Boxster approved tires - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

Rail26 · 07-12-2005, 02:01 AM

I remember seeing a thread on the "approved" tires by Porsche. Here is an article I came across that may help out if you are interested. Mine came with the Bridgestones...Not sure if I like them yet.

Article:
Porsche has approved the Bridgestone Potenza S-02 N3, the Continental SportContact N1, the Michelin MXX3 Pilot SX N2 (which I have), the Pirelli PZero Direzionale and Asimmetrico N3, and the Yokohama AVS S-1Z N1. They also specify the sizes which are 205/55-16 front, 225/50-16 rear, 205/50-17 front, 255/40-17 rear, and 225/40-18 front, 265/35-18 rear. Porsche has tried to categorize these tires to compare their relative merits using a "sports," "all-around" and "comfort" rating. Only the Michelins and Pirellis are described as "sports" tires. The others are "all-around" (Bridgestone) or "comfort" (Yokohama and Continental). So choose the tire that best describes your driving style. If you get really annoyed at a harsh ride, get one of the "comfort" tires. If performance is more important to you, get one of the "sports" tires. If you can't decide, get the "all-around" tires.

Brucelee · 07-12-2005, 04:29 AM

Will they next be telling me what car wash liquid to buy?

BuffaloBoxster · 07-12-2005, 05:07 AM

That and the Bridgestones scored better on Tire Rack's survey for performance than the Pirellis. I've got the Bridgestones myself and they're a great performing tire.

deliriousga · 07-12-2005, 05:12 AM

....in the right size.

In general, check the traction and wear ratings for grip. AA best for traction. A lower wear rating means softer, stickier tire for performance driving with a higher speed rating, but more road noise and they don't last as long. Higher wear rating gives you a harder tire for a more comfortable drive, lower on the performance scale, lower speed ratings, longer lasting and less road noise.

Pick the one that suits you best in your budget, preferably not Michelin or Bridgestone

(personal reasons).

Personally, I get better performance, ride and wear from the Kumho tires than I did from the Bridgestones that came with it.

Rail26 · 07-12-2005, 12:44 PM

Out of curiosity, I checked the reviews on the B-stones on TireRack.com and they didn't really come highly recommended. I have been keeping tabs on all the traffic on this site concerning tires...seems like Kuhmo and Michelin have been favorites?

I think I am going to change my tires out for train wheels or sharpening wheels anyway. I imagine the tread life is quite impressive!

Pilot2519j · 07-12-2005, 01:31 PM

Pick the one that suits you best in your budget, preferably not Michelin or Bridgestone

(personal reasons).

Personally, I get better performance, ride and wear from the Kumho tires than I did from the Bridgestones that came with it.

[/QUOTE]

I bought tires and the Tire Center STS the old WTC installed Marshall tires which allegedly are Kuhmo racing tires. The installation and the tires turned out to be a complete fiasco since STS did not have high speed tire balancing and the clown doing the work installed clip on weights on the Carrera rim. The number of things wrong in the install was scary and I still had a car that the tires were not balanced right. I went to Silver Star and the manager balanced the tires for free. I decided that the engineers of Porsche know which tire is better and insures you the best braking and handling performance better than any clown from a tire center. What you buy is your choice but I would stick to what is recommended. I had S0-3 on my 2001 S-4 I had a lot of problems with them, tranning & blowouts and they are not cheap either. I now have Michelin Pilots and even though they screwed up the Indy F-1 they seem to work real nice with the car.

socratic · 07-12-2005, 11:40 PM

An interesting recurring theme in the Tirerack.com reviews is that no matter what the tire, from the less expensive Kumhos to the ultra expensive Micheline Pilot Sports and P-Zeros is that traction, especially wet weather traction, goes away significantly after about 1/2 of the tire wears away. Also road noise supposed dramatically increases around that time too.

I'm curious why they can't design a tire that is more consistent through its life.

Also if the above "theme" is true, then I should buy the inexpensive Kumhos and ditch them after 1/2 the tread is gone. Performance should then easily top the supposedly higher performance Michelins and Pirellis which would be at their mid-point in their lives (or past it since they may be softer). Cost wouldn't be much different and you'd be always getting excellent traction versus some probably skitterish results as the so-called high-end tires reach the end of their lives.

By the way, I am runnnig the Kumhos; they came with my 2001 (purchased used). Am very happy with them. Rides smooth and quiet, just like I like them to. I'm one of those who would gladly sacrifice the "ultra max super" grip for nice soft ride, quiet running, long life and a gentle predictable breakaway at the limits of adhesion. --traits which, I gather, are polar opposites when it comes to the so-called high-end tires.

boxstter · 07-13-2005, 03:49 AM

I have the Ecsta's on our TT coupe and they are louder than a freight train after about 10k. They grip is good and the ride is nice but the noise is ridiculous. Are your's really a decent noise level?