DDT-TypeS

Short review:

Just got them put in...

Noise: A+ very quiet compared to stock OEM michelins. I rolled up all the windows, sunroof visor and drove on different pavement types and noticed a drop in road noise. No lie, it really improved. Don't know if it was due to the stock oem's being nearly bald...but these ASX's are very quiet.

Comfort: These are 215/50R17 91W rated tires. Overall diameter is 25.5" and I have noticed that indeed, they seem to be a bit more comfortable than stock. How I determined this was going over uneven pavement, rough gravel roads, and the freeway both smooth and bumpy portions. Seems a bit better than stock. Quieter yes, but not that dramatic in terms of comfort than OEMs. However due to the fact the OEMs were showing the tread depth line, I believe these ASXs are much more comfortable than the stock OEMs.

Tire Design (aesthetics): I would say they aren't that bad looking compared to OEM but the OEM tires are better looking. These ASXs have a stupid label on them that says ALL SEASON (in curly writing) and a big label "OUTSIDE" to signify how to mount the tires. Overall not as ugly as the continental contact extremes.

Tire Tread design. Interestingly it has a 2 ridge water tread in the center compared to the 4 ridge water tread on the OEM tires. The side edges of the ASXs are agressive looking and I believe the overall all season design is new to kumho but it works.

Grip (Dry): Peeled out a few times and it gripped! DIdn't track the car but overall I can tell that it has more grip than OEMs...even if the OEMs were new, they don't grip the dry end this well.

Grip (cornering): EXCELLENT. I was able to corner without squelching the tires. On ramp curves and other cornering tactics seem to be honed throughly with these ASXs. Nice overall improvement than stock!

Grip (wet): Not bad at all! Really, I think this is where this tread design really works well. Smooth, no hydroplaning (although I didn't try really deep puddle water yet). Overall very good.

Grip (snow): Haven't tried it yet. But my OEMs did quite well (with the LSD of course) and I have no doubt that these ASXs will do better.

Tread life: rated at 420. Should last about 40,000+ miles. I believe it because I put about 50,000+ on my michelins already and I still have some tread life left.

Weight: I don't know the weight of the tire, but I do know that it is rated at 91W. The load is the main concern I have and I have yet to experience anyone other than myself sitting in the car driving pretty aggressively. I don't know how the car will behave with a full load of 4 passengers and cargo while doing agressive manuevers (braking, accelerating, cornering). I don't know how it will handle the extra load because the CLS OEM has 93v rated tires. Since the CLS 6-speed is less than the automatic, I wonder if its ok really. The CLP however has the 91v load rating. And I think perhaps the CLS-6 is closer to the CLP in weight?

Flat spots: (I have not noticed any yet...) Perhaps due to the width of the tire 215/50R17, I don't have the same problem others who have the ASXs have. Time will tell though.

Price: $95/piece. Fantastic price and overall very very pleased. I was looking to buy the Pilot sport A/S, the continental contact extremes, but due to the price of the pilot sport a/s's ($200), I opted for something cheaper. The Continental CEs were $97/piece and I heard ok things about that tire. Tread wall design is ugly, flat spots, bubbling, etc...I steered towards something new from Kumho. It's worth it really.

Summary: I really didn't know what to expect from these ASX tires. I read up on some reviews but there weren't many on the 215/50R17 size. I wanted overall SAME DIAMETER/SAME SETUP as my OEMs so I had no choice really but to try these out and it is really worth the buck. If you are seeking to purchase new tires, give these ASX's a shot. They really are alot of bang for the buck.

dgracer

What pressure are you running in yours? I've got the 235/45's and am at 41 and may drop the rear to 38 or so. At 36 they flatspot overnight and feel a little soft. Otherwise your review is similar to mine. So far, so good.

DDT-TypeS

I think mine is at 40psi front and rear. yes, they feel "soft" when you push the side wall in. And yes, I read your reviews before buying these suckers even though your review was based on the 235 series ASX. I am pleased to say it is very nice and worth every penny

I'll monitor the flat spot and see if it occurs. Max psi on this tire is 51 or something like that.

DDT-TypeS

Cum-ho asx tread design:

ferizzo

HE SAID CUM-HO AGAIN!

DDT-TypeS

I will take a pic later on...to confirm for ya'll..but

The car has been sitting cold in the garage for about 14 hours now. NO FLAT SPOTS front or rear noticed! Perhaps because I have about 40 psi and the width is OEM stock: 215/50R17

I don't know about the 235/45 series..but the 215/50 model is just fine. No flat spots at all so far. Again, I'm really diggin' the quality of these tires...damn, bye bye michelins!

dgracer

You wont notice the flatspots until you DRIVE it after sitting for that long. You'll feel a vibration from about 30-45. You probably wont get them at 40 which I think is the minimum to avoid them. I dropped my rears back to 38 for better ride, and they started doing it again.

DDT-TypeS

I just got back from work...and NO, I DIDNT FEEL A DIFFERENCE SINCE THE DAY I CAME BACK FROM INSTALLING THE TIRES. There still isn't any flat spots when I booted the bitch up in the morning, and I drove off to do some errands ~15miles. During the warmup, it was smooth and quiet before the engine warmed up and even after many miles of city driving and then coasting home from the highway, I experienced nothing abnormal-no vibrations, no shimmeying, no harshness.

Again, it may be due to the 215/50 series tires I have on. I seriously did not experience anything wrong with these tires even starting off having the tires sit out in the cold for over 1 day.

TL_Type_S

Yeah, I have had the ASX's ... i like em ... but they flat spot like a mo-fo in the cold

TL_Type_S

i have the 235/40/18's however... so i dunno if that makes a difference..

they sorta suck in the rain ... but that could just be b/c I have exceptionally wide tires b/c of my 8.5" rim width ... i'd imagine the narrower tires to do better in the rain ... less hydroplaning, etc.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

TL_TypeS, What PSI do you have in each tire?
Incorrect PSI will screw up the tire, you know..

pimpscls

do you guys know if these are comparable or are in the simalar performance as as toyo proxes 4? B/c my tread is getting low

dgracer

Yes they are in a similar category as the Proxes 4, both being UHPAS but the ASX has a much higher treadwear rating. 420 vs. 300 and that was the difference for me even though I know thosse numbers are not necessarily a universal rating as the name suggests.

TL_Type_S

Nashua -- i use the suggested tire pressure -- i forget exactly but the pressure is EXACTLY what Kumho suggested and what tirerack suggested for the tire as it applies to my car. maybe 32 psi?? i forget, i'll check it out

Nashua_Night_Hawk

please keep us posted... I am now at 40 PSI. It rides smooth too!

TL_Type_S

I'm at 35 all around... I'll try 40 and let you guys know how it feels. i have a feeling it'll be a little hard w/ my 18's and chicago pavement ... but if it saves my ass in the rain ... i don't care.

DDT-TypeS

After sitting in the garage for the past 2 days, I took the bitch out for a ride today to see if I get that 'flatspotting' effect. Tires have been cold for more than 48 hours.

I started her up and within 60seconds, I pull out of the garage and sped off to run some errands. ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE FROM DAY ONE WHEN PUT TO THE TEST AFTER MORE THAN 48 HOURS TIRES BEING COLD. No abnormal shaking, bumping, shimmeying, etc. for the 20 miles I drove her today. Started from a cold engine to full warm up to full highway travel after 15 miles of city driving and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABNORMAL. My PSI is at 40psi front and rear. It was actually 36psi and I increased it to 40psi and still no difference felt.

I don't know about you guys with the 235/45 tire sizes, but the 215/50/R17 size does not have this effect. The tire is very quiet and grips very well in both wet and dry. So I have to conclude up to now that there are no problems with the tire at all.

TL_Type_S

DDT ---

bro, congrats on not having any issues w/ your tire... i have a few glitches w/ my ASX's ... but i still love them -- i love them more for their bang-for-the-buck factor than anything, and they have a semi-cool tread pattern...

since I only have a 15.0 second TL 5AT .. i'm not super concerned w/ off the line traction .. just the fundamental traction concerns, such as driving in the rain, snow, etc. So far, the rain has been sketchy sometimes on take-offs and moderate acceleration into turns... hopefully i'll be able to plow thru some light snow

TL_Type_S

I think that my 40 series profile has a LOT to do w/ the flat-spotting ... i doubt the width of the tire has anything to do w/ it.

NiteQwill

What is the Temp and Traction rating on this tire along with the 420 treadwear? AA A?

BTW: 215/50 size

Nashua_Night_Hawk

I think it is AA and A... I noticed around 75 MPH a quick steering input as in changing lanes quickly, resulted in vague steering response then steering than a bit of wiggiling in the back.

I am not sure if this is due in correct tire pressure or if it is characteristic of the tire itsef, more testing and experimenting is needed.

resedaruss

iTrader: (1)

I have about 1000 miles on a new set of Kumho Ecsta ASX's in the 215/50R17 size with 36 psi all around. The extra pressure makes up for the lower load rating of 91W (vs the 93V for the Michelins). As pressure goes up, the load bearing capacity increases. 91W was assigned to the Kumho's based on load capacity at 32 psi. At 32 psi, the Michelins are rated for 1367 lbs per wheel. The Kumho's are somewhere around 1360 lbs at 36 psi. Bent wheels and blowouts are the main concern when load rating isn't high enough.

At 36 psi, I have no flat-spotting. I have driven these on highways at high speeds in rain with excellent sure-footedness. I switched to these when the Michelin's started hydroplaning after 6/32's wear. They had 4/32's left but I didn't want to drive on them any more. Overall, I am very happy with the Kumho's. I decided early-on that I was not going to spend $180 per tire for Michelins that were simply "pretty good." Excellent handling for $95 (the Kumho's) are much more my speed.

resedaruss

iTrader: (1)

Regarding the following: "I noticed around 75 MPH a quick steering input as in changing lanes quickly, resulted in vague steering response then steering than a bit of wiggiling in the back."

I found from some research that new tires, with 10/32's tread on them have more "squirm" than worn tires. Thus, many people complain about steering response after getting a set of new tires--they're used to the stearing response they had with worn tires that had a shallow tread depth.

This could explain the steering response issue mentioned above.

EricL

Be careful with the de-rating. The tires are load rated at 91 @ 36 PSI, and the max pressure is around 51 PSI.

There shouldn't be a problem with 91 tires.

However, the original tires were XL rated and do have a reinforced casing (they do squeal like piggies, get good gas mileage, don't grip too well on smooth surfaces, and, IMO, cost way too much).

You can mess-around to a degree with pressure, but I'd hate to see someone moving to 88 load-rated tires and just pumping them up to 45 PSI based on "well, I guess I can do this if Joe says it works for him." IOW, watch the extrapolation.

There's a shit load of weight on the front tires, the car goes fast, and with a lot of load, velocity and heat, it needs some good load capacity.

I'm sure your tires will work great, and hopefully you report in on them. However, I sure hope that people don't start picking lower ratings without some serious talks with the manufacturer (as it seems that you did).

resedaruss

iTrader: (1)

It was Tirerack that told me to pump the pressure up to 36 psi since I had Emailed them (before I bought the tires) with my concerns about buying a tire with a lower load rating. They sent me an Email with algorithms for computing the amount of pressure needed to bring a tire with a lower load rating into spec for the car the tires are on. They stressed that one would need to stay below the max pressure for the tire. They were also very convincing when they stressed that bent rims (as opposed to safety concerns) was the main issue around lower numerical load ratings.

Inasmuch as they refused to sell me a tire (235/45R17) that required greater width than my stock wheel has (7 inches), I felt assurred that they would not give me misinformation about load rating in order to sell tires.

Tirerack also claimed that load rating is always measured relative to 32 psi so as to have a common point of reference when comparing different brands of tires.

resedaruss

iTrader: (1)

I went back to Tirerack and double checked the Load Rating pressures and I was mistaken about 32 psi being the point of reference for load rating specifications. Although I couldn't find in print where Tirerack specifies what the reference pressure value is, the reference pressure does appear to be 36 psi.

Sorry for the wrong information.

In any case, while the 93V rating has a load rating of 1433 pounds at 36 psi, I was filling the OEM tires to 32 psi as Acura recommends. Therefore, a load rating of 93V means that the tire at 32 psi is good up to 1367 pounds--because the lower pressure Acura recommends reduces the load limit to that value.

Thus, the 91W load rating at 36 psi, which I upped the pressure to, is good for 1356 pounds--very close to the 1367 pounds the OEM Michelins were providing.