CEAT are a budget brand, made by one of the bigger, better known budget brands (can't remember which one). They're not very good, but if you're ditching the car soon, then the cost saving (~£20 a corner for 155/55/R14 about 5 years ago) could be worth it.

CEAT are made by Pirelli. Arrowspeed are made by Goodyear.

I do miles fully laiden, so choose Michelins. I know I can get 25-30k from the fronts and/or rears.

So I could buy cheaper, but if I only save £50/corner and they only achieve 1/2 the distance then it's a false economy.

Dan

I have considered buying the 235/40/18 instead of the standard 225.

Does the 235 fit OK?

Does it look any better? I think the 225 looks narrow on the rear . This may be better sorted with a wheel spacer - but Im not really that keen on these (dont have any evidence -just feels unsafe to me).

Any handling/noise pros or cons ?

mine are on my passat, came as 235 as standard so I cant compare with 225 but i've seen others with 225 so im guessing you'd be fine. 235 are a bit more expensive too, not such a common size. What I can say, theres no more tyre noise than what I got with my vRS

My Pirelli P-Zero's that came on the car are not as good as the Veredesteins, If I was taking the car round a track on a hot day then the P-Zeros might have a slight edge, but the Veredsteins are much better in the wet and nearly as grippy in the dry, certainly not a cheap nasty budget tyre

Never heard of Vredstein, Toyo, Falken.

All I know of is Goodyear, Dunlop, Bridgestone, Pirelli, Michelin, Avon, Firestone & Continental's.

So the "cheap unknown brands" are unknown to you.

Toyo & Falken have been around for at least 25 years that I can remember. Vredstein - I have knowledge of them but they aren't sold in Australia - AFAIK, they've been around for years.

When I worked at Goodyear in the '80s I was told that Goodyear supplied tyres to our local vehicle manufacturers (Ford, GM, Toyota, Mitsubishi/Chrysler, Nissan) at "manufacturing cost price or less" in competition with Bridgestone & Dunlop (the other major local tyre mfrs at the time). The reason they were happy to lose money doing this was because their research had shown that ~70% of drivers replaced like-for-like at the first tyre change-over and 40% at the 2nd change. If you could get your tyres on a vehicle as OEM then you were guaranteed a certain amount of sales over the next 5 years. Not only was this good for the cashflow but it meant the Production Planners could better estimate production levels, capital expenditure requirements, etc.

It also meant that we sold OEM spec tyres at a premium and it was an easy sale because:

• The company cars just came in and said "gimme another set like wots on it"
  
• And for everyone else you could BS on about "chosen by the manufacturer", "ideally suited to the suspension tune", "tyre engineers working with suspension engineers", etc.
  

I asked SUK the same question - this is their response:

"Thank you for your recent email, regarding the tyres on your Octavia.

Having spoken to our Technical Support Team, I can confirm that your tyres need to be Y rating XL tyres and I would not recommend for you to fit W rating or non-XL tyres."

I asked SUK the same question - this is their response:

"Thank you for your recent email, regarding the tyres on your Octavia.

Having spoken to our Technical Support Team, I can confirm that your tyres need to be Y rating XL tyres and I would not recommend for you to fit W rating or non-XL tyres."

Still presuming that Jules has 225/40 18s; what I suggest this advice from SUK means is 'get tyres that are 92Y load index and not 88W'.

As long as they are 92Y, as your OE Michelins are, they do not have to say XL (which your Michelins do not IIRC). For this tyre size, it is the 88W that is 'normal' and the 92Y are 'extra load'.

So what are you going to buy? Go get the Vreds - you know it makes sense.

PS> Vredestein is a Dutch Company and compared to Goodyear, Michelin et al can probably be best described as a small independent (i.e. not global) and AFAIK they only market within Europe.

PPS> Question for Brad_1.8T - any comments from down-under on Bridgestone's new Adrenelin that seem to be awesome from some reviews I've read but they are not available in Europe yet (only Far East and Australasia?)

PPS> Question for Brad_1.8T - any comments from down-under on Bridgestone's new Adrenelin that seem to be awesome from some reviews I've read but they are not available in Europe yet (only Far East and Australasia?)

The Adrenaline are a very good tyre. Quite a few of the guys on my "home" forum use them (Car and Image) and have written extensive revues.

Unfortunately, Bridgestone hype them so much that many people have purchased them as a track tyre (like a Falken RT615), which they aren't. In fact, they aren't as good as an RE050A. As one user said 95% of an RE050A for 65% of the cost.

The Adrenaline take a long time to bed-in (at least 700km) and they don't like violent steering inputs. They give a softer ride than the RE050A.

If you have a browse at my home forum, maxjj, has ongoing revues as do a few others - I've never driven a car with them fitted but from what I've read I'd probably describe them as a good premium all-rounder for the enthusiast driver that has to share his car with his kids/wife.

The Adrenaline are a very good tyre. Quite a few of the guys on my "home" forum use them (Car and Image) and have written extensive revues.

Unfortunately, Bridgestone hype them so much that many people have purchased them as a track tyre (like a Falken RT615), which they aren't. In fact, they aren't as good as an RE050A. As one user said 95% of an RE050A for 65% of the cost.

The Adrenaline take a long time to bed-in (at least 700km) and they don't like violent steering inputs. They give a softer ride than the RE050A.

If you have a browse at my home forum, maxjj, has ongoing revues as do a few others - I've never driven a car with them fitted but from what I've read I'd probably describe them as a good premium all-rounder for the enthusiast driver that has to share his car with his kids/wife.

Thanks; I'd gained the impression that they were Bridgestone's 'top' (performance) tyre but clearly the RE050A remains as this.

In which case - I'll stick to my Ultrac Sessantas

Thanks; I'd gained the impression that they were Bridgestone's 'top' (performance) tyre but clearly the RE050A remains as this.

In which case - I'll stick to my Ultrac Sessantas

Yeah, I doubt you'd gain/lose much switching over.

Still presuming that Jules has 225/40 18s; what I suggest this advice from SUK means is 'get tyres that are 92Y load index and not 88W'.

Yes im running on standard 225/40/18 92Y with standard VRS suspension height.

Can I fit 235/40/18 95Y without catching body work etc. ? I think thi sshould be OK But would like to hear from those in the know.

Yes im running on standard 225/40/18 92Y with standard VRS suspension height.

Can I fit 235/40/18 95Y without catching body work etc. ? I think thi sshould be OK But would like to hear from those in the know.

You should be OK on this others have done it, I have read in the past, with no ill effect. Points to think about;

1. Bodywork etc. - as you are on OE springs the car sits high enough and 7.5J Zeniths sit inboard enough that you are most unlikely to catch the bodywork

2. Gearing will be altered a little bit so speedo reading will loose accuracy and it will blunt acceleration, but you might get better fuel consumption

3. Zeniths are only 7.5J rim width and really 235s will sit much better on 8J or 8.5J rims; 7.5J is narrow enough for 225s as they are.

4. You are deviating from OE spec so think about Insurance declaration etc. etc. (if I don't mention this someone else will).

5. Ride will improve a touch as you will have taller sidewalls to the tyres.

6. As you have OE springs the bigger tyres will visually fill the wheelarches better.

7. 235/40 18s are more expensive?

All food for thought; in the end its up to you.

2. Gearing will be altered a little bit so speedo reading will loose accuracy and it will blunt acceleration, but you might get better fuel consumption

Having a quick look on some of those tyre size comparison websites, going from a 225 to a 235 will have an 8mm difference on overall diameter, which is 1.26%.

At a speedo reading of an indicated 70mph, it would actually be doing 70.88mph, but as Skoda speedos overread anyway by a few mph, it might make it slightly more accurate!

Having a quick look on some of those tyre size comparison websites, going from a 225 to a 235 will have an 8mm difference on overall diameter, which is 1.26%.

At a speedo reading of an indicated 70mph, it would actually be doing 70.88mph, but as Skoda speedos overread anyway by a few mph, it might make it slightly more accurate!

Quite correct. The same website (I presume) also tell us that 235/40 18 should be mounted on 8J to 9.5J rims (Zeniths are 7.5J). See here;- Tyre Calculator - Alloy Wheels - Specialist supplier of alloy wheels and tyres packages, Fast Delivery, Buy Online

Quite correct. The same website (I presume) also tell us that 235/40 18 should be mounted on 8J to 9.5J rims (Zeniths are 7.5J). See here;- Tyre Calculator - Alloy Wheels - Specialist supplier of alloy wheels and tyres packages, Fast Delivery, Buy Online

Yep - same website and yes, it does state 8 to 9.5 rims for the 235 tyre.

TBH, I'd just leave it alone if it were my car, but obviously it's up the OP to decide for himself given all the info on here and elsewhere.

Thanks Carlos & Bahnstormer

Thats a really useful site.

I'll probably stick with the 225/40/18 as I dont want to change the wheels really.