little dramatic ;-)
My problem with the OPs post is that he's claiming something without having any data to support his claim, just that it 'feels' the same.
Also, if you could point me to a zero emisisons car that seats 7 with better stopping distance, that would be awesome.
And what tires do the Cadillac and BMW come with? Those cars have a 20% better stopping metric than Tesla. There's nothing disingenious about what I said. What's disingenuous is giving the OP crap and making it all about pedestrian lives when none of us own the best stopping car out there. If someone really cared that much about other drivers and pedestrians they wound have bought the best car for it.
And so is the post I quoted where someone's tire choice is ridiculed as killing pedestrians and a disregard for life. All over a tire that may never even be used to its limits, let alone become the difference between life or death. I can drive up to 60k miles a year, 100k+ if I'm doing a lot of transport in the truck and I can count the number of times I've panic stopped, two.
I'll be switching over to the cheapest tire per mile because that makes the most sense. I don't track the car and my spirited driving is limited to highway interchanges. I run Michelin on the truck and I'm lucky to get 35k out of them I run Generals on the fleet trucks and they have no issues. I've got 11k mines on this car since December and I'm halfway through the tires. Michelin will not be going back on there.
I guarantee you that whatever tire you are using, there is a better one that provides superior grip and braking power (I think about road racing tires with rain tread), and that would be far more expensive and impractical. But they are SAFER.
You see what I am saying.. folks have used "safer" as a way to bully people into all sorts of buying decisions. I agree about using DATA, but who sets the standard for what is acceptable? It can't just be based on the fact that there is something better, right?
If your goal is zero emissions and not pedestrian safety then choice of tire is irrelevant. If your goal was pedestrian safety then your driving the wrong vehicle. People ridiculing the OP for his choice is comical.
Racing slicks are horrible in the rain. The compounds used in the rubber are worthless when wet.
But yes there's always something "safer" and Irellevant to most people's usage. If you constantly find yourself in panic situations where the "safer" tire is the difference between life, accident, or shitting your pants; you need to reevaluate yourself and driving habits, not the tires.
There might be tires that are $2000 each that are slightly better than the tires you're using.
Everything in life is a trade-off (even life).
Oddly enough, I'd like to both not wreck the environment and not kill pedestrians.
Don't drive, only way to solve both problems. You're never getting rid of pollution, everything on that car has a carbon foot print and that rubber isn't grown on trees anymore. Even with the bestest tires in the world you can still kill someone or end up in an accident.
This argument does not add up. Product price does not equal product quality. Price is most often determined by product marketing/branding and positioning.
Judge products by their individual merits, not price. Anyone who instinctively buys the more expensive product because of a mistaken belief it is inherently better is sadly wasting their resources.
I buy the best performing product I can afford, after taking into account both hard data and subjective reviews.
Back on topic, has anyone found any hard data for OPs tires?
All I found was an article saying these Chinese tire makers continuously discontinue models and introduce new ones at such a low volume per model that nobody ever gets a chance to test them. Any truth to that? That sounds a little like how mattress companies make unique models per store to keep people from comparing prices.
What about if I told you that I found brake pads that were $2? I even tried them out and they "felt fine to me".
That's just as silly as your $2000/tire analogy. But like you said, everything in life is a trade off. I'm just surprised so many people think it is wise to trade the most important safety aspect of a car for a little bit of money. Especially on such an expensive car.
There's always something "better", so where do you draw the line? Logic presented in this thread seems to indicate expensive = better, so do I shame you for ONLY spending 2000 dollars on a set of tires when a set of 3000 dollar tires exist?
Tire choices are always a religious debate. There is no right or wrong. Just what suits your needs from a grip vs longevity vs cost perspective.
I don’t believe the overall msg is that “more expensive” alone equates to better. The proven brands and specific tires within those brands do command a higher price vs newer players with rock-bottom prices.
Some of the responses to the OP regarding safety were based on the “finding the CHEAPEST tire possible” comment.
Personally, I stay away from any tire that has a wear guarantee because by default, that means the compound is hard, which contradicts why I buy sport sedans. This includes expensive tires like the hugely popular Conti DWS06. I go middle of the road. Not paying for Michelin PSS, but also don’t go with Nankang, Achilles, etc.
For my recent purchase, I was deciding between either the Hankooks or the Falkens. I went with the latter.
For this specific Nankang tire, something doesn’t add up - 40K wear guarantee, but the UTQG rating is only 240. You’re not going to get 40K miles with that rating. Maybe that’s the hook? You continually get a pro-rated credit to buy a new set of the same tire after 20K?
All this talk about stopping distance. Let's not forget about our 60ft time.