I've been looking at what tires I should get next and I am having some trouble deciding between the Falken Azenis and Kumho Ecsta MX. My driving style is aggressive and I would like to buy a tire that will not only last, but will also handle better than my Dunlop 8080Es. Although I am shopping for tires to go on my daily driver, noise and comfort are not an issue for me.

My wheel sizes are 17x7.5 front with 17x9 in the rear. Current tire sizes are 225/45ZR17 front and 245/40ZR17 in the rear. Falken Azenis come in 225/45/ZR17 and 245/45ZR17 respectively while Kumhos are offered in 225/45ZR17 and 245/40ZR17 as well as in 235/45ZR17 and 255/40ZR17. Price is not much of a concern as they are in about the same price range with the Kumhos being a couple of dollars more expensive.

Which would you choose and why? What are your experiences with these tires and what have you heard (good or bad) about them?

Thanks in advance,
Salvador Escalante, Jr.

 

From what I've heard, the MX is a little more rain-friendly than the Azenis. For a daily driver, I'd be tempted to get the Kumhos.


[Modified by qtiger, 3:32 PM 2/15/2003]

 

The MX looks a lot like the SO3s imo. Maybe someone can compare those two?

 

more info would be good.

is this for the street? what kind of car?

if you don't race, i wouldn't recommend either one of these tires. the street ain't a place to drive aggressively, the track is. as such you don't need a tire that has awesome grip levels for your trip to "shop and save".

nate-who doesn't like were this is going.....

 

I dunno, I kind of like being able to stop quickly when a car pulls out in front of me on the way to the "shop and save."

--buji


[Modified by buji, 5:01 PM 2/20/2003]

 

cost wise, Azenis. $60 a piece for 205/15/50. and awesome grip (although rain is a bit intimidating, but just drive slower). however, I'm inclined to agree that if you're not racing you have no need for either of these tires. their grip isn't so much greater than a normal performance tire at low street-temperatures (and there is no excuse for driving hard enough on the street to bring them up to race temps....). i might recommend some Kuhmo 712s for a daily driver. they're great in the rain, and last much longer than either of your other two choices. if you get the Azenis, look to replace them before 15,000 miles.

 

Yes this will be for my daily driver M Roadster that I plan to Auto-X and maybe HPDE in. I usually reserve Auto-Xing for my suspension modification laden Civic VX but I will soon give that car to my little brother. So, I will have no other means of Cone-attacking, canyon carving, or (eventually) HPDEing in other than in the M.

When I say driving aggressively, I mean accelerating fast, braking late, I mean that I drive "fast and hard." I like spirited driving and having the peace-of-mind of being able to stop on a dime when cars pull out in front of me. I also like knowing that when kids run in the street in front of me, as it has happened in the past, I can stop before I hurt or worse, kill them. I also like how stickier tires are more responsive when among other things, jerking the wheel to make a lane change whenever I happen to come across SUVs that did not come with the turn signal option.

I want stickier tires not only because I can take advantage of them on the track, but because it is safer to have a more responsive, grippier tire/car.

qtiger: Wet traction is also a concern here and that is why I am debating on whether or not to buy a set of Azenis. Granted, dry weather is ahead here in SoCal. but we are not strangers to summer rain. From what I have heard from people with Azenis, they are quite easy to manage in the rain so long as you slow your pace. I always drive really slow in the rain any way so that is why Azenis are one of my top choices. Price is THE top choice.

All things being equal, What tire is stickier?
What tire will last longer?
Should the availability of the plus ten millimeters of tire width be the deciding factor?

Any and all information regarding this matter is greatly appreciated.

 

ugh. saw it coming. rj, can you give the street racing mantra?

first off, you shouldn't be driving in areas with little kids fast enough to warrant a panic stop. period.

so that same peice of mind is there even though you don't know what kind of road conditions you have? grippy tires don't do **** skidding on sand/water/oil etc.

similar to a gun, a car is only as safe as the driver.

nate-stick with something that will last for the street. buy something grippy for the track.

 

I am not Steve Mcqueen in Bullit or even remotely like him. Another thing, I am not Paul Walker so no need for your street racing mantra. Maybe I should not be using the phase canyon carving as you probably think I am racing up and down the canyon roads in Malibu. I drive a little faster than most but not to the point where my tires are slipping or screeching or even on the verge of letting loose.

Solo-x, be realistic. Panic stops will be needed whether you are traveling at 10 or 25 miles per hour in a residential area when, as it has happened to me and many others, kids jump from between parked cars onto the street in front of you. So in essence, yes panic stops are very necessary and will be warranted.
Also, some people change lanes erratically and when you get cut off, you cannot just hold on and hope for the best. You must either brake or maneuver and both those things require or benefit from having good tires.

1,766 people were killed by traffic in Los Angeles County in 1999, including 214 pedestrians. -- Thoreau Institute.

In 2000: Los Angeles tops the rankings for the most pedestrians killed and injured; 203 pedestrians were killed and 5,377 were injured -- more than a third of the total number of pedestrians hit by cars in the state. -- The Surface Transportation Policy Project
If you do some research, a lot of these people were killed because they caused and are responsible for their own death or injury. This means that the driver could not do anything to prevent the incidents. I know that because my car has good tires and accelerates, stops, and handles exceptionally well I have avoided being involved in accidents and/or a victim of other peoples mistakes. I am not saying that every car should run Hoosiers but it is safe to say that the better your tires, the more responsive and perhaps the safer your car is. That's the big issue when debating if SUVs are safer than sedans because SUVs can withstand or hold up more damage but sedans are more likely to avoid an accident completely because they maneuver better. If you have not noticed, because I drive an M Roadster, I would much rather not want to be in an accident.

Well, if you read carefully, I mentioned that I drive slower in the rain because I am conscious of and pay attention to road conditions and adjust my speed accordingly. I know how my car, even without sand/water/oil, can easily lose traction and oversteer so I always make sure I play it safe when road conditions are not ideal. This way I don't have to worry about skidding, sliding, or losing control.

Yes, and this tells me we are on the same page. I understand I may have given off the wrong "vibe" but I assure you that I am not a maniac.

If anything, you should have gotten that I am looking for "better" tires because I would like them to be more responsive (read: safer or grippier) for both daily driving in street and occasionally under race conditions at the track.

So, back to Falken Azenis Vs. Kumho Ecsta MX.
With all things being equal, which tire would be grippier?
Which tire will last longer?
Should the extra 10 millimeters in width f/r for the Kumhos be the deciding factor?

Thank you,
Salvador Escalante, Jr.

 

Sounds like he needs some information, not a lecture...

I've had no experience with the MX's (since they don't come in a 205/50), but from what I've heard they are a little better in the rain, but tend to get greasy a little bit quicker when hot. On the street (highway driving) they will get hot. Hotter temps than autox'ing unless you have multiple drivers.

I personally would stick with the Azenis'. The cost alone is worth a slight sacrifice in wet grip. They definately have better grip than the S02 and S03's I've had on and seem to last about the same. I got 12,000 miles on the S03's and I have almost 10,000 miles on the Azenis', and still have 5/32" remaining...

Hope this answers your questions without providing comment on "your" driving habits. Whichever tire you choose, keep them on the downside..

Jeff

 

Hopefully we will have a few guinea pigs this year. I want to buy a set and try them out but i have two sets of tires from last year to finish up first.

 

i apologize. i got the impression of a ricer zoom-tard. clearly that is not the case. the falken's definitely win in the cost/performance equation.

nate

edit: grammatical issues


[Modified by solo-x, 6:25 PM 2/16/2003]

 

hrm..... i went from OE firestone firehawk GTA's (195/60/15) to those falkens (205/50/15) with 2 degrees of negative camber and i drove on the falkens in the rain only a handfull of times. I had to drive slower and any puddles caused the tires to hydroplane badly. No puddles - they were ok. But with the state of the roads in the DC/Metro area, there's potholes and puddles everywhere when it rains. If this is the case... i'd lean towards the Kumho MX's.

 

I never had any serious rain problems with my azenis. My fondest memory of them in the rain was a trip from my home in central nj to some friends house in central PA. Ten minutes after I left, the heavens opened up, and we ended up getting about 2" of rain that night. At that time, the tires had about 8,000 miles on them, and two track days. My camber was -2 front and rear. And this was in a 2000 lb hatchback. I never hydroplaned once, ever in these tires. The only problem they ever presented in the rain, is when they find a high spot or a dry spot in the surface, they'll grab it and pull the car that way, but that could be attributed to having no power steering.

In the MX's defense, a friend of mine has them on his e36 m3, which has seen 5 auto x's and 2 days at lime rock, plus daily driving, and he loves them.

 

They do now!! Comes in WR speed rated and YR speed rated, same price. (Why would you want to buy the WR rated if its the same price as the YR rated??)

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/Compar...performance=MP

 

Huh??

"Alarmed by a study showing that 90 people have been killed on just 20 San Fernando Valley streets over the past three years, police are fanning out along those routes and cracking down on speeders...Police said speeding is a factor in most fatal and serious-injury collisions."



Source:
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...?search=filter