Tyres for Standard vRS mk1

[Girardi]

All,

 

My rear boots are pretty much new but the fronts are right at the end of their life, currently Falken ZE914.

 

On my last car I went with some Hankook v12's on the front and they gripped well but had a very soft tyre wall which didn't inspire confidence! Previously i've always sworn by Yokohamas but they tend to be pricey for what they are.

 

Based on what i'm looking to spend I've shortlisted the following:

 

Avon zv5

Falken FK453 (or Falken ZE914 - are they worth the extra?)

Toyo t1r

Uniroyal RS3

 

Any experiences of these for comparison? I know the RS3's always get a good write up for their capability on standing water, but since I drive sensibly over standing water anyway I'd happily take something that grips better in the other 99% of driving conditions if it's there.

 

Would be on standard spiders so 205 50 R17

[KenONeill]

Of your list, I'd have the Falken or the Toyo.

[hardcorehobbit]

The RS2s that I have on my mk1 always did a good job.

Didn't think the RS3s had been out long enough to get always good reviews.


Having said that, I'd go with them, or the 453s. Some have said bad things about the 914s.

[L3MHN]

I had a set of the falken fk453's on my STI Impreza, a lot better than the Bridgestones in the wet, not tried a set on a fwd car yet but the wife is needing a full set of tyres on her V5 Golf and I was going to put them on it, although I am tempted by the new RS3's, they're about the same price

[Girardi]

Yeah, i'm swaying towards the 453's. The zv5's seem to get some pretty shonky reviews and our local place can't easily get t1r's in that size (I know I can get them online but it's a faff and it's cheaper to get the local garage to order and fit them).

 

The 914's incidentally are (so I'm told) more a 'touring' tyre, so harder and more wear but not anything like as grippy despite being more expensive than the 453's (softer but grippier and less wearing).

 

I'm not a huge fan of the 914's currently on the car either but not judging them too hard since they're well into the wear marks.

[L3MHN]

The toyo T1R' s are better suited to lighter cars, don't seem to do too well on bigger heavier cars for some reason, you'd be better off giving the 453's a go

[danknott15]

I've got a full set of Falken ZE-914 on my mk1 vrs and for the money there bang on. Very grippy in the wet and even better in the dry. For £380 for a full set of 4 can't really complain. 

[KenONeill]

The toyo T1R' s are better suited to lighter cars, don't seem to do too well on bigger heavier cars for some reason, you'd be better off giving the 453's a go

I get where you're coming from. The T1-R suffers from edge wear on an Octy with Skoda's standard presures, but it's an easy fix to go up 2PSI all round. (based on several people, range of engines and trim, and even a 4x4 model)

[WvRS]

+1 on the Falken ZE-914, i payed £166 fully fitted for a pair 

[AnotherGareth]

Have you considered fitting the same to the front as are fitted on the rear?

 

Alternatively, move the rear tyres to the front so they wear out more quickly, and get a couple of new tyres in line with your preferences to go on the rear, with the idea of changing to the same tyre all round when the other pair need replacing.

[Girardi]

Have you considered fitting the same to the front as are fitted on the rear?

Alternatively, move the rear tyres to the front so they wear out more quickly, and get a couple of new tyres in line with your preferences to go on the rear, with the idea of changing to the same tyre all round when the other pair need replacing.

A very good suggestion and I would do just that... But the rears are no name ditch finders that were on there when I got the car. Wouldn't want to trust them on the driven wheels tbh!

Think I'm going to stick with the falkens but still need to decide which.

[Girardi]

Quick update, had a pair of Falken fk453's put on this morning. Will see how I get on with them but they seem to be a dramatic improvement so far.

Was nearly swayed towards some Michelin PS3's but really couldn't justify the extra this time round.

[DanHarper]

A very good suggestion and I would do just that... But the rears are no name ditch finders that were on there when I got the car. Wouldn't want to trust them on the driven wheels tbh!

Think I'm going to stick with the falkens but still need to decide which.

 

But you trust them to keep the back behind the front when braking in wet conditions or through standing water?

 

Keep the best/newest tyres on the rear. Low rear grip compared to the front is dangerous. Getting going is not such a big problem as stopping and keeping it in a straight line!

 

Wear out those ditchfinders by putting them on the front or you'll still be running them in 4/5 years time.

[DaveMW]

How much did they cost you if you don't mind me asking?

[Girardi]

Dave, I paid £206 all in including fitting, balancing and tracking for the pair of fronts.

 

Dan, I take your point but i'd prefer some controllable breakaway oversteer over limited front grip, breaking and traction in most instances. Appreciate that standing water can be a problem but in 99.9% of situations I'd still prefer front grip to rear. And i'll be replacing the rears too anyway as soon as budget allows!

[KenONeill]

The other thing that very few of the "best tyres on the rear" lobby ever take into account is that most "heavy braking emergencies" involve straight line braking, when good fronts mean that the rears are running on more or less dry road.

[Girardi]

The other thing that very few of the "best tyres on the rear" lobby ever take into account is that most "heavy braking emergencies" involve straight line braking, when good fronts mean that the rears are running on more or less dry road.

Equally the majority of FWD braking comes from the front...

[KenONeill]

Equally the majority of FWD braking comes from the front...

That too; it's also the case front engine RWD or full-time 4wd (less so with 4wd, since the drivetrain can transfer some effort front to rear).

[Raf_]

Just had my mot yesterday and all four of my tyres have had advisories. As I don't need them straight away I'm gonna buy 2 every couple of months. At the moment all 4 are Falken 452's, I've been really happy with them and they've lasted ages. I'm thinking of 453's or uniroyal rainsport 3's as they seem to get good reviews . Can get both fitted for around £185 for 2. Anyone got any others to put into the mix? They have to be under £190 for a pair lol

[Oldfellah]

That too; it's also the case front engine RWD or full-time 4wd (less so with 4wd, since the drivetrain can transfer some effort front to rear).

The majority of any normal braking comes from the front, whatever the driven wheels. That's where "weight" is transferred to when the car is braked so the front tyres have better grip than the rears (for the same coefficient of friction) and can stand more braking force being applied without losing their grip. Also why front brakes are almost always larger diameter than rears as they get more work to do.

[DanHarper]

The other thing that very few of the "best tyres on the rear" lobby ever take into account is that most "heavy braking emergencies" involve straight line braking, when good fronts mean that the rears are running on more or less dry road.

 

Regardless of what particular pigeon hole you want to put me in, if you're so uncomfortable with the quality of the tyres that you don't want to run them on the front, bin them. If they are left on the rear they will be there for years. Personally I'd be replacing them if they were that bad, otherwise running them down on the front where they will wear quicker if I was being a bit Yorkshire and wanting to get my monies worth (and I'm not just saying that I would and then when it comes to spending my hard earned changing my mind. I have just bought 4 Vred snowtraks, and in a few months need to buy 3 more RS3s to complement the one I just bought to put on the spare. No point having a capable car then crippling it with rubbish shoes).