Time for new tires - let the debate begin

[mjw930]

Originally Posted by boxstter

I assume you bought your 01 boxster used since these tires were new but I don't see them listed anywhere as an N spec tire. How is the tread wear? Noise? I keep teetering back and forth as to weather an N spec tire will make that much of a difference in ride and performance. None of my other vehicles are performance oriented and generally speaking I just get something middle of the road aka best value for the money for the particular car but with the Boxster I am enjoying the quality of driving so much I don't want to mess things up and at roughly $1000 - $1200 that could be a costly mistake.

One advantage of sticking with the N-Spec tire is you get something that you can be confident will perform well in all respects, noise, ride, handling and wear (well, that last one is subjective).

For me the bottom line for someone who doesn't know a lot about tires is that sticking with the OEM versions prevents you from making a $1000 mistake.

Case in point, I am one of the handful of people who actually don't like non N-Spec PS2's on the 986. I know, they are standard on some 987's but they are also N-Spec which I can guarantee has a different construction than the non N-Spec PS2's. There is no N-Spec variant of the PS2 that fits the 986. On the other hand, the Bridgestone S-03's are great tires on the 986 and they aren't N-Spec. It all depends on what you want out of the tires and the car.

On the tire issue, tire dealers can be held liable if they knowingly install a tire on a car that is below the minimum speed rating that the manufacturer specifies for that particular model. I know it's asking a lot of a person who's JOB it is to sell tires to actually understand speed ratings but hey, I guess I'm a hard ass.

Just so you know, the correct term is "performance rating".

And you wouldn't believe the number of people who come into a tire shop and drive cars they've dropped $80,000+ on, and they want Toyota Corolla price range tires. No Lie.

And when the good tire places won't sell them Chewy Louies, they get a case of the @$$ and go to BJ's or Walmart and get them there instead, where they really DON'T know what they're doing.

[BuffaloBoxster]

I have been very happy with my Bridgestone S-03s. They appear to be wearing pretty well, they're nice and sticky, and I don't really notice much more road noise than the Pilot Sports I used to have on the car. They're also a great wet weather tire.

[adg]

Help me here folks........


THis thread is discussing new tires after 12,000 miles.

Is this all I can expect from tires on the Box??? I have an '04 with only 2500 miles now, and expected lower than average (40-50K) mileage, but 12k sounds very low.

Do you guys buy new tires every year?

[MikenOH]

I got 30K out of a set of Michelin MXX3's. Lots of auto-x's on them; the rears were just about to wear bars, the fronts had a bit more tread but the shoulders were gone.

I'm guessing 15-20K would be more reasonable depending on how you drive. The rears will definately wear out before the fronts.

Keep in mind this is based on using maximum performance summer tires rather than some touring tire with a wear rating of 400+.

[MikenOH]

I got 30K out of a set of Michelin MXX3's. Lots of auto-x's on them; the rears were just about to wear bars, the fronts had a bit more tread but the shoulders were gone.

I'm guessing 15-20K would be more reasonable depending on how you drive. The rears will definately wear out before the fronts.

Keep in mind this is based on using maximum performance summer tires rather than some touring tire with a wear rating of 400+.

[TriGem2k]

Originally Posted by adg

Help me here folks........


THis thread is discussing new tires after 12,000 miles.

Is this all I can expect from tires on the Box??? I have an '04 with only 2500 miles now, and expected lower than average (40-50K) mileage, but 12k sounds very low.

Do you guys buy new tires every year?

Really Really depends on the driver....I go through rears about once every 9months. I average about 9k miles a year on the car.

[MNBoxster]

Hi,

Tire wear is mainly Driver Dependent. How you use them, where you use them, how well you keep them inflated, etc.

You simply won't get tons of use from any Performance Tire because they are made of Softer Compounds, which is what gives them their excellent Grip.

That said, there is both a Wear and Time component to your Tires. Due to Heat Cycling, etc. your Tires will get Harder with age and wear Faster and their Grip will deminish. The Maximum anyone should keep a Performance Tire is 4 Years. After that, regardless of Treadwear, the Tire has gotten Hard and is becoming unsafe. Old Tires are much more prone to Blowout due primarily to their diminished capacity to shed Heat.

Paying for New Tires every 3-4 Years can be a B*tch, but paying for Bent Sheetmetal (Yours and Theirs), and possibly Bent People, is even much more so. BE SAFE!...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

Originally Posted by adg

Help me here folks........


THis thread is discussing new tires after 12,000 miles.

Is this all I can expect from tires on the Box??? I have an '04 with only 2500 miles now, and expected lower than average (40-50K) mileage, but 12k sounds very low.

Do you guys buy new tires every year?

yep!
one set of rear a year for the last 3 years and no front changed and this include an average of 2/3 track days

[mjw930]

Originally Posted by creseida

Just so you know, the correct term is "performance rating".

And you wouldn't believe the number of people who come into a tire shop and drive cars they've dropped $80,000+ on, and they want Toyota Corolla price range tires. No Lie.

And when the good tire places won't sell them Chewy Louies, they get a case of the @$$ and go to BJ's or Walmart and get them there instead, where they really DON'T know what they're doing.

Actually the Speed Rating is what it's called and that is what I was referring to BUT, you are right that there is more than just the speed rating that people need to consider when buying tires. Load rating is something that most people have no clue about but again, I would expect a tire "professional" to educate the consumer" (yeah, right!)

It amazes me too that people drop $80K on a car and balk at spending $1000 to replace the tires. Maybe a lot of those people really can't afford the $80K car but due to creative financing then are able to drive cars way beyond their means. That 's the only excuse I can come up with besides stupidity.

Here's a good link that explains speed ratings. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=35&currentpage=48

Thank you for the correction. I will make sure to tell my husband who is a Performance Application Specialist in the tire industry, that he has been using the incorrect terminology for the past 17 years.

As for getting mileage out of tires, I replaced the original Conti's on my Boxster with 35,000 miles on them. Of course, I kept the car properly alligned, keep the tires balanced and properly inflated and 95% of the driving is "spirited" country road driving, and not much track time.

[mjw930]

Originally Posted by creseida

Thank you for the correction. I will make sure to tell my husband who is a Performance Application Specialist in the tire industry, that he has been using the incorrect terminology for the past 17 years.

As for getting mileage out of tires, I replaced the original Conti's on my Boxster with 35,000 miles on them. Of course, I kept the car properly alligned, keep the tires balanced and properly inflated and 95% of the driving is "spirited" country road driving, and not much track time.

I didn't mean to say your husband was wrong but I checked everywhere I could and the term Performance Rating was never mentioned. I searched all the major tire manufacturer sites as well as the large tire resellers.

Performance Rating, by definition, would include many more factors than simply the speed and load ratings. The problem with something as subjective as a Performance Rating is there isn't an industry or engineering standard by which to measure one brand / model against another. Things like Speed Ratings and Load Ratings are finite and defined the the UTOG thus making it capable of being used accross tire brands / models.

If I'm wrong then please point me to a reference for Performance Rating that explains the way it's calculated as well as the actual ratings themselves.

The terminology changed several years ago. The term "speed rating" is a misnomer.

I've linked a few examples, but the industry has changed the name due to the fact that consumers tend to focus on one word that doesn't accurately represent what the rating stands for: "Speed". They see that word and say, I don't drive above 65 mph in my SL500. Why do I need a tire with a SPEED rating of 149+ mph?

http://expertpages.com/news/performance_tires.htm

8th paragraph down explains why it is now called a Performance Rating, and no longer called the "speed rating".


Same here : http://www.sizes.com/home/automobile_tires.htm




It isn't about a tire going 149 mph for 1/4 mile. Most people never go that fast, and most cars cannot go that fast. But they may still own cars with sophisticated suspensions requiring certain performance characteristics found in tires capable of sustaining a 149 mph rate of speed for one hour, under load, without compromising the performance of the tire, which is related to sidewall stability and integrity.

Performance does not necessarily mean high speed. Performance is simply how a tire perfoms under normal driving conditions. Important things like steering response/cornering, accelerating, braking and maintaining control in a panic situation. A better perfomance rating means improved response times. The sidewall doesn't have to play "catch up" under sudden braking and swerving manoeuvers in a higher performance rated tire. This would be the "slip angle", and less is better, which is what you get with a higher performance rating.


But, try telling this all to John Q. Public...or his wife. They still focus on the fact that they never drive above 65 mph and see absolutely NO reason to spend money on a tire that does. By calling it a performance rating, it emphasises the safety aspects, which John Q Public is far more responsive to.


A classic and true story about speed ratings: My husband was dealing with a Lady with her XJS Jaguar, and she thought she was All That. While my husband tried to patiently explain why she could not put S-rated $39 tires on her Jaguar, which required V-rated. She finally blurted out in a very demeaning manner (as if talking to some $5.00/hr peon), "Excuse me, but I own a Jaguar. I think I know what it needs better than you do . Have you ever even driven one?"

"Yes ma'am, I have, but I prefer to drive my Porsche or Maserati." and pointed to his car parked next to the building. That shut her up right quick.

[mjw930]

I'm sorry but neither of your links sway me. Both are individual's repsentation of the facts as they see them. What I've attached is the actual NHTSA federal regulations and description of tire markings. In all cases the DOT/NHTSA identifies the tires Speed Rating or Speed Symbol and makes no mention of Performance Rating

I think what we have here is a marketing name change from either the manufacturers or retailers to help the general public understand what this number means and I understand completely why they would want to do this.

Now, as some background, I'm an engineer that has spend a lot of time dealing with government regulations in the communications industry. This has made me very aware of using proper terminology as it relates to the regulations my systems must adhere to. I'm also a sports car enthusiast who has been enjoying and racing performance cars for roughly the last 30 years. If I seem stubborn then I guess I am but that trait has served me well in both my professional and personal life over the years.

I suggest we call a truce to this and get back to what we all can agree on, our love of Porsche's

[boxtex]

Originally Posted by adg

Help me here folks........


THis thread is discussing new tires after 12,000 miles.

Is this all I can expect from tires on the Box??? I have an '04 with only 2500 miles now, and expected lower than average (40-50K) mileage, but 12k sounds very low.

Do you guys buy new tires every year?

[B][B]Check this web site it might help, don't whine. You drive a porsche there is some perks as expenses that come with it other wise get you a rice cooker.

[boxtex]

Originally Posted by adg

Help me here folks........


THis thread is discussing new tires after 12,000 miles.

Is this all I can expect from tires on the Box??? I have an '04 with only 2500 miles now, and expected lower than average (40-50K) mileage, but 12k sounds very low.

Do you guys buy new tires every year?

Here it is.
sorry about that
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=10252&page_number=1