Hey guy I am interested in buying some new tires for my car and am looking for some input.

They're for a 1999 Honda Civic Si with aftermarket 15x6.5 rims. I have the stock rims with winter tires so these will be for the spring, summer and fall. No snow driving. Im in NY so they will be going through rain and other weather conditions but nothing to horrible. I am looking for a nice summer tire. Its not a track car or a hardcore autocrosser/drag racer but I would like good dry and wet handling and braking. The car is a daily driver so treadwear is a factor. Comfort and noise is not necessary but it would be a plus. Right now I have Dunlop Formula 901's and I am not a big fan of them. ( to loud, wear to fast, wet handling is dangerous, dry handling is ok at best...)

From research these tires seem to be great for me. 340 treadwear (as oppossed to 200 on the dunlops), in the tire rack test they were better then the dunlops in every aspect, and there reasonably priced ( would like to keep it under $75 a tire).

I just have a couple of questions. Stock tire size is 195/55/15. A lot of people recomend going to 205/50/15. Is this a big help in handling? I understand that its about 1.5% smaller so the speedo will be off about 1mph at 60mph. Is this any cause for concern?

Any other input on these tires or something similar i should be looking at? I haven't heard much of anything about them.

Thanks

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I am looking for a nice summer tire. Its not a track car or a hardcore autocrosser/drag racer but I would like good dry and wet handling and braking. The car is a daily driver so treadwear is a factor. Comfort and noise is not necessary but it would be a plus.</TD></TR></TABLE>

My two recommendations would be:

1. Kumho Ecsta SPT 195/55-15 $65
2. Yokohama AVS ES100 195/55-15 $61

Both of these tires offer very good dry and wet handling and braking at a great price. And both should last a reasonably long time. Treadwear ratings are often deceptive, particularly when comparing tires of different brands, so I don't put a lot of faith in them; FWIW, they are 340 for the SPT and 280 for the ES100. Regardless, if you maintain proper pressures and rotate them occasionally, you should be able to get 30-40K miles from them, maybe even more. Prices are from the Tire Rack.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Stock tire size is 195/55/15. A lot of people recomend going to 205/50/15. Is this a big help in handling?</TD></TR></TABLE>

No. A difference of 10 mm in width is virtually insignificant. It also causes your speedometer and odometer to be off. And 205/50 tires are significantly more expensive than 195/55. Stick with your stock 195/55-15 size, if you're buying a tire that comes in that size.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Any other input on these tires or something similar i should be looking at? I haven't heard much of anything about them.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I do not recommend the BFG g-Force Sport. Both the Kumho SPT and the Yoko ES100 offer much, much better performance in every way, at a similar price.

Here's some perspective. These tires are all in the "budget performance" segment of the tire market - tires that offer decent performance at a bargain price. A few years ago, this segment was led primarily by tires like your Dunlop FM901, the Kumho Ecsta Supra 712, and the BFG g-Force Sport. They offered similar performance and were okay at the time they were introduced. Then, in 2003, Yokohama came out with the ES100. Even though it was similarly priced, it was head and shoulders better than any of those three tires; for example, in a side-by-side comparison test on the Tire Rack website, the ES100 beat the 712 in 23 out of 23 categories tested! (And the 712 beat that BFG tire in a similar test.) It's really only been this year (2005) that other tire manufacturers (notably Kumho with the SPT and Dunlop with the DZ101) finally introduced tires in this category that were able to offer similar performance at a similar price to the ES100.

So the Kumho SPT and the Yokohama ES100 should both meet your needs very well. If you wanted slightly better performance - wet and dry handling, etc - you could spend a bit more and get the Toyo T1-R in 195/55-15 for $87 from onlinetires.com. But I think the SPT or ES100 will be fine for you.

BTW, you stated your needs and situation extremely well.

 

First off thanks for the detailed reply.

Also I noticed you mentioned the dunlop Direzzas but did not include them in tires to get.

How are they? Worth looking into? Thanks again!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I noticed you mentioned the dunlop Direzzas but did not include them in tires to get.

How are they? Worth looking into?</TD></TR></TABLE>

They're not available in 195/55-15, only 205/50-15. I've heard they're decent but they don't come in the size that Tire Rack uses for testing, either, so they haven't been in any of their side-by-side comparison tests.

 

Dunlop Direzza

 

One last thing. I notice for all 195/55/15 they use a measured rim width (ideal rim width?) of 6". I will be putting the tires on a 6.5" wide rim. Is this a big deal? So that will widen the contact patch? And to my understanding it will have no effect on diameter because of the steel belts?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">One last thing. I notice for all 195/55/15 they use a measured rim width (ideal rim width?) of 6". I will be putting the tires on a 6.5" wide rim. Is this a big deal?</TD></TR></TABLE>

No. 15x6.5 is still in the middle of the rim width range of 5.5-7.0 inches for both tires, so it will be fine. Don't worry about it.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So that will widen the contact patch?</TD></TR></TABLE>

No. The width of the tread is still 195 mm.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TurboEM1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">to my understanding it will have no effect on diameter because of the steel belts?</TD></TR></TABLE>

It won't have any effect on the diameter because you're talking a very small difference that's in the width of the rim, where it doesn't usually affect the diameter anyway.

 

for the price you can't beat em. Exellent tire. Better tire and last longer than the yoko es100's.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by integ97vtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">for the price you can't beat em. Exellent tire. Better tire and last longer than the yoko es100's.</TD></TR></TABLE>

also more quiet and better dry traction in my experience

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by integ97vtec &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">for the price you can't beat em. Exellent tire. Better tire and last longer than the yoko es100's.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Absolutely not true, if you're referring to the BFG g-Force Sport. The Yokohama ES100 offers FAR better performance than the BFG, in both dry conditions and in wet conditions. BETTER dry traction and BETTER wet traction by far with the ES100. The Kumho SPT does as well as the ES100 in the dry, and is slightly better in the wet. The BFG, by comparison, is crap.

The BFG is only comparable to the previous generation of budget performance tires from a few years ago, the ones the tire manufacturers are now replacing because the ES100 was so superior - tires like the Dunlop FM901 and the Kumho Ecsta Supra 712. For example, check out this side-by-side comparison test in which that old Kumho 712 beat the BFG overall. When the ES100 came onto the market in late 2002, it was a HUGE leap in performance in that price category; as you can see in this other test, it was WAY better than the same Kumho 712, sweeping it in 23 out of the 23 performance categories tested. It has only been in 2005, over two years later, that most of those same manufacturers have been able to develop and introduce tires that are about as good as the ES100 in this price range - Dunlop replacing the FM901 with its Direzza DZ101, and Kumho replacing the 712 with its Ecsta SPT. For now, BFG is still stuck with the poor performance of its g-Force Sport, but I bet you they, too (or their Michelin parent) are working on developing a tire that's more competitive.

As for treadwear, the ES100 will last a long, long time - at least 40K on my Integra, which is more than any other performance tire I've used on that car. The Kumho SPT should be comparable. You can't always trust treadwear ratings, but FWIW, the rating on the SPT is the same as that old crappy BFG.