davewhodavedunn

Hi i guys. So I am wondering if anyone has ever had experience with FALKEN tires? Specifically the FALKEN fk452. I had these on my 2006 Acura tl for 1 and a half summers and 1 summer on my 08 Honda accord v6 sedan with 19inch rims. I just bought a new set of fastwheel raven rims (great Canadian company). I used Hercules raptis wr1 on these 20inch rims. They turned out to be defective and I swapped them for these falkens as they were the same price range. When I had them they before they scalloped after 2 seasons. I contacted FALKEN and they say this could have been because of suspension or alignment issues. I told them that was bullshit. They did nothing to help. Regardless round 2 begins. I contacted falken to tell them I have a new set of these tires and I am not messing around this time. Even the tire shop told me to keep and eye on these, keep my car aligned as these have scalloping issues.

Let me know what you guys think of falkens or the falken fk452s.

davewhodavedunn

Sarlacc

I used to autoX with an older falken...the Azenis..I think it 415 or 416.

I LOVED them. I would look at falken for my current car...but they don't make tires in the size I would need.

oonowindoo

Azenis is completely different from 452, it is closer to R compound than street tires.

452 is very popular in the VIP world because the sidewall is ideal for stretch.
If you are using for daily drive, anything is fine.

jjashaa

iTrader: (23)

for the price, i think i would rather get the hankook v12

davewhodavedunn

This is the response via email.

As we may have discussed in the past, the FK-452 is a directional tire, and cannot be rotated in an X pattern to mitigate feathering or similar wear.

If the tire sizes are significantly larger in overall diameter and wider, or if the car is lowered, or the wheel offset is different, the alignment specs for the car may not be applicable to the new fitment. So, even a car that is "correct" on the alignment rack will wear oddly, since the specs assume the original.



Our Tire Guide shows two possible specs for the V6:

P235/45R18 94 Load Index (Standard) at 34 PSI front/rear. At 34 PSI the design tire load is 1,396 lbs.
P225/50R17 93 Load Index (Standard) at 32 PSI front/rear. At 32 PSI the design tire load is 1,367 lbs.

The 225/35R20 is a 90 Load Index (Reinforced) which carries a maximum 1,323 lbs at 42 PSI. That indicates you 44 lbs to 73 lbs under-rated for the design load, and the tires require 42 PSI to do that. We understand that car makers assume a full passenger, fuel, and luggage load when choosing tire load ratings. If you do not normally run that fully laden, you may have adequate load capacity with this size. But again, that is at 42 PSI.

Please ensure that you are operating at that 42 PSI. It is likely that if the TPMS is still set for the original design pressures you are underinflated significantly. You should check with your Honda dealer to ensure they have been reset to that higher pressure.

Inadequate load and or inflation will at best result in irregular tire wear, and at worst may result in tire failure. Please make sure you are running the correct pressures.

stangg172004

Good starting point, had them for my first auto-x season. Switched to Direzzas and stuck with them until i decided to put money towards student loans instead of my car :-/

fuzzy02CLS

iTrader: (2)

They were on my srt8 when I bought it. 255-45-20 all around. I had almost no traction. They would loose it at any speed if I put the pedal down hard. Caused the ESP to kick in all the time. Once I replaced them with the current hankooks all that went away.
My only experience with the fk452, & I'll never get them.

davewhodavedunn

Anyone else have these fk452s? Is 42psi not alot? I am communicating with them to basically say "if these tires are shit like everyone says they are and shit like they were on my other set then why are they still selling them and why don't they back them up with warranty?

AZuser

If they were "shit" the last time you had them, then why'd you get them again?

05TLdcc

You already answered your own question.

onebadna1nsx

I actually really liked the 452's.
If you're stretching tires, you will hear people hate on the FK452's saying they bubble like crazy. Now that more people are running V12 Evo's, people are seeing that they bubble too. I've had one bubble on my stretched FK452's, and a complete sidewall failure with the V12 evos.

For the first few months with the brand new FK452's they were awesome, you could only hear the wind noise. After wearing them down, they get very noisy and make a wompwompwomp sound like an airplane. They still grip very well though. I'd say myself that the V12 Evos are a better tire. I've run 3 sets of V12's since then and haven't looked back.

davewhodavedunn

If the fks were so good why did you change them up to the v12s? I think falken has potential but they need to try harder.

synth19

I like 452s as the tend to run more narrow then other tires in the same size.

SharksBreath

iTrader: (33)

i run fk452's bc i heard they were good for stretching. i haven't had any issues with them and i'm about 7k miles into them.

neuronbob

OP, I fail to understand why you didn't just purchase another type of tire in the same price range instead of purchasing a third set of tires you didn't like.



For the record, I've owned two sets of Falken 512s and while they wore well and were inexpensive, they got really noisy toward the end of their service life despite regular rotation. They kept their grip till the end, though.

davewhodavedunn

It clearly states that was the only option. It was a new set of hercules tires or the falken fk452s or spend more money on another tire.

These tires corner well but they are not good in the rain. They are really loud too. Trust me they wear really fast and unevenly. Im going to bump them up to 42psi as they directed and see how they roll. No pun intended lol

onebadna1nsx

To me the V12's are a better tire as I stated earlier. I ran 8 sets of 452's before my first bubble. After I finally had a bubble I decided to try something else- friend told me to try the V12's since they were $25 cheaper per tire so I went with it. Turned out to be a good thing.

davewhodavedunn

Do you guys think 42 psi on a 225/35/20 tire is too much?

neuronbob

Not being argumentative, but you didn't clearly say that was the only option in your OP.

In any case, 42 psi is high for 20-inchers. Mid to upper 30's is probably adequate depending on what kind of ride quality you are looking for.

Good luck with the tires!

davewhodavedunn

I hear ya. I just think that is weird that falken told me to put 42 psi in them based on the tire size, rim size, car make and model. Isn't this bad for the tires? Too much pressure?

onebadna1nsx

If you're stretching, 40 is the minimum PSI you should keep the tires at... at least that's what my friends told me. I kept them at about 34psi and got the bubble. I'm now running about 48psi. I don't really see any adverse effects.

Will Y.

If that was Falken's recommendation, go with it.

Acura recommended 39 psi COLD for the front tires on the OEM A-Spec 18" rim for the 3G TL, compared to 35/36 psi in front for the 17" rims on the manual trans cars.



48 psi sounds too high for tire pressure on a daily driver.

Tire pressure increases as the tires warm up, so your tires will be @ 50+ psi when the tires are warm, which I'd be concerned about-- hopefully that's lower than the max air pressure imprinted on the side of your tires.
Greater wear in the middle of the tread will also mean 48 psi is too high, and that less tread connects with the road compared with a lower pressure.

fuzzy02CLS

iTrader: (2)

Regarding PSI. Run the 42 & watch the wear. All you can do . There really is no magic PSI rating. What works best for you will be different then another car. As long as you don't go past the rating on the tire.