RS246.com Forum :: The World's #1 Audi R, S and RS Enthusiast Community

Hi

After some thought about moving to an e60 M5 I have decided to stick with the rs4.

I need to replace the tyres and my choices are:
Toyo proxes t1 (had them on an evo 8 years ago and they were great)
Pirelli P Zero (had them on a BMW and wasn't too impressed but on 4wd?)
Then there's bridgestone, continental and Michelin options (ran Michelin pilot sport on my old alpina and also good)

Can anyone give me advice based on experience? I bought the car on sh1tty budget tyres and decided to wear them off before replacing so I'm looking forward to some proper grip.

Thanks!

Scatman wrote:Toyo proxes t1 (had them on an evo 8 years ago and they were great)
Pirelli P Zero (had them on a BMW and wasn't too impressed but on 4wd?)
Then there's bridgestone, continental and Michelin options (ran Michelin pilot sport on my old alpina and also good)

Can't comment on the Toyo.

Wouldn't let P Zeros within a million miles of my RS4 again, it came from the factory with them and I hated them (poor wet grip, very short life).

Michelin PS2, and newer versions of, are the choice if cost is no object.

You don't mention the Vredestein Sessantas, which many of us run and are happy with - but it must be said they take a LONG time to bed in.

I have dunlop sp sport max 2 on mine and they are excellent

I run Conti SC3's in the summer
and Conti DWS in the winter

heard only bad things about the P Zero (although it was oem)

PetrolDave wrote:

Scatman wrote:Toyo proxes t1 (had them on an evo 8 years ago and they were great)
Pirelli P Zero (had them on a BMW and wasn't too impressed but on 4wd?)
Then there's bridgestone, continental and Michelin options (ran Michelin pilot sport on my old alpina and also good)

Can't comment on the Toyo.

Wouldn't let P Zeros within a million miles of my RS4 again, it came from the factory with them and I hated them (poor wet grip, very short life).

Michelin PS2, and newer versions of, are the choice if cost is no object.

You don't mention the Vredestein Sessantas, which many of us run and are happy with - but it must be said they take a LONG time to bed in.

I've just put the Vreds on the front, agree with PD, but i'm happy with them and they feel excellent in the wet.
Revolution, one of our sponsors is a distributor for them so give them a call for a very competitive quote, got mine from there

Michelins any thing else is a compromise in performance or price its that simple

lengster1 wrote:Michelins any thing else is a compromise in performance or price its that simple

+1

I have PS3's on mine and can't fault them...

It surely depends on how you drive your car? I would suggest that in 90-95% of situations that some of what you deem to be compromised tyres in terms of budget are as good if not better in some situations but perhaps do not have the ultimate grip if you push your car to the maximum of its ability either on the road or importantly on the track.

F1's are a great alternative on a budget to Michelins as are Vredesteins and both from input from forum users out last the Michelins in terms if longevity. Each to their own but I wouldn't say it is a compromise, just choice.

Just had Vreds put on the back and I've been really pleased with them. Great tyre for the money.

the only difference between Michelin, Conti, Yokohoma, etc, is price and marketing
tires may be 10% of the performance equation: engine, gears, brakes, driver
and the difference between vreds, PS3's or SC3's is measured in a few percent, and usually evens out: one might be aa bit better in the dry, and one in the wet

a few percent of 10% is nothing
many tests I've seen rank the vreds and conti better than the michein
for the cost you can change conti 3 times for every 2 michelin, meaning you can have a tire with more tread more of the time

sport auto test, and in Germany tires can be used as god intended?
http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/20 ... e-Test.htm
1 bridestone
2 conti
3 hankook
4 pirelli
5 michelin

just one test, but if you research you will find many more to help you

newer one http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/20 ... e-Test.htm
1 pirelli
2 goodyear
3and so on

if you look at michelin 4th 220 points (wet/dry 143/77) and conti 7th 216 128/88)
4 point difference, less than 2%
the michelin are better in the dry 143 vs 128 but the contis are better in the wet 77 vs 88
but the performance numbers are equal, the michelin gets its point advantage for wear, etc., NOT performance numbers

I've had P-Zero's on a few different cars including the RS4 and have never liked them.
Michelins I thought were over priced and not as good as others (this was a long time ago though).
I've used Toyo Proxes T1Rs and like them a lot but are soft and wear quickly. The same for bridgstone (S02 or S03 I think, not the RE040, 050 ones).
I equally like (and are my current footwear) the Goodyear Eagle F1s. The car accelerates in the wet as well as it does on the dry (I know that it says more about the quattro system then the tyre though).

a lot comes down to the priority of the selection criteria of the buyer
mine
wet performance
comfort: ride quality, noise, directional stability
cost/durability
dry performance (it's so close among moder hipo tires and the difference can't be used on the street)

I recently purchased some Goodyear Asymm1s for the RS4, and I'm very happy with the performance and look.

I just purchased some Goodyear Asymm2s for my S3 and these are brilliant, and a bit cheaper than the other brands as well. they are also ranked as the best wet weather tyre around

In addition, they have a massive rim protector on them which is obviously there to protect the rims, but makes the tyre look a bit wider also.

Evos 2012 tyre test using an S3

http://forum.rs246.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... ilit=+tyre