Edward'TLS

This guy over in the 4G TL forum says that the Conti DW performed about the same as the OEM MXM4 in the dry.

I haven't tried the Conti DW nor the DWS. Would those who have please comment ?

pimpin-tl

I've owned the dw tires on previous cars and they rock. These mxm4 tires are terrible. I also use to be an instructor at road courses so I know how to drive.

Jackass

Who cares? You are comparing two tires that have completely different price ranges as well as different classes. What are you after? If someone says they are comparable, then great, you just saved a bunch of money by getting the DW or DWS instead of bucking up for the MXM4.

beyond 1000

DWS and nothing else for me.

MikeW

Having never owned a set of the M4s I can't vouch for them but I can vouch for the DW. Great tire. They're my summer tires and I love them. Recently threw my winter stockers on and found one of my DW had a nail. Not sure when I picked it up but it hadn't been losing air. Just sucks I gotta replace one, maybe two.

Italiano

Continental's are the shit man....especially the DW's..

TLtrigirl

iTrader: (1)

i believe ceb has a TSX which shouldn't matter THAT much but everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion and review of products. i have the DWS tires on my TL...i like them. better than the crappy stock bridgestones that came on mine. overall the DWS is a good all around tire. for an all season it handles quite nicely in snow and wet conditions relative to other tires 've had (toyo proxies, GY eagle GTs <==stay FAR away from these). dry is a little less confident around turns due to the so called soft sidewalls, but know the limits of the tires and the car. i have driven many 4G loaners and they had the stock MXM4 on...i chirped them a few times. can't say much about the winter capabilities. we have them on the Accord....based on the driver's feedback (my other half, not a car guy)...."my car is terrible in snow." my thoughts...it's not the car...it's those shitty OEM michelins dear. i think that with any tire set up it would also depend on the handling characteristics of the car and what you are looking to get out of the tire.

the conti's are in a different classification than the OEM michelins (UHP vs touring i believe). there are many members on here that have the DWS tires and few with the DW tires. the majority seem to favor the DWS/DW's. a few didn't really care for them and went with the pilot sport's.

so what it should come down to...what are YOU looking for in a tire???

nvasion

Dws ftmw

CLtotheTL32

iTrader: (3)

ftmw?

nvasion

for the motherfking win


dws are great. i have them on right now, the stock mxm4 are terrible tires

I hate cars

While the DWs are a good tire, they're the forum boner and overrated around here. It's possible the stock Michelins are just as good. Doubtful but possible. I would question how that poster arrived at his OPINION.

If someone asks me which tire is better I have steady state g-force and stopping distances averaged over no less than 10 stops on the same surface to give. In addition to the objective numbers, I have written down my subjective feelings as well such as the overall dynamics, how they break away at the limit (all at once or gradually), turn-in, turn-in vs ride comfort, optimum temperature, do they get greasy and give up when run hard for extended periods, do they chunk away under track conditions, etc.

Taking an on-ramp to compare tires and saying "I know when I'm at the limit" is a BS way of judging tires and it's only one aspect. At a minimum the car should be taken past it's limit until either the front end pushes or the rear end slides and it should be done in the same manner each time. Measuring gforce is an even better way. For example, I keep sticking with the Nitto NT05 (getting my 4th set put on this afternoon) because even though I've found one tire that comes close in one area, the NT05 has an awsome breakaway. When the car begins to slide in a corner, say the rear end starts to come around, all it takes is a little throttle and a very small steering correction to bring it back in. I've had other tires that once the rear end starts to slide, you're going full lock on the steering and pray that you catch the rear end. Going around an on ramp quickly will not give you this kind of info.

Where is that thread located, I want to read it.

4drviper

i think the poster of the quoted thread will think
"OH SHIT I"M GONNA CRASH" when the rear end comes around lol

Edward'TLS

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...=874990&page=2

I hate cars

Thanks. I couldn't help myself on the post that said he's the most knowledgable person in the thread. Things should liven up by morning lol.

bluescreenofdeath

all that drama gave me a headache.
maybe 'Ceb' is comparing a brand-new set of Conti DW's on the offramp to a set of worn MXM4's. Isn't it true that in dry conditions a worn tire can be grippier than a brand new tire that hasn't been broken in yet? It seems from my personal experience that some tires at 2/32's I've had were grippy as hell on dry pavement compared to their replacements.

Will Y.

That can be true, but it depends on the tire compounds, tire construction, age, tire temperature, road temperature, etc. The difference between worn and new tires of different types (summer tires v. grand touring tires) can be huge based on those factors.

Based on my personal experience and vast tire knowledge (OK, maybe ), the MXM4s seemed to harden up and lose grip after 25K miles or about 2 years, possibly to extend tread life. The grand touring MXM4s had less grip at the end of their life than at the beginning, and less grip than the new UHP all-seasons that replaced them.

The Potenzas RE970 A/S Pole Positions I have now are the bestest 3G TL all-season tires evar, based on my obviously superior butt dyno!!!
...except that I've never driven a vehicle with the DWS and have not driven in snow with the RE970 (the one area Tirerack.com's testing shows the DWS as being better than the RE970).

YMMV.

I hate cars

Most tires lose traction from heat cycles. Less tread can mean less tread squirm and deflection. Usually with age the heat cycles hurt traction more than the reduction in tread helps.

Most summer tires do extremely well in the wet and they're usually good at evacuating water. Up until you hydroplane, the rubber compound is all that matters in the wet. It's the tread that helps stop hydroplaning.

Obviously for absolute best dry traction, no tread is best, look at any racing tire but you don't want to get caught out in the rain. I've gotten caught in the rain on my Hoosiers with only two small lines cut in the middle and people were looking at me like I was crazy and trying to show off but I wasn't. There was one intersection where the light went green and I was giving it as little gas as you could give it and the slicks were still spinning. When I let off the gas, they would slowly slow down but there was no instant stoppage of wheel spin even with my foot off the gas. You've never experienced slippery, not even snow until you drive a car with slicks in the rain. They would literally hydroplane at 5mph.

Edward'TLS

What puzzled me the most was that this "Ceb" guy, who claimed to know all about tires, seemed to think that the Continental DW (max-perf. summer) was no better in dry performance than the stock Michelin MXM4 (grand-touring all-season), and that the Michelin Pilot Super Sport (max-perf. summer) couldn't virtually "blow the socks off" the stock MXM4 in terms of dry performance.

I hate cars

I was considering going over there to nit-pick but the mods would probably not like it. Still tempting though.

bluescreenofdeath

Thanks IHC, that's good to know

ceb

It is painfully obvious that some folks here are only capable of taking posts out of context.

Nowhere did I state or imply that the OE were equivalent to the DW - which I currently happen to have on my car.

I stated that my car - on either tire - negotiated a particular offramp without issues at a certain speed. This was obviously not a back-to-back test by any means but was a mere comment that roughly 40mph felt fine with either tire.

It is obvious to everyone but Edward - who seems on a quest to take my posts out of context - that a high performance summer tire will have more grip in certain conditions than a grand touring all season tire.

What must also be recgnized that this entire discussion began when Edward blamed another member's accident on the "crappy OE tires" when that poster was actually driving on bald tires.

My point in that thread was the same as here - the incident was caused by defective equipment (bald tires) and not the type of tire. A bald DW, PS2 or whatever would have resulted in the same outcome.

That thread degenerated when Eddie claimed that his high performance Michelin tire negotiated a 60kmh curve at 160kmh while the OE tire could barely manage 90kmh - an absolute impossibility.

He seems to have gotten annoyed when I called him on it.

That said, the facts as I have always stated

Under certain conditions, a high performance tire will obviously outperform an all-season tire

The OE tire is an intentional compromise between handling, wear and comfort

The OE tire is perfectly fine for most owners under most conditions

Tread is required for roadholding in the wet

I'm out of these idiotic threads unless my posts are taken out of context.

I hate cars

I actually agree with this. Hydroplaning resistance is a matter or tread. Below the hydroplaning threshold it's all in the rubber and many people don't realize a high performance summer tire actually grips very well in the rain along with excellent water shedding ability. Any tire, even the best rain tire on the planet would have the same result if bald. Hydroplaning scares me the most because with just about any other scenario there's something you can do to overcome it. Hydroplaning is one of the few things where once it begins you're along for the ride. I've got caught in the rain on my Hoosiers by accident and they literally hydroplaned at 10mph. I had to drive home at 10mph with my hazards on and the car was still going sideways toward the crown of the road with no throttle.

All seasons are a compromise and IMO they do nothing well but everything ok.

Differences in cornering speeds while it may seem like a lot to the driver usually amount to a mph or two when measured at the limit. I do hit this limit once in a great while on the street under the right conditions and part of the reason I've stuck with the tires I have is the break-away is very predictable, especially for a tire with such high limits. Many of the race tires I'm used to completely give up once you break traction.

Morrissey25

iTrader: (4)

Having owned both tires, I personally feel that the DW's have been the best. It isn't because I feel that the stock MXM4's are bad, I just feel more planted with the DW's. Realistically, it is most likely because I am running 265's that makes me feel more planted

I am a firm believer that as IHC stated "All seasons are a compromise and IMO they do nothing well but everything ok..." And it is because of this that I choose to run a summer tire in the warm months and winter tires when there is a possibility of snow. Comparing an all season tire to a summer tire does not make sense to me. Either way, I absolutely love my DW's and will continue to purchase them. I'm not ballsy enough to run slicks in the summer months due to my fear of hydroplaning...

If I was to consider using an all season tire I would try out the DWS Conti's over the MXM4's just to see if I could "feel" a difference...

nfnsquared

Good article on automobile tire hydroplaning. It's really scary at how slow a tire with perfectly good tread can hydroplane:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/m...view/index.htm

Even with good tread, speed can get you in trouble when you hit pooled water of sufficient depth (doesn't take much, as little as 1/10") and distance (30ft). There is a very general rule of thumb to determine an approximate speed at which a tire will hydroplane and that is 9 x the square root of the tire's pressure.

The CU Reports findings of hydroplane speeds between 47mph and 55mph seem to back that up, but remember, that's with great tread still on the tire.

ceb

Finally somebody who gets it

We used to put people into identical cars with new, worn and bald tires and sent them on the "hydroplaning section" of the BMW test track. Here is an short description of how hydroplaning works It is important to note that even with new tires, that loss of roadholding happens with only 5mm of water on the roadway. That 5mm is nearly equivalent to the tread depth of a new tire (13/64ths - most new tires are between 14 and 18 64ths)

Newer studies are now leading US lawmakers to consider 4/32nds as the new replacement point for a tire. The German Automobile Association ADAC considers a tire ready for replacement at 5/32nds (although the current legal limit there is 2/32nds as well)

Hydroplaning is no fun as the OP in the thread that starting this discussion found out the hard way.

Edward'TLS

Back in that thread, this was what I said in full (with no editing) :


This was a continuation of what I started off in post #15, once again quoted in full :


I was always talking with this point in mind : "Please ditch the crappy OEM all-season tires and instead get some decent high-performance tires best suited for the weather."

Thus, in post #34, when I said high-performance tires, I meant high-performance summer tires for the summer, and high-performance all-season/snow tires for the winter.

Still, high-perf. all-season and even some high-perf. snow tires will out-corner the crappy performing OEM MXM4 in both the dry and the wet.

Nowadays, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA3 and PA4 high-perf. snow tires are so advanced that they are on par with even the high-perf. all-season tires in the dry/wet/snow/ice, let alone the grand-touring all-season tires such as MXM4. The drawback are more noise and much shorter lifespan than normal.

It wasn't after you posted the following, that I mentioned the Pilot Super Sport summer tire for the very 1st time, just to illustrate how max-performance tires can virtually "blow the socks off" the crappy-performing OEM MXM4 A/S tire in the dry; simply because you couldn't even take corners with the Conti DW (max-perf tire) any faster than the OEM MXM4 (grand-touring A/S) :


I absolutely can't see any value of a person's credentials when he said he had (for the industry) driven cars on various tires virtually from the beginning of modern radial tire technology, but wasn't able to take corners with maximum-performance summer tires any faster than with the grand-touring all-season tires in the dry.

I have used many different tires and have continuously posted reviews on them in the 2G/4G TL Tires & Wheels sub-forums. In the next few days, I'll post another new tire review on the Michelin's newest snow tire - Pilot Alpin PA4.

If you really have (used ?) tried so many tires, why don't you also post some reviews on them, so that all Acurazine members can benefit from your knowledge and experience too ?

I hate cars

Got any personal experience with hydroplaning?

I hate cars

I'm not at a computer so I'll elaborate later. A tire that's great in the rain will resist hydroplaning better to a higher speed and/or water depth than a tire that's not so good at shedding water.

However, and this is where the miscommunication comes in, run both of those tires down to 2/32nds and they're on equal ground. Remember its the rubber compound that determines traction in the wet when you're below the hydro planing threshold. It's the tread at work at higher speeds and deeper water , shedding water where hydroplaning is a factor so the rubber can do its job. . Take away the tread and you're back to just the rubber determining rain performance. As I said before on some 11" wide slicks, 5-10mph was enough to hydroplane in very shallow water.