Hankook Ventus
 

Anyone have experience with these tires? I may need to modify my search next time. I was after sticky and quiet and that's what I got. Downside must be a tire issue though. This weekend I took my car out to stretch its legs on a slightly hilly road. Between 95 and 135 mph it felt very light and "flighty". It tracked straight but didn't feel safe. I bought the car last October with worn, mismatched Goodrich tires and at 140 it felt very stable. Any thoughts? What about the Michelin Pilots, much better choice?

Not me but my buddy has them. According to him, they are good street tires though nothing really special.

I've run the Ventus V12's on my '99 Box on street, track and AX. My experience, with that model, is that they are very good street tires with softer sidewalls than the Sumis I currently have, the Bridgstones and Pirellis I've had before. I had to increase tire pressure by about 4-6 psi in both AX and track use to keep the tire from rolling over the indicators. You don't say if these are the V12's but you might try increasing the PSI to stiffen the sidewall the next time you go out and see if it makes a difference.:cheers:

V12 great for the $$$ little less turn in response compared to better Bridgestones and Dunlops. I found these are one of the lightest tires of bunch if concerned about rotational mass weight. Had these on my old Z car.

Mercedes & Jaguar post tire psi settings for normal & high speed driving on the vehicle.
If I recall correctly it's 4psi higher for 100+mph.
I think Porsche lists their spec in the owners manual.

I run Ventus V12's on my street rims and on my track rims. They give PS2's a good run for their money at 1/2 to 1/3 the price. I am happy with them (at any speed).

Sorry, Ventus V12 Evo 2 models.
I'll check the pressure and raise it if need be, then test it on the same road. I hope that helps, I don't want to get rid of these two weeks after I put them on and less than 75 miles on them!

I have the Evo V12 110 model on my car now. They have lasted me over three seasons, which is twice as long as the Michelin tires I had before. I'm actually getting the newer model 120's put on my car in the next day or two. The fronts are still in great shape, but the rears are almost down to the wear bars on the inside edge. Hankook has a $80 mail in rebate if you buy four till the end of May. So I'm just going to get all four.
All in all I think they are quieter and more grippy than the Michelin pilot sport A/S 3 that came on the car. I replaced the rear pilot sports soon after I got my car with another pair of pilot sports. Less than two years later they were shot. So for the price of 2 rear pilot sports I got all four of the Hankooks. I found them to wear better, be much quieter and have more grip than the Michelin's. I'm sure the higher priced Michelin's are much better, but for the price I'm happy with the Hankooks.

New tires do take some breaking in. Give them 500 miles before you pass judgement...

I'm using them. I found them a bit greasy in the back until I took some very good advice and lowered the psi about 4 lbs in the back. Cold pressures are set at 29 front, 32 back they go up about 3 lbs when the get warmed up. I've had the car over 160 kph on the track and it felt completely stable. They have about 5000 km on them.

And soon thereafter, it will be time to replace them again. I have never seen tires wear so quickly on a car. I have changed my rear tires three times and never gotten more than 7000 miles...different brand each time.

That's kind of what I was saying. I like them until that 160 kph zone, then they get uncomfortable. I'll raise the pressure and put a few miles on them and try again. Hopefully I can find a sweet spot where they feel stable at the more interesting speeds and hang on well at lower speeds.

Is it possible you have too much toe in the back or another type of alignment issue? I got 10,000+ out of my Sumi HTR Z III's in the back, including 2 track days and several Autox events before I took them off, with a good amount of tread still on them (around 2/5 or more left, slightly under half) and replaced with a set of Hankook RS-3 which I got 6,000 street miles and 8-10 track days and about 8 autox events. I could have gotten a couple more track days out of them but they were unsafe for wet driving because they were practically down to slicks at that point so I got a new set. The sumis are back on as my street tires and still going strong. I got over 30,000 out of the fronts.

Some tires do wear very quickly in the back especially, and if the rear alignment is out they can scrub like crazy and wear super fast. Possibly that may help to get some more life out of the backs for you?

Steve

I'm amazed when I hear Boxster owners claim some of the high mileage they get on tires but after reading the posts here I'm wondering if the 986 models don't share a common alignment or suspension characteristic that causes rear tire wear as the most I've ever gotten on a set of rear tires is 15K miles on the original set of Pirellis that came on it. I went through a set of Bridgestones in 2K miles and both Sumis and Kooks get 10-12K before they are down to the wear bars. I used to track and AX so I thought that was the reason but the rate of wear doesn't seem to change with tamer driving. The alignment, on my Boxster, is not out so that doesn't seem to be the issue. Any thoughts?

With me it may be that I am the world's slowest and most conservative driver on the street. If I put my foot down more I bet I would get much more wear :)

Back when I first got my car and had to pick up a power brake bleeder I found a local-ish shop that had one in stock and drove up there. The place is called Achtuning and I had no idea what they really did, but one thing they specialize in is alignments.

I asked if they could do my boxster and he said yes they do them, and that they use different rear end settings which dramatically improves tire life. Not sure what they do but I think I recall him saying that the factory uses way too much toe in at the rear (I could be pulling that out of my a** though).

You may well be correct as the Bridgestones I went through in 2K miles were on an 18" rim package I bought to replace the OEM 17's. The 18" rims increased rears from 8.5" to 10" of tread and for some reason this caused toe to be exaggerated. I ended up spending $500 on a kit so toe could be corrected enough to stop excessive wear. I've got new Sumis on the rear now and am curious to see how long they last.

Why?
 

I guess my question would be, why would you want to buy Hankook tires over Michelin? The only advantage I can see is that they are cheaper, and you usually get what you pay for. For a car that costs $65,000 new, I don't mind spending a little more money every few years for tires. I have not used Hankook tires, but I have used Michelin Pilot Super Sports, and I can say that they are awesome!

Use Hankook tires and you will have your answer. I had Michelins. They were not as sticky, they were louder, amd they turned into hockey pucks after a couple of seasons. Why would you pay extra for Michelin when you could have Hankook?

I have 19" rims running Hankook V12's front and rear and get 20,000+ miles before it even gets close to the wear bars. I'm lowered on Bilstein shocks and Eibach springs, it's all about having a good alignment. I have absolutely no rubbing at all even with my steering wheel turned all the way. Scrapping is another story. lol