Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[cem_devecioglu]

Goodyears (f1 asym 2) definitely silent, unless you start slide and sideways   but temperature difference may have effect , not sure..
 
PS3 I found them very good on a friends car (accord).. but tyres were new..
 
for clit I'm using pilot exalto pe2 which was excellent but its a different league..

[SMD]

Good to know. As I said earlier, I have 4 different branded tyres with different amount of tread on each tyre resulting in a little tyre noise on the motorway

[feeutfo]

Currently running sc3 very good tyre all round.
Will give 20k, so justifys the the more expensive price IMO.
Excellent grip wet or dry, good stability in the MO variant.

However they are bringing in the similarly ish priced sc5 so 3 is becoming more difficult to find in my preferred "MO" Mercedes variant with rim protection, as Micheldever didn't have any in.
I currently have the Audi variant and although not as stable are slightly more compliant. Early days with these though so will report as I find...

The sc3 don't give as planted a feel as the Dunlops such as sport maxx and tt but they do last longer. Considerably longer. Still give good directional stability though.

Goodyear give good results too but I have limited experience with those, although others speak highly off them.

I am told the only difference between MO and the std SC3 is a soft start compound is used on MO, to give ecellent grip from new, much like the SP9090 over the SP9000

utter 'dangle berries'! As said check the conti web site. It's listed in detail.

There is absolutely sweet FA on the UK Contiental Tyres website. Only one variant of SC3.  To be honest, such a crap website is putting me off their product

Bloody awkward admin!
http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/automobile/themes/car-tires/summer-tires/contisportcontact-3/contisportcontact-3,tabNr=4.html

[TheBoy]

Have you tried the GY F1 assymetric 2 yet? Noisy, but very grippy. Not too expensive either?

Not on mine, only on other Omegas (so I wouldn't have driven it as hard as mine). I reserve judgement, but wasn't that impressed, I was expecting better after the reports I'd heard from people I trust.

[TheBoy]

Currently running sc3 very good tyre all round.
Will give 20k, so justifys the the more expensive price IMO.
Excellent grip wet or dry, good stability in the MO variant.

However they are bringing in the similarly ish priced sc5 so 3 is becoming more difficult to find in my preferred "MO" Mercedes variant with rim protection, as Micheldever didn't have any in.
I currently have the Audi variant and although not as stable are slightly more compliant. Early days with these though so will report as I find...

The sc3 don't give as planted a feel as the Dunlops such as sport maxx and tt but they do last longer. Considerably longer. Still give good directional stability though.

Goodyear give good results too but I have limited experience with those, although others speak highly off them.

I am told the only difference between MO and the std SC3 is a soft start compound is used on MO, to give ecellent grip from new, much like the SP9090 over the SP9000

utter 'dangle berries'! As said check the conti web site. It's listed in detail.

There is absolutely sweet FA on the UK Contiental Tyres website. Only one variant of SC3.  To be honest, such a crap website is putting me off their product

Bloody awkward admin!
http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/automobile/themes/car-tires/summer-tires/contisportcontact-3/contisportcontact-3,tabNr=4.html

So, as suspected, Merc only on 91. Not sure thats enough.

[cem_devecioglu]

as we concluded (at least I tought we concluded) before, driver impressions changes from person to person.. 
 
so the only thing that must be accounted is physical measurements on the road..

[TheBoy]

as we concluded (at least I tought we concluded) before, driver impressions changes from person to person.. 

Everyone has different demands on tyres.

so the only thing that must be accounted is physical measurements on the road..

Tyre reviews are only useful if done on the same car, ideally set up the same way, and if a comparison is being done, by the same driver. For example, a Michelin PS3 driver's view on the amount of grip his tyres can give in a corner will be wildly different to mine.

Which makes every single tyre review site out there utterly useless.

[cem_devecioglu]

as we concluded (at least I tought we concluded) before, driver impressions changes from person to person.. 

1.Everyone has different demands on tyres.

so the only thing that must be accounted is physical measurements on the road..

2.Tyre reviews are only useful if done on the same car, ideally set up the same way, and if a comparison is being done, by the same driver. For example, a Michelin PS3 driver's view on the amount of grip his tyres can give in a corner will be wildly different to mine.

3.Which makes every single tyre review site out there utterly useless.

1.you will demand acceleration, braking and cornering..  everyone wants the same..
 
2.Tyre tests are done by serious organizaions like TUV or others.. physical measurements are done with different tyre brands .. can you claim you will run 100 metres faster than Usain bolt under different conditions 
 
3. cant agree
 
 
 

[TheBoy]

1.you will demand acceleration, braking and cornering..  everyone wants the same..

But my idea of those clearly is different to a PS3 driver's idea of the same. OK, I'll concede the PS3 has a stunning stopping ability in the dry.

Additionally, tunnie for example, wants none of those, he wants something that lasts a million miles, and doesn't care about grip.
 

2.Tyre tests are done by serious organizaions like TUV or others.. physical measurements are done with different tyre brands .. can you claim you will run 100 metres faster than Usain bolt under different conditions 

It matters not who do them. Unless the comparison is done on the same car, by the same driver, its invalid. Has no meaning. Pointless.

I can assure you, Pirelli P6000 (a rather mediocre tyre IMHO) is not a good tyre on the Omega. Its 'OK', but not good. On my previous Astras, it was quite poor. On my little Rover, its stunning. Brilliant. Can't praise it enough. I would also say, on the Rover, there was a marked difference in handling between the H and V rated ones.

So even with the same sized car, same driver, tthe same tyre can swing both ends of the scale with different cars.
 

3. cant agree

Understandable if we can't agree on first 2 points

I will never listen to any review unless its done by someone who makes the same compromises as me, drives a similar style to me, and is done on the same car, set up similar to mine. Otherwise its a waste of time. IMHO.

[YZ250]

I will never listen to any review unless its done by someone who makes the same compromises as me, drives a similar style to me, and is done on the same car, set up similar to mine. Otherwise its a waste of time. IMHO.

That could be difficult, most of them will be serving time for driving like you. 

[feeutfo]

...and the fact tyre makers build tyres for a specific car, and even a specific range,  proves the point that "a tyre" will very easily perform differently on a different car. So unless anyone can come up with a tyre test on an omega we are still very much in the dark as to what works for us on the omega, and what doesn't. And that's before we take driving styles into account.

Having said that, I still believe if we had the resources to run an off tyre test, and had honest drivers that understood what they want from a "good" tyre while accepting thier own driving level to match, I am sure we would all come to very similar conclusions, provided the car was constant, in good nic, and preferably an omega.


I am sure there would be groups of drivers. Fa(s)t medium slow etc, within the results that would prefer a longer lasting tyre over a grippy one etc...

But then again, with no experience of driving at all a tyre test might be the only point if reference.

Personally given given my experience with 3 types of sc3, results can be very different. Why? Maybe suspension design comes into it.

McPherson strut suspension on omega.
Same on Mercedes perhaps? Cirtainly they're later models have extreme castor angles.
Multi link suspension on Audi known to be harsh and prone to failure.
Lexus dual wish own design is highly accurate but very hard, so all of these makers will ask very different qualitys from their tyres.
Eg I do wonder if Her Lexus will benefit from a set of Falkens, although she's happy with the noisy harsh ride Kumho ku31 give the car.


You see my point? Various cars with various suspension designs and drivers with very different ideas on what qualifies as a "good tyre" means tyre test relevance is non existent. ESP on our 10 year old buses.

Cirtainly what's recommended On here sometimes is obviously not based on first hand ecperience.

[05omegav6]

My prefered budget tyre (and tread pattern) is available in 17" and 18" so I am having a set fitted to my mfl MV6 wheels which are being refurbed as we speak...

Chris, when you have a drive to test the poly donuts,  you'll be able to compare them with the brands that you've tried thus far

I suspect that if we bought Tunnie a set of Autogrip F107s he would suddenly develop a very keen interest in tyre performance

Personally, I found the Goodyear NCTs that were originally fitted to be an effective tyre in both wet and dry and also under duress, however they barely lasted 10k, which, given their price, meant that they were not such good value for money

[TheBoy]

I suspect that if we bought Tunnie a set of Autogrip F107s he would suddenly develop a very keen interest in tyre performance

He drove with my Autogrip, and didn't notice . Mrs TB drove to one of the Wycombe meets with my Autogrip, and refused to drive the car again 

So even though they both have a Miss Daisy driving style, there will be differences in tyre demands.

[feeutfo]

We must stop using Tunnie as a benchmark it really isn't fair. (snigger)

[TheBoy]

OK, found the specs on TIS - not directly, but against tyre pressures. GM state for facelifts (for 235/45/17) 94W and Opel Aftermarket as 93W and 94W. This fits in with that info in the back of my mind that Omegas on 17" rim should have 94 or higher (although 93 or higher seems to be the case) - though not sure where I got that, as not in FL manual. Maybe in MFL manual?

Which puts the SC3 MO out of the equation, as not available in anything other than 91 in my size.

//TB goes off to the Dunlop site...