Daily Interlude

I'm ready to get a set of tires. I'm set on getting the Hankook Ventus Rs2 Z212 tires but I need to know if it's worth the extra $45+ to get the 205 over the 195's considering I'm not currently autocrossing and/or road racing (though I do want max performance for the money).

While I have your attention, would it be worth it for $15 more for the 205 azenis?

Here's the run down:
283 shipped - 195/50-15 Hankook (http://www.edgeracing.com/tires/1955015/)
329 shipped - 205/50-15 Hankook (http://www.edgeracing.com/tires/2055015/)
342 shipped - 205/50-15 Azenis (http://www.edgeracing.com/tires/2055015/)


TIA!

PrinceAli132

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nsxtasy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The Azenis RT-615 is an excellent choice for those who want great dry traction. Its downside is that it wears quickly, but as long as you don't mind that, it's a great choice. Falken talks about it as being in between street tires and R compound track tires.

Hankook Ventus RS2 compared to azenies.

Azenis are stickier and turn faster times on an autocross course. (Both tires were included in a tire test in Grassroots Motorsports magazine last August, and the Azenis had faster lap times.)
Both tires wear very rapidly, so you won't get as many miles on them as other, less sticky tires.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Nsxtasy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you're looking for longer treadlife, but you still want great performance to get the most out of your high-horsepower application, I recommend the Goodyear F1 GS-D3, which come in 195/50-15. They're grippier than any other street tire except the Falken. They have the highest user survey results of all 24 tires in the Tire Rack's top performance category. And they just won the tire test in the current (December) issue of Car and Driver (they beat the Hankook, among other tires, although the Falken wasn't in the test). At $85 each for 195/50-15, they're a bargain, too. </TD></TR></TABLE>

You could thank Nsxtasy.

Ali

nsxtasy

Gee, I'm flattered. Thank you, Ali. &lt; blush &gt;

I assume this is for your '88 Prelude. Your stock tire size was either 185/70-13 or 195/60-14. You can use either 195/55-15 or 205/50-15 on your car. Don't use 195/50-15, which is too small.

As quoted above, the Azenis are stickier, and both tires wear rapidly. This makes me wonder whether these are the best tires for you, because you appear to be concerned about value as much as performance. Both tires, particularly the Azenis, offer great performance (particularly on dry pavement) but, because of their rapid treadwear, they do not offer good value for the money. You will be replacing the tires 2-3 times as often as other tires, and they're not THAT cheap (both around $80/tire in 205/50-15).

If you are looking for very good performance for driving around town, but not worried about extra tenths of a second on an autocross course, and you're also looking for good value, I recommend getting the Dunlop Direzza DZ101, which is still on sale in 205/50-15 at Edge Racing for $45/tire. I know, this sounds like a cheap tire, so it must be crap... wrong. The DZ101 in 205/50-15 sells for $58/tire at the Tire Rack and is pretty much identical in performance to tires like the Yokohama ES100 ($75/tire in 205/50-15, $61 in 195/55-15) and the Kumho Ecsta SPT ($61/tire in 205/50-15, $63 in 195/55-15). Don't ask me why it's only $45, but it's an incredible bargain at that price.

Now, if you ONLY care about grip, and not about value, then get the Azenis, no question. If you're worried only about grip, then yes, the Azenis are worth the extra money. But it sounds to me like you care about saving some money, even if it meant somewhat less (but still decent) performance... and if that's the case, then the DZ101 for $180 plus shipping will do that for you.

How much difference are we talking about? Let's crunch the numbers, using the costs from Edge Racing and typical tread lifetimes for these tires. Let's say the Azenis cost you $342 per set shipped, plus $60 mounting/balancing, and they last you 12K miles. That means that every 60K miles, you are paying $2,010 for 5 sets of tires. Now, let's say the DZ101 cost you $210 shipped, plus $60 mounting/balancing, and they last you 30K miles. That means every 60K miles, you are paying $540 for 2 sets of tires. $2010 vs $540 every 60K miles - Big difference, huh?

So think about how much you care about performance, and how much you care about value, and how you use your car. Then make the decision that's best for you.

Daily Interlude

This is all good info!

I probably won't put 12K miles on this car over 2 years (not a daily driver) so that's not that big of a deal (if they wear faster). I am worried about value but don't want to compromise the performance. I want to stay with either the Falkens or the Hankooks.

Looking back at a tire calculator, you're definately right, 195 is too small. So now the question is this, is the Azenis worth the extra 15 over the Hankook? I've heard that they are very good and compare quite well to the Azenis...

I think I'm leaning more toward the 615's for $3 more a tire...

nsxtasy

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Daily Interlude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't want to compromise the performance. I want to stay with either the Falkens or the Hankooks.</TD></TR></TABLE>



Thanks for the clarification.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Daily Interlude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">is the Azenis worth the extra 15 over the Hankook?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, absolutely.

Just look at the tire test in last August's Grassroots Motorsports and you'll be convinced.

Daily Interlude

Sounds good, and thanks!

Also, can someone change the thread title for others searching to something like:

Opinions needed: Hankook Ventus Rs2 Z212 vs Falken Azenis Rt615

Mike_C

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Daily Interlude &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Sounds good, and thanks!

Also, can someone change the thread title for others searching to something like:

Opinions needed: Hankook Ventus Rs2 Z212 vs Falken Azenis Rt615</TD></TR></TABLE>

get the falkens and done...

ES2

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">



Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, absolutely.

Just look at the tire test in last August's Grassroots Motorsports and you'll be convinced.
</TD></TR></TABLE>


Awsome link nsx

LudemanDan

One thing the Hankooks have over the Falkens (I have the Hankooks now and I used to run the Azenis 215s) is rain traction. The Hankooks are non-directional and have fat grooves all across the tread, whereas the Falkens are directional and have fatter cornering blocks but probably are much more prone to hydroplaning. So if it's still raining where you are... something to take into consideration.

The other thing the Hankooks have over the Falkens is heat behavior. The Falkens get greasy when hot, so the amount of grip you're used to when they're cold is compromised. The Hankooks do just fine with heat. I bought Hankooks this time over Falkens because I'm starting to do track, and I do NOT want my tires to get less sticky when hot.

But if you're not making a science out of finding the maximum grip in a particular corner pass after pass after pass (a.k.a. driving on a track), this shouldn't be too much cause for concern on the street. Falkens are the best dry performers.

Dan

nsxtasy

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LudemanDan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">One thing the Hankooks have over the Falkens (I have the Hankooks now and I used to run the Azenis 215s) is rain traction.</TD></TR></TABLE>

But there are many tires that do better in rain than the Hankooks. Going back to the Car and Driver test, the Hankooks came in eight out of eleven in wet performance tests, too. If rain performance is a factor, you're probably better off getting a different tire from either of these two - perhaps the Goodyear F1 GS-D3.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LudemanDan &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The other thing the Hankooks have over the Falkens is heat behavior. The Falkens get greasy when hot</TD></TR></TABLE>

The Falkens aren't that bad at all. (Perhaps you're thinking of its RT-215 predecessor, which was a lot worse?)

When the Z212 and the RT-615 first came out, there was one significant advantage of the Z212 over the RT-615: price. Since January, when Falken lowered the prices on the RT-615, that's no longer an advantage. As you say, if you're looking only for dry performance from a street tire, the RT-615 is the tire to get. If you factor in other things (e.g wet performance and/or treadlife), then there are other tires that better fit what you're looking for than either of these.

LudemanDan

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nsxtasy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
The Falkens aren't that bad at all. (Perhaps you're thinking of its RT-215 predecessor, which was a lot worse?)</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yeah, that's what I have experience with. They were almost useless by the third run at autox. I've never driven on 615s, but I've asked plenty of people about the difference and gotten mixed reviews. Most people say they're just a little better with heat; one person said they're even worse.

Dan