[Ch]amsalot

That has to be one of the most idiotic inventions of the decade. Like I want to be having anything to do with my car in freezing weather, let alone putting stockings on my tires.

Machine washable eh? Do you really want to wash your underwear in a washing maching that has had those tire socks in them? I mean, we're talking road salt, grease, oil, road kill and worse.

The people who would benefit most from these socks should get dedicated snow tires and be done with it.

-[Ch]ams

intelliboy

i need to replace my front tires for 2000 3.2TL.
The original specs are 205/60R16. I saw on tirerack these two tires.

Kumho ECSTA ASX 205/40ZR16
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...rtnum=04WR6EASX

Sumitomo HTR+ 215/40HR16
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires...tnum=14HR6HTRPL

I have heard using a low profile tire may create some problems but i wasn't sure
how severe it would be.

I read thru the forum and people have put 215/55R16 for 205/60R16. The above two
are tires have quite a shorter side wall which looks good but i'm not sure if it has
any implication on milage/braking.

any advice appreciated

derrick

^ These tire sizes that you mention are more than 10% SMALLER than OEM spec. There is no way that a TL should be using these tires. It would be downright dangerous. No reputable tire shop would install those on your car. There are serious implications on mileage / speedo readings if you use a tire size like those you mention ... you would be terribly off!

If you want to use a 'low profile' tire, you have to upsize the rim to achieve that look. Using a thinner tire using your current rims ... doesn't work that way.

intelliboy

thanks for the advice. so i guess i'll stick to one of the 215/55R16 as mentioned in the thread.

[Ch]amsalot

I've been VERY happy with my 215/55 ZR 16 BF Goodrich g-Force Sports. They are reasonably priced, handle great in the dry, and have a decent treadwear rating:

http://www.discounttiredirect.com/di...36&rd=16&ar=55

If you want something that excels in wet, look at this one:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....num=155WR6EUHP

-[Ch]ams

[Ch]amsalot

This is very cool and shows what happens to your contact patch when you underinflate. No friggin' traction in the wet:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tirete...e.jsp?techid=3

vtec260

I put BF Goodrich Traction T/A on my TL-S. A bit louder than stock Michelin tires, but handles and corners way better. Priced at around $160 CAD each and has 100 000 km (60000 mile) tread wear rating and has AA traction and A temperature ratings. Directional treads, long wear and good tractions in snow were my priorities in choosing this tire model. We had 15cm of snow a few days ago here in Winnipeg, Canada and plowed through well enough to impress me. Anyone else have comments on these tires???

bonknhead

I too have the BFG Traction T/A, stock size, on my TL-S. I really like them. They're wider than the stock Michelins, and much grippier. They're great in the rain too.

We're only had one day of snow here in the Portland Metro area, but they did just fine. I've only had them for 3 months, so I don't know how they'll do long term, but so far so good.

[Ch]amsalot

The Traction T/As is one of the best dry/wet performing all-season tires (there are better choices for snow). I've put that tire on the both my mother's and mother-in-law's cars. ;-)

However, it's still an all-season tire, with all-season limitations. A TL, especially a Type S, begs for dedicated summer & winter tires.

-[Ch]ams

Itch71

I know it ain't "the season", but I came across this thread. I spoke to a few local people re. winter tires when I got my '99 TL. The Nokians came highly recommended. So I dropped the $800 Cdn. for my 4 Nokian Hakapeliitta RSi's and all I can say is "WOW"!! This is by far the best winter tire I've ever put on any of my vehicles. I live out in the country and people are contiuously amazed at where I can get to. As long as you're not bottoming out, you can go anywhere, snow, ice, slush....doesn't matter. I didn't find them overly noisy either, which would not have been a big deal. I'll sacrifice noise for safety any day in our winters. These tires are as soft as chewed warm bubble gum....so try to put them on last minute and take 'em off as soon as you can.

Cheers!
Itch

BIGTUFFGUY

i'm looking for winter tires now
so far the Dunlop m3's are the favorite and people really like them.

fsttyms1

Im placing my order for a new set in a few weeks. Im most likely going to try the new Dunlop SP Winter sport 3d's. Ive run the M3s for quite awhile and love them. so im hoping this will be a good upgrade.

BIGTUFFGUY

the Dunlops are 275/each
i also heard really good things about the Toyo Garrit KK. 250/each

on 101tires.com the Toyos were favored by a small margin. I've had the T1-S on my car and was super happy with them. That alone might push me towards the KKs'.

Delirium

I've run on Toyo garrit and they are great

fsttyms1

only 136 from the tirerack

Edward'TLS

After six winter seasons, my 225/50/17 Pirelli W210 snow tires are going into retirement. So I'm starting to check out what's new in the high performance snow tire market again. There's not a lot of choices for H+ speed-rated snow tires in the OEM 215/50/17 size, but still better than none six years ago. The only two choices are Dunlop Winter Sport M3 (H-rated) and Michelin Pilot Alpin PA3 (V-rated). The M3 seems to be a highly praised snow tire among this forum, whereas the PA3 is a brand new model.

However, when I examine the tire specs, I find that the M3 is actually a very heavy snow tire in terms of weight. I guess no one ever looked into the weight factor. As a comparison, from TireRack :

(1) 215/50/17 - Dunlop Winter Sport M3 (H-rated) - 29 lbs, $136.
(2) 215/50/17 - Michelin Pilot Alpin PA3 (V-rated) - 22 lbs, $171.
(3) 225/50/17 - Pirelli W210 Snowsport (H-rated) - 24 lbs, $147.

So the M3 is 7lbs heavier than the PA3, and is even 5lbs heavier than my current oversized W210, per tire. That's equivalent to a total of 28lbs or 20lbs of extra unsprung weight respectively. Performance will certainly suffer.

I'm leaning towards the light-weight PA3, but still want to wait until some sort of reviews or comparison tests are available before buying.

TLAwesome

If you stick with the 225/50HR17 size, you can get the new Dunlop Winter Sport 3D. At 24lbs, it's probably your best best.

Another excellent choice is this Goodyear GW3

fsttyms1

Honestly you wont notice that weight. Its a snow tire not a track R compound tire where weight really counts. I never say any difference (and actually felt better response from them over the lighter F1 GSD3s i ran in the summer.

Edward'TLS

Unsprung weight works the same way with summer tires in the summer or with snow tires in the winter. People are dying to pay mega $$$ for light-weight rims just for that extra few lbs of weight reduction. Sure we don't want heavy tires to wipe out all those weight savings, especially the tire weight is concentrated at the outside-most circumference of the rim/tire combo, which will impact the moment of inertia the most. My 18" summer combo is ~6 lbs per wheel lighter than the OEM 17", and will spin up faster and has better throttle response and a little faster acceleration time.

I don't get much snow in the West coast, and almost all my snow drivings are the trips to the ski slopes. I only spent 10% of the winter season driving in snow or ice. They have check points at the base of the ski mountains, and vehicles not equipped with snow tires or chains will have to turn back home. So all-season tires won't cut it. That's why I want high performance snow tires rather than hard-core snow tires or studded tires. I also want to have as much performance out of my snow tires as possible during the dry winter days. So tire weight is also a concern for my purpose.

TLAwesome

What do you think of my suggestions? Both the GW3 and Dunlop 3D are performance-oriented snow tires.

The GW3 was the performance king last year, although I'm tempted to think the 3D, with newer technology, may beat it now.

Edward'TLS

Good suggestions, but the GW3 is a run-flat tire which tends to be heavy and offers poorer performance than the non-run-flat counterpart. It would have been perfect if the 3D is available in 215/50/17.

fsttyms1

Well im just giving you my honest opinion. I would bet you will never notice the difference in weight. I loved the M3s. They were awesome in snow and were better handling in the dry than the stock tires. I never noticed any ill traits. I have about 60k miles driven on the M3s and can attest their ability. They are better than the alpin and blizzak (all of which i own)
And my mileage is up with them on as well.

Edward'TLS

I agree that most people on this site give high marks to the M3's. But its an older generation design which has been around for a couple of years. So I want to try out the newer generation high performance snow tires, such as Alpin PA3 and Dunlop 3D. Someone's gonna try out the new stuffs.

TLAwesome

The Primacy Alpin PA3 was recently tested and kicked ass in terms of performance, beating the Dunlop 3D on dry performance.

http://www.michelin.co.uk/uk/front/a...?news_id=20658

Edward'TLS

I just realized that there are two different Alpin PA3 models : the high performance V-rated Pilot Alpin PA3, and the lesser performance H-rated Primacy Alpin PA3. They both are this year's new releases from Michelin, but only Pilot PA3 has our OEM 215/50/17 tire size.

The Pilot PA3 has tightly grouped asymmetric tread blocks and is more stressed in dry performance than ice/snow traction, while the more open unidirectional tread-blocked Primacy is the other way round. So if the Primacy PA3 is very good in the dry, the Pilot PA3 will flare even better on dry performance.

TLAwesome

I concur; the Pilot PA3 will be better in dry and worse in the snow than the Primacy PA3.

The Primacy PA3 should, however, ast longer and give better fuel economy, according to Michelin's website. Both tires are performance-oriented (V and H).

I don't think you could go wrong with either one, so you might as well get the higher-dry-performing Pilot PA3 and let us know how you like it.

Edward'TLS

Yes, I'll go for the Pilot PA3. I just want the highest dry performance tire but with a mountain/snowflake stamp on the sidewall.

hockeynut

Nice thread. I will echo the high rating for Dunlop Wintersport 3's - I have run these for the last 3 winters and they are excellent. Better dry pavement performance than my OEM Michelins and current Avids. I rack up a lot of miles in the winter and these have always been very good on the snow - I literally blow by 4wd trucks and SUV's with these and am very stable. I should be able to eek out 1 more winter with these tires and then will be forced to look at new ones - we'll see what is getting praise at the time.

What I find amusing is that so many people think I'm crazy to spend the $ on dedicated snow tires. I always tell them how big of a difference they make but they just stare at me and say "but I have all season tires". One of those things that if you don't experience it you'll never know. Kind if like the people that don't understand why I like big screen HD and surround sound - "it can't be that much better than regular TV"

I like the way Tirerack spells it out - you wouldn't play a sport without the proper footwear. You could, but you'd be at a disadvantage.

TLAwesome

Three of my WS60s seem to have a manufacture date of 0307, and one of them has 0207.

I'm annoyed they're so old, but even more annoyed that they're not all the same date. Should I be concerned?

BIGTUFFGUY

I just ordered a set of Dunlop Wintersport M3 tires. After everyones positive feedback I couldnt resist. I hope they are as good as everyone says they are.

a local retailer matched the tirerack price! I cant go wrong with that.

I used to have the Blizzak WS50 and really liked those tires.

derrick

Uhhh ... I'm guessing "0307" means March 2007 and "0207" means February 2007. The Blizzak WS-60 is the replacement tire for the lauded WS-50 (that recently was discontinued) from Bridgestone. So ... a tire being 8 months old is not "old", at least to me. Unless you demand the 'freshest' (ie a chef) ... 8 months is nothing when it comes to tires.

fsttyms1

TLAwesome

The first number is the week of the year, 0207 and 0307 were made in the second and third weeks of the year (in January). By the time I put these tires on wheels, they'll be nearly one year old.

In a recent tire test in the current issue of EVO magazine, a six-month-old tire took 14% longer to stop in the wet than an identical tire with a 3-week old manufacture date. This is because the rubber degrades when stored in the warehouse.

I don't consider a tire purchased in October with a January manufactured date fresh. The rubber was indeed dry; any protective oils were gone.

TLAwesome

Just a heads up, I was able to get my hands on four new WS60 tires all with a manufacture date of 3407. That's the Week of August 19th, just over two months ago, which is a helluva lot fresher than the Weeks of January 8th and 15th.

The difference was noticable immediately. The tires themselves were sticky to the touch (let alone cleaner). Who knows what kind of storage conditions the first tires endured, but I'd rather not have to wonder if the tires were exposed to the sun or hot conditions which could degrade the rubber.

Thumbs down for Tirerack for selling me old stock. Two big thumbs up for my local Firestone/Bridgestone dealer (where I should have ordered from anyway) for finding me the freshest WS60s possible.

fsttyms1

And by time you get to use them there would have been no difference. What do you think will happen to them when you store them for the summer so you can use them next winter??

TLAwesome

When I store them, I know they'll be stored in a clean, cool and dry, temperature-controlled environment with no sunlight, in tire storage bags to prevent the tires from cracking due to natural ozone in the air.

So, there's a big difference. I don't know where, or how, the nine-month old original WS60s were stored, but I highly doubt they were given the consideration I will give them.

I encourage you to pick up the latest issue of EVO magazine (it's expensive here in the States but worth it). They have an excellent and throrough performance tire test, and also a blurb about how important is it to get the freshest tires possible (unless, of course, you like taking 14% longer to stop in the wet). The new Goodyear F1 Asymmetric is now arguably the best all-around performance tire you can buy.

fsttyms1

they keep the tires in a climate controlled warehouse. Honestly your reading a little too much into the details (like most do with oil filters and how many more microns they filter)

TLAwesome

The tires were received by TireRack in the summer. Where were they stored before then? Were they ever bagged, as even TireRack suggests is done with tires? Do you have personal knowledge of the storage conditions for the nine-month-old tires?

Honestly, you give way too much credit to those in the chain of custody without any basis for your conclusion whatsoever.

Bottom line is people should attempt to get the freshest tires possible, even if it costs a little more.

Edward'TLS

Unless one gets to buy fresh tires every year, the existing tires will still age and dry up during the 5-6 months that they are being driven around on the car.

However, the new Michelin PA3 series tires should address your concern because they are made of sunflower oil-enriched helio compound which should keep the tires nicely oiled up until the treads are completely gone.

fsttyms1

Who did i give credit to in the chain of custody??? NO ONE!
If they were in the tireracks possession yes, they are stored in a climate controlled warehouse.

Being put on the car and out in the environment for 5-6 months are going to age the tire more than storing it. Are you going to take the tires off the car and vacuum seal them up every time you park the car to keep them out of the atmosphere?? Sorry, but like i said, some people are too anal and read too much into the minor details.