|
Has anyone any experience of using Hankook tyres? The ones that I am considering for our Xantia (185/65 R14), have very good performance ratings on www.mytyres.co.uk
|
I bought a Cavalier SRI some years ago that had them fitted. After a few miles I binned them and fitted some decent ones. They seemed to be made of Bakelite and slid all over the place. Maybe they have improved since then.
--
\"Nothing less than 8 cylinders will do\"
|
|
|
|
I,ve recently fitted a pair of Hankook Ventus Sport K104 tyres to My mondeo, bought from mytyres.co.uk. They were suprisingly grippy in the wet and the dry even before they bedded in, although they did let me know when they were being pushed to their limit. Now I've done over 500 miles on them and they are bedded in they grip like glue. It's too soon to tell how quickly they wear, but I'm extremely happy with them, as they cost only half as much as the Contis, Bridgestones, pirellis and such. They have a wear rating of 280, traction rating of AA, are "Extra load" rated at 650kg and have a rim protecting shoulder to protect your alloys. I put them on the front for about 300 miles, to bed in, then changed them to the rear.
|
I'm in the same boat as Kith, I've had Ventus K104's on for a few months now and I'm impressed with them for the price.
I'm used to Goodyear Eagle Venturas, which are an underrated tyre, but I'm happy with my compromised choice.
|
|
|
|
You could check out webb site.I havent heard of them before.
www.hankooktyre.com.au/V2/aboutus/globaloperations...p
--
Steve
|
|
Hankook supply some branches of motorsport, and in the UK are used in some control tyre (ie only ony type of tyre permitted)kart formulae.
|
Tyres are the only thing between your car and the road. Do not skimp on them with budget tyres of questionable performance, becuase one day it could be my car you hit becuase the budget tyre had lower braking performance than a decent tyre :)
In a recent Autorcar tyre test, the difference between the 1st rated tyre in wet braking (Goodyear Eagle F1) and the 5th rated (Can't remember, could have been a a Michelen or a Pirelli) was a staggering 10ft from 60mph. Bear in mind that the 5th rated tyre was a decent, branded perfornance tyre.
Thats almost 2 car lengths stopping difference!
Imagine what the difference between the top tyre and a a super budget tyre from a manufacturer nobody has ever heard of could be. Personally, if I ever round a bend in the wet and suddenly find a queue of traffic or an obstruction, I want to make damn sure I can stop. And you can't do that with false economy happy shopper tyres.
|
"you can't do that with false economy happy shopper tyres."
Except I seem to remember a recent Autoexpress tyre test in which (very cheap)Barum Tyres (I thought Barum only made Li-los) came out much better than the very expensive Michelins supplied on my car in both wet and dry.
Unfortunately I can't find it on their website and have thrown away the magazine.
|
|
|
You must be used to very small cars if you consider 10 feet to be "almost 2 car lengths stopping difference!"
Like most things in life, the last 1% improvement in performance can account for a 50% increase in price.
I agree that tyres should not be skimped on but equally I wouldn't spend an extra 25%+ on a tyre so that I could get away with driving like a loony and still think I could stop in an emergency.
One can ruin a £200 tyre just as easily as a £50 tyre by getting a nail in the wrong place or having a blow out on the motorway.
No tyre on the planet is going to be able to "make damn sure" you can stop. learn to srive within the capabilities of your mind and not your ego.
|
Hankook tyres have been all over the Middle East and Asia for as long as I can remember and are well enough respected. I venture to suggest they have to work a lot harder in such climatic and traffic conditions. It's a bit like saying nobody had ever heard of Kia once but look at them now.
|
Which? magazine tested car tyres in March 2004 and found that the Hankook in size 205/55 R16V did well, or very well in all tests - dry road grip, wet road grip, comfort, noise and wear; all areas execpt rolling resistance.
The American site www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/utqg/Tires2.cfm (I hope I've done that right)seems to list all tyres by traction, temerature rating and wear rating, it makes for some interesting reading.
For my two penn'orth, Michelins are no longer are as good in any respect as they once were.
Don drbe
|
I have just tried the link above and it doesn't work. Sorry.
drbe
|
|
it does now; there was a typo.
|
|
|
Right. Try again. Perhaps third time lucky.
www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/utqg/pages/Tires2.c...m
should be the correct URL. (Could a mod change it, please?)
That will teach me to check first!
drbe
|
|
I already had done it, that's how I knew it was a typo.
|
|
I'm curious as to whether there is any consistency between tyre test results. We have references on this thread to tests in Auto Express, Autocar and Which. Do these tests in different magazines tend to back each other up? I must confess having never noticed much in the way of patterns emerging when looking at tyre tests - but maybe some of you have studied this more than I have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
