f*cking tree hugging hippys!

i can't believe that anyone would want to compromise to such an extent that they would purposely choose tyres which have poor grip.

all you have between the car and the road is 4 patches of rubber, surely you want something that has better stopping properties than butter stopping a hot knife!

I've bought toyo's for my fabia because of their excellent grip AND for the fact that they last really well.

A grippy tyre will last a long time if you don't generate any g forces but if you have to do an emergency stop, then the car will stop quickly.

My car will stop from 30 in less than it's own length in the dry on toyo's. That's without a reaction time factored in.

Hopefully I will never need this stopping power for real but you never know when someone may run out in front of you.

Always buy the grippiest tyres you can afford.

I've bought toyo's for my fabia because of their excellent grip AND for the fact that they last really well.

A grippy tyre will last a long time if you don't generate any g forces but if you have to do an emergency stop, then the car will stop quickly.

My car will stop from 30 in less than it's own length in the dry on toyo's. That's without a reaction time factored in.

Hopefully I will never need this stopping power for real but you never know when someone may run out in front of you.

I got 18k and about 100 track miles out of my t1-rs and they were fitted to my "mildly modded" VRS. I paid £58 a corner and I reckon I could have got at least 25k out of them if I drove a little more sympathetically.

I will fit these to the Roomy when the OEMs go.

I really don't think sweeping statements about eco tyres can be substantiated.

"Eco tyres" can mean a lot of things. Often coupled to "Low rolling resistance" (reducing fuel consumption which is nice not only from a "f***ing tree hugger's" point of view but also wallet-friendly). But yes, it has been reported that LRR tyres also gives less efficient stopping power.

There are other things to consider, such as chemicals used in manufacturing.

And "eco tyres" comes from different manufacturers and with different patterns. They are not all alike.

I found an independent consumers' organisation test (Norwegian) that put Conti EcoContact 3 at the top.

When it came to grip only, Conti PremiumContact 2 got the best scores together with Bridgestone Furanza (but hey were also among the most expensive.

Dunlop SP30 uses 90 % less polyaromatic oils (cancerogenous) than Michelin Energy E3B, is less noisy, has better grip and the same rolling resistance. Reasonably priced too.

I really don't think sweeping statements about eco tyres can be substantiated.

"Eco tyres" can mean a lot of things. Often coupled to "Low rolling resistance" (reducing fuel consumption which is nice not only from a "f***ing tree hugger's" point of view but also wallet-friendly). But yes, it has been reported that LRR tyres also gives less efficient stopping power.

There are other things to consider, such as chemicals used in manufacturing.

And "eco tyres" comes from different manufacturers and with different patterns. They are not all alike.

I found an independent consumers' organisation test (Norwegian) that put Conti EcoContact 3 at the top.

When it came to grip only, Conti PremiumContact 2 got the best scores together with Bridgestone Furanza (but hey were also among the most expensive.

Dunlop SP30 uses 90 % less polyaromatic oils (cancerogenous) than Michelin Energy E3B, is less noisy, has better grip and the same rolling resistance. Reasonably priced too.

indeed, I wouldn't class tyres like the conti ecocontact 3 the sort of "eco" tyre I refere to..... I'm refering to the specific ones used in hybrid/bluemotion type cars, that have been proved to drastically increase stopping distances in the wet..., our goverment (UK) is trying to make it law, that if these cars have these tyres on originally (to get the low CO2 emissions test results, and hence, to get a lower tax bracket) they must have them replaced with exactly the same tyre, the owner can't choose a different one... this, to my mind, means they are trying to make a law to decrease road safety, increase accidents, and potentially put our lives at risk, which is SO wrong. :(

Agreed, everything could be drawn too far to the extremes and it's stupid to look just at environment and skip road safety - but I would say that it's equally stupid to do the opposite.

Also, safety can sometimes be an academic issue. I can describe myself with the wording of the OP here:

However, call me old fashioned, but I slow down to take corners, and I don't think I've ever skidded in any of my cars.

It's a fact that wide tyres (195 or 205) give better grip than narrower ones (not least on wet roads). But for me to pay the extra cost would be plainly ridiculous. The extra performance might be invaluable in certain circumstances. But those of us who slow down to take corners don't need them.

My second car was a Citroën with 60 BHP and 145/15 tyres - and that's low rolling resistance It was definitely not unsafe when it came to road grip and handling. With to-day's technology it could have had an impressive MPG figure too. So environmental concerns and safety don't have to be at odds with each other. We will all be rolling a little slower, though :P

As people have said above I would say Mitchelins (sp?) for wear. I had some on my old fiesta and they never seemed to wear. I did 30k+ miles involving some enthusiastic driving and they were hard as nails (so to speak).

What is up with my spelling today?!!!

Mark

indeed, I wouldn't class tyres like the conti ecocontact 3 the sort of "eco" tyre I refere to..... I'm refering to the specific ones used in hybrid/bluemotion type cars, that have been proved to drastically increase stopping distances in the wet..., our goverment (UK) is trying to make it law, that if these cars have these tyres on originally (to get the low CO2 emissions test results, and hence, to get a lower tax bracket) they must have them replaced with exactly the same tyre, the owner can't choose a different one... this, to my mind, means they are trying to make a law to decrease road safety, increase accidents, and potentially put our lives at risk, which is SO wrong. :(

I think a law that says if you have a LRR tyre to get into band A you have to refit a LLR tyre is perfectly reasonable. As long as dealers are permitted to offer the car without LRR tyres as an option and specify this at registration.

Another vote for Michellin tyres. Had them mon my wifes :cough: Saxo and had to replace them at over 50k miles due to the age and not on tyre wear (the sidewalls had started to crack before we could cover enough mileage to replace them because of tread wear). Also had them on my current Octavia, and they have been used throught the life of the car and can see that they have been replaced at around the 35k mark each time and it was a lease hire car so probably not been driven as carefull as a Private car owner.

I have just changed two 'Continental' rear tyres after having done 76K miles on them. Date stamp on the tyres was 1996, been on the car since it was new.

you brought this one up from the dead didnt you.

Wear isnt such an important factor for me, dont do massive mileage anymore, plus prefer having the knowledge that my tyres will still work in the wet, the most important for me is low noise, the quieter the better, can good wet grip and low noise be combined in a tyre?

Enough of the guesswork and opinions already!

Simply read the label... or the tyre wall:

Goodyear Tires | Tire Buying Made Easy | UTQG

Want a hard-wearing boot, then go for an 'A', or better still, a 'AA' Tread Wear rating.

Traction works the same too.

My Conti SportContact 2s, for example, are AA for traction and A for wear.

Will deffo by them again, even though I had previously been an Eagle F1 man.

Michelins for low wear, just put some Exalto PE2's on to replace the OEM Primacy's at around 23k, although they'd have gone on to 25k+ if I'd fancied living dangerously.:eek:

Will see how this later design compares with the older one, just have to suspend the Sky subscription for a couple of months to fund the difference between them and the Kuhmo's/Nexen's/F1's/Toyo options etc.

From what I read of others experiences these are supposed to grip, wet, dry, summer and winter unlike some others that have lasted forever but made for an exciting time in the rain!

hey fella...

I had avons on my vRS... and you (and your stepdad) are right, they have good grip in both wet and dry... however my vRS was 'only' running 155bhp, and one of these tyres fell apart (ZZ3's) I had a vibration, and rumbling noise, that couldn't be accounted for, when I had the tyres changed, the tyre bloke sai "come look at this" from the outside, no signs of problems, on the inside there was a crack, at about the level where the sidewalls meet the tread, and the bloke said "these were deforming and going oval, thats where your vibration has been comming from, they could have blown at any time.."

ssoooo my advice, is don't use the ZZ3..... :( (and you're running even more power and torque than I was remember, and my car was driven around at 30mph for most of its life!

Agreed 100% with this statement. Had ZZ3's on the front of my vRS when I first got it and they disintegrated causing a rumbling that I couldn't explain. Tyre chap pointed it out by spinning the wheels on a ramp and showing how lumpy the profiles were - when the tyre was removed those lumps were they tyre falling apart from the inside.

Currently running Uniroyal rainsports now all round and the grip from them, especially in the wet is very good. Wear wise though, I'd say they're about average. Nowhere near as good as the Michelin Ditchfinders but then the grip levels are much better. Paid £50 a corner for them too.....Michelins were a lot more than that (about £90 IIRC) so I could almost have 2 sets of these for the price of a set of Michy's

I love this thread, big mileages out of tyres. I can only get 10K out of the fronts on the Vrs, 11K out of the fronts on the Roomie. Hardly ever need to change brake pads though. Is there a connection there I wonder?

You can sleep soundly at night in the knowledge that they're doing their bit to save the planet though

Chris

Is that why these tyres are "eco"? The stopping distance is increased, forcing you to drive slower?

Seriously though, I'd have no problems at all recommending Michelin Energies for any Fabia apart from perhaps the VRS where you'd be better of with a sportier tyre.

VAG Leasing fit only Continental tyres because of the very good wear rates.

Michelins, fair amount of grip and last ages, saving the planets is all good and that but you want some grip to enjoy it, a crashed car is just scrap, that aint worth nowt in eco terms all that cost recyling and another car is on the road. keep the one you got clean and shiny and working well and on the road.