Sarge

Keep in mind I'm upgrading every aspect of the car; tires are critical.

On race gas I may make near 800bhp, and with H-sports, upgraded shocks, big brakes and a 295 tread section on this heavy car, tires are a critical factor, particularly for summer use.

For winter/all-season, less so...

LCP

Part of the problem with the car being this heavy is that the tires disappear even faster when driven hard. So you spend too much on them to begin with and then they disappear. Michelins are just a ripoff in the USA now with the exchange rates, with no justifiable performance increase proportional to the added cost.

Sarge

My options for summer fitments are these two tires:

Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 285/35/ZR19 - 99Y 220 AA A $435

Bridgestone Potenza RE050A 285/35/ZR19 - 99Y 140 A A $278

Given the amount of power and the amount of money I'm already pouring into the car, the incremental cost of the PS2's over the RE050A's seems like a relatively good cost/benefit decision in favor of the PS2's.

They offer more grip and better sidewall flex characteristics which lends to sharper steering input.

The whole exercise is frankly a complete and total waste of money, but it is a 'project' that I've been intent on doing for years, and sometimes you just have to say 'what the fvck', and I'm saying it with a smile this time.

So now that's in motion, the extra $600 for the PS2's seems like a no-brainer given (1) my experience with them on my 997 C2S and (2) The reviews I've read by RS6 owners of both tires...

Frankly, if I could get some nice 10" or 10.5" wheels I'd consider some 295 or 305 section tires, but I have a feeling they'd probably tramline like hell. I'm a little concerned with the 285's but the nose-heavy configuration of this car demands some meat up there. Ask any RS6 owner...

In an 'extreme' modification project like this one, I don't look at tires from a 'price point' perspective, but strictly an incremental performance perspective. While they can still be 'over driven' quite easily, given the weight of the car, the PS2's seem to bring something additional to the table over the RE050A's, and that's how the seats at this 'modded' table are being allocated.

If it were a lightly modded allroad, I'd look at it a bit more sensibly. But nothing about this is really sensible, except perhaps that it's cheaper and more capable on the road than a Cayenne turbo... which also hardly qualifies as sensible, eh?

But I'm gonna be grinning ear to ear when it's done :-)))

Sarge

You have P Zero Nero's or P Zero Nero M+S? Very different tires, of course...

Sarge

I think you were the only negative data point I read on the WR's.

I'm somewhat concerned that they have achieved some sort of cult-like 'beyond reproach' status where no fault 'could ever be considered', so I was glad to find someone with something bad to say about them.

I may still give them a try though, as I've loved the Hakka snows I've had in the past, and reputations (like the WR has) don't get randomly assigned.

As I intend to mount them for ski season and/or long distance towing only, I'm inclined to put more value on the wet/snow/dirt performance, which is what's leaning me in that direction.

If I don't like them as much as the P Zero's, It seems like it'd be pretty easy to dismount and sell them to someone down here or up in the bay area.

I'm also going to wait until probably November or so before committing, as there may be some new offerings by then. Thanks for your input though. At least I feel like I'm getting the full measure of the pros/cons...

Sarge

Everything I've read puts the Conti Extreme's in second place to those option, price excluded. I've read some pretty disappointing things about the Yoko's winter performance, putting it in 'last' among this group.

The notes I've read give the Conti Extreme's high marks for snow/ice grip and comfort/noise, but lower marks on steering feel and dry road holding, owing partly to a softer sidewall (not a good thing on 18's while towing a boat).

It seems the PS M+S are best at dry road holding, the PZ M+S are next, followed by the Yoko's, the WR's and then the Conti's.

Given I have summer tires, my priority falls more to the wet/snow/dirt qualifications, which would give priority to the Nokian WR's, followed by the Conti's, the Pilot Sports and then the PZ M+S.

Comfort seems to fall toward: Conti>WR>PZ>PS>Yoko

So for road trips in the winter in frequently/mostly dry conditions, but with an imperative placed on snow, the WR seems like the best choice (given the snow imperative), without consideration for cost.

Given the amount of money being poured into this car, and the fact that the tires are the most important part to realizing the car's potential, I'm not concerned with the cost difference in any of these tires.

Lastly I also have to give priority to the load rating on the tires. I'm not sure what it is for the Conti or Yoko, but the WR's have the load rating I need as well...

Thanks again for your input - any further thoughts?

finiki

<ul><li><a href="http://www.tirerack.com/a.jsp?a=AR4&url=%2Ftires%2Fsurveyresults%2Fsurveyd isplay.jsp%3Ftype%3DUHPAS">Click for data..</a></li></ul>