Thinking of trying the Kumhos after running 3 sets of Toyos.

Anyone got first-hand experience of using both on a Fabia vRS?

I haven't experience of both on my Fabia, but I had Toyo's on a mk2 Golf and found them pretty poor in the wet, I've currently got the Kumho's on my Fabia and I've been really impressed - I certainly wouldn't swap them for Toyo's.

agree on the Toyos being poor in the wet - i wouldnt go back.

got the kumhos on the rear and they seem really good and i will get them for the front very soon

Mmm. Just read up on them Kumhos, sound good in dry and wet.

Speed rating 'y'. (Capable of 186mph) lol.

Good price to on Camskill tyres.

i think i paid 75 fitted a corner

Toyo Proxes are good tyres, very good in the dry, decent in the wet, I'd say they're better overall than the Kuhmo's, at the expense of a higher wear rate!

I've run both.

Kumho - Longer wearing, didn't give me as much confidence as the Toyo's

Toyo - If I can afford them I'll buy them (just started running Toyo Proxes 4's on the Roomster) if not the Kumho/Hankook

I haven't tried the Kumhos but the curious thing about the Toyos is the fact that all the "professional" reviews suggest the wet handling is "good" or "excellent" whereas most of the the "private" reviews rate them much lower for wet handling. They're certainly a lot better than the OEM Michelins which came on my 2004vRS. I have them fitted on both the current vRS and the Atom (at Ariel's suggestion).

I like Proxes but they are expensive, Kumhos wear unevenly (it's all over the web) I have had 2 sets of KU31's wear badly on the inside edge of 2 different cars (inside ended up bald with the rest of the tyre on 3-4mm) with feathering that caused a droning nose like a shot wheel bearing. I have just fitted a set of Matadors to the front of my vRS after reading this: http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Matador/MP-46-Hectorra-2.htm and so far I would agree with the review (apart from wear as I can't tell after 2 weeks) they are a bargain at less than £50 each from Camskill.

Carl.

On my second set of ku31's on the front. Last set lasted 6000 miles but did wear unevenly. Inside edge had no rubber left but rest of tyre had over 3mm. Thought it was because it is lowered but looks like may be a common issue. The tyres are good wet or dry. I paid £80 per corner.

Ive just come from toyo's to Conti sport contact 5's. Toyo's were hideous, soft, lasted 5k on my lcr. lack of any kind of wet grip, which imo, living in the UK tends to be priorty.

On my 2004vRS I was getting around 20k miles out of the fronts and about 40k miles out of the backs.

Brought ku39's in may for the front of the octy, they were on the wear indicators by august, sure they gripped well but under 10k (think it was more like 5-6k) my winters wear better than these and the fk452's that went on to the rear gripped just as well. Oh and the 452's have hardly worn at all.

Thanks for all the feedback folks.

I'll probably be sticking with the devil I know (the Toyos) although I was keen to swap to an asymmetric tyre. Will keep up with comments about the Ecstas - the K39s are supposed to be an improvement over previous versions?

Improvement? Maybe they mean they wear evenly like mine did lol. Honestly I've never had a tyre wear out so quickly. To me they gripped just as well as Falken 452s which wear better, I expected to get 2 years use out of them and not under 6 months! Going to buy 452s in spring to replace them which I should of done in the first place and not try and save a few quid ended up costing more in the end lol