Picking up my 06 STI Today, never owned a manual - any tips?

[JD]

Not really. I don't test tires for living. But I do have sufficient
second hand data
to make the conclusion I made. See below.

Maybe I should excercise restraint and post from home so that I can
waste more
time googling.

Maybe you should just post about subjects that you have first hand knowledge
of

 

[Body Roll]

Incorrect. The RE-070 offer excellent dry, sunny weather traction. They just
suck in the rain, mud, snow.. well pretty much everywhere but dry, warm
pavement. There are very few tires that will match the RE-070 in normal
summer driving. You know the treadwear is 140 right? They're practically
slicks..!

That got me thinking for a while, but ok, I'll bite. I'm not sure where
I can stick the 140 figure.
140 of what? That is dry grip? Does it mean that the tire just does not
last?
Hey, there is RE-92 that
1) Does not grip
2) Does not last
3) Cost a lot
It probably got low treadwear rating too. I expect to get 25-30k miles
of them
on my OBS. Good riddance.

I deeply care about wet grip of max performance tires
(and turn in response, because if I did not uhp all seasons would be no
brainer).
Understandbly the snow grip is close to 0. That is not what max perf
tires
are designed to have anyway.

What is sorely needed for further progress in decent tire sales is an
overhaul of the traction ratings by the tire industry. What I want to
know is:
1) Dry traction
2) Wet traction
3) Snow traction
Say you mount a set of tires to measure on G35, 325i or IS250
(basically anything
with a decent (firm) suspension) and measure what you can get on a
skipad.
For example 1.0g/.82g/.01g is useful to me because I know that it's
better than
1.02g/.67g/.02g on wet.
Ice traction would be nice to know but I'm not sure how many companies
have an
ice skipad to test the grip on ice.

Mind you the difference in wet grip in C&D test was between .67 (who
pulled that? KD?)
and .82 (F1 GS-D3). Since 070 was not in the test your guess is as good
as mine regarding
wet performance. Being a Bridgestone I'd expect it to be pretty good,
closer to .82 than .67
But how could anyone be sure? There is absolutely no transparency in
the tire performance
ratings.

Is treadwear index useful to you? Would f1 gs d3 last as long on a tire
shredder like evo/sti
as on econo car like basic Impreza? Probably not. Not that I care.

Then there are ratings on tirerack. Not sure where people pull the
numbers from 0-10.
Probably out of their posterior. What would've been useful (if the tire
companies won't
budge and overhaul the traction & treadwear ratings) is a peer 2 peer
comparison
of two tires. You rate
1. Dry grip of tire A vs. tire B
2. Wet grip of tire A vs. tire B
3. Snow grip of tire A vs. tire B

That may help to kill the 80000 mile warranty garbage for people who
matter.

Any CS students want a programming/web design project?
All I care about are max perf tires and uhp all seasons.
I don't think there is a need to compare the high performance garbage
like RE-92s.

 

[k. ote]

That got me thinking for a while, but ok, I'll bite. I'm not sure where
I can stick the 140 figure.
140 of what? That is dry grip? Does it mean that the tire just does not
last?

A treadwear rating is 140 means that whatever the baseline of "100" is for
your locality's tire ratings, you can expect to get 1.4 times that. Up
here, that means I have an expected lifetime of 14,000 km. That's puny. A
normal AS tire has a treadwear up in the 400s (40,000 km.)

Hey, there is RE-92 that
1) Does not grip
2) Does not last
3) Cost a lot
It probably got low treadwear rating too. I expect to get 25-30k miles
of them on my OBS. Good riddance.

In the RE-070's case, low treadwear really does mean "basically slicks."
They're so soft that they wear down much more quickly than normal tires do.
Softness, in this case, translates to "insane dry grip." Plus, it basically
has no tread pattern on it. It's literally just one big, flat tire with a
couple of lines through it.

Mind you the difference in wet grip in C&D test was between .67 (who
pulled that? KD?)

Who's 'KD'?

Is treadwear index useful to you? Would f1 gs d3 last as long on a tire

It is. It tells me how soft my tire is and what I can expect if I autocross
to work every morning. Which I don't.

Any CS students want a programming/web design project?

Oh, what low standards we have these days that we think we need a CS
undergrad to design a website. I remember when the S in CS meant just that
to Joe Q. Public.

 

[JD]

That got me thinking for a while, but ok, I'll bite. I'm not sure where
I can stick the 140 figure.
140 of what? That is dry grip? Does it mean that the tire just does not
last?
Hey, there is RE-92 that
1) Does not grip
2) Does not last
3) Cost a lot
It probably got low treadwear rating too. I expect to get 25-30k miles
of them
on my OBS. Good riddance.

I deeply care about wet grip of max performance tires

Depends on the max perf tire. Some are designed for the wet and some for
the dry

(and turn in response, because if I did not uhp all seasons would be no
brainer).
Understandbly the snow grip is close to 0. That is not what max perf
tires
are designed to have anyway.

Depends on the tire. There are max performance snow tires and gravel tires
as well

What is sorely needed for further progress in decent tire sales is an
overhaul of the traction ratings by the tire industry. What I want to
know is:
1) Dry traction
2) Wet traction
3) Snow traction

OK. Now you have three numbers that few understand rather than one.

Say you mount a set of tires to measure on G35, 325i or IS250
(basically anything
with a decent (firm) suspension) and measure what you can get on a
skipad.
For example 1.0g/.82g/.01g is useful to me because I know that it's
better than
1.02g/.67g/.02g on wet.
Ice traction would be nice to know but I'm not sure how many companies
have an
ice skipad to test the grip on ice.

And set the expectation that they will grip at the same level with an SUV.

Mind you the difference in wet grip in C&D test was between .67 (who
pulled that? KD?)
and .82 (F1 GS-D3). Since 070 was not in the test your guess is as good
as mine regarding
wet performance. Being a Bridgestone I'd expect it to be pretty good,
closer to .82 than .67
But how could anyone be sure? There is absolutely no transparency in
the tire performance
ratings.

Is treadwear index useful to you? Would f1 gs d3 last as long on a tire
shredder like evo/sti
as on econo car like basic Impreza? Probably not. Not that I care.

Depends on how you drive it. I got 40,000 KM (24,000 miles) out of the OEM
RE070s.

Then there are ratings on tirerack. Not sure where people pull the
numbers from 0-10.
Probably out of their posterior. What would've been useful (if the tire
companies won't
budge and overhaul the traction & treadwear ratings) is a peer 2 peer
comparison
of two tires. You rate
1. Dry grip of tire A vs. tire B
2. Wet grip of tire A vs. tire B
3. Snow grip of tire A vs. tire B

Lots of tire review places that already do it. Why would the tire companies
need to overhaul their ratings? The They already have treadwear, temp and
load ratings that describe the behaviour of the tire. It is more a matter
of educating oneself on what that stuff means. All the info you need is
already on the tire.

That may help to kill the 80000 mile warranty garbage for people who
matter.

Any CS students want a programming/web design project?
All I care about are max perf tires and uhp all seasons.
I don't think there is a need to compare the high performance garbage
like RE-92s.

Why would a CS student want to do a website? If they are interested in this
stuff, they probably already know it. And they sure don't need the practice
building a website.

 

[Body Roll]

Depends on the max perf tire. Some are designed for the wet and some for
the dry

What I meant was I deeply care about wet grip of max performance summer
tires.
Proofreading is important :-(

Depends on the tire. There are max performance snow tires and gravel tires
as well
Right.

OK. Now you have three numbers that few understand rather than one.

That's exactly the main point of my post. I have no idea what I'm
supposed to do with 140 treadwear AA traction. So you have one 140/AA
that have a wet grip to a tune of .67g
and another AA/140 that grips at .82g when it's wet. It's a large
enough spread for
me to chose f1 gs d3 instead of king of dry, don't you think???

And set the expectation that they will grip at the same level with an SUV.

You mean there are SUV tires that actually offer some grip under some
conditions?
What are they?

Lots of tire review places that already do it. Why would the tire companies

Really???? How does RE-070 compare to Advan Neova on wet pavement?
You see a lot of reviews for performance winter tires with any numbers
quantifying the grip? The three at a time tests on tirerack are useful
but
it takes forever to dig thru all of them. C&D did an awesome 15 tire
comparo
a while ago but I haven't seen anything like that for uhp all season
tires
or winter tires.

need to overhaul their ratings? The They already have treadwear, temp and
load ratings that describe the behaviour of the tire. It is more a matter
of educating oneself on what that stuff means. All the info you need is
already on the tire.

In very rough terms maybe. But it's up to the tire maker to put AA
rating on the tire
that might be marked by traction A by another manufacturer or
artificially
place uhp tire (RE 950 for example) into hp category next to crapenza
92
(Do I hear anyone snickering?). To punch below weight so to speak.

Why would a CS student want to do a website? If they are interested in this
stuff, they probably already know it. And they sure don't need the practice
building a website.

Ok. I'll refrase: any volunteers hungry for that kind of work?

 

[sndive]

A treadwear rating is 140 means that whatever the baseline of "100" is for
your locality's tire ratings, you can expect to get 1.4 times that. Up
here, that means I have an expected lifetime of 14,000 km. That's puny. A
normal AS tire has a treadwear up in the 400s (40,000 km.)


In the RE-070's case, low treadwear really does mean "basically slicks."
They're so soft that they wear down much more quickly than normal tires do.
Softness, in this case, translates to "insane dry grip." Plus, it basically
has no tread pattern on it. It's literally just one big, flat tire with a
couple of lines through it.

Ok. According to your theory RE-92 with rating 160 A A in 205/55 HR16
size
(apparently it varies depending on size from 160 thru 360!!!!!) offers
insane dry grip?
160 is not much higher than 140, don't you think?
Ecsta ASX (which cost about 1/2 of RE-92 btw) has a rating of 420 A A
or AA A.
420 is much higher than 160 so you are saying it grips worse than
RE-92?
No bloody way. The only place where 92s outperform ASX is maybe snow.
I haven't driven the same car with 92s and ASXes on snow to tell which
one is better.

Links to the spec pages:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.jsp?make=Kumho&model=ECSTA+ASX&tirePageLocQty=

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Spec.jsp?make=Bridgestone&model=Potenza+RE92&tirePageLocQty=

Looks like the traction part of the UTQG was developed in stone ages.
AA is above .54g? .41 on aspahalt? Wow!!! That's fine graining!
Maybe the turanza customers can appreciate that fine index.

 

[JD]

What I meant was I deeply care about wet grip of max performance summer
tires.
Proofreading is important :-(

Tire rack gives reviews as do a number of palces on wet versus dry grip

That's exactly the main point of my post. I have no idea what I'm
supposed to do with 140 treadwear AA traction. So you have one 140/AA
that have a wet grip to a tune of .67g
and another AA/140 that grips at .82g when it's wet. It's a large
enough spread for
me to chose f1 gs d3 instead of king of dry, don't you think???

140 treadwear tells you how soft the tire is, and how long it will last. A
treadwear of 280 would last twice as long under identical conditions, but
the compound is harder. That means it will never develop the same grip as a
140 for the same tread pattern, but its grip also won't vary as much with
temperature.

You mean there are SUV tires that actually offer some grip under some
conditions?
What are they?


Really???? How does RE-070 compare to Advan Neova on wet pavement?
You see a lot of reviews for performance winter tires with any numbers
quantifying the grip? The three at a time tests on tirerack are useful
but
it takes forever to dig thru all of them. C&D did an awesome 15 tire
comparo
a while ago but I haven't seen anything like that for uhp all season
tires
or winter tires.

What difference would it make? A number is just a number. It will be no
more meaningful than the UTQG is now. You can take the treadwear (which
gives the softness of the compound) and the contact patch size (available
from the manufacturer) and the percentage of the tread that is in contact
with the road (not too hard to figure out by looking at the tire) and get
the figures for how much water the tire can displace (also available as part
of the tire spec) and you can calculate it roughly yourself.

In very rough terms maybe. But it's up to the tire maker to put AA
rating on the tire

Well, they test it. But the test is standardized. Tires manufacturers have
their own set of standard processes for producing, testing and labelling
tires.