200-treadwear tire test | Continental ExtremeContact Force vs. Falken Azenis RT660 vs. Hankook Ventus R-S4

The Test

We broke our testing into three phases: a scrub session to get a feel for the tires and heat-cycle the rubber; a time trial session to determine ultimate single-lap pace; and an hourlong endurance session to judge consistency and durability.  

Texas’ Harris Hill Raceway served as our venue, as it offers a balanced mix of on- and off-camber turns, plenty of elevation changes and relatively smooth pavement. For consistency, our test mule was our Triple-Threat ND2-chassis Miata project car, which offers the perfect combination of handling, power and braking. We fitted the car with 245/40R17 tires on 17x9-inch 6UL wheels from 949Racing. 

To verify consistency in driver performance and track condition, we started and ended the time trial portion of the test on a set of broken-in Falken Azenis RT660 tires in a 235/40R17 size as, dimensionally, it falls inline with our two test tires.

Test Mule: Triple-Threat ND2-chassis Mazda Miata

Photography Credit: Andy Hollis

Round 1: Scrub Sessions

For our scrub sessions, we brought the tires up to speed over several laps, being careful not to overdrive them into a graining condition. Both the Continental and Hankook exhibited similar driving characteristics: good responsiveness, consistent grip, and plenty of audible feedback as they approached the limit. 

While the Continental behaved a little better under braking and the Hankook offered superior corner-exit grip, the easiest way to tell them apart was the timbre of their squeals: The Hankook was a baritone, the Continental a tenor. The Continental’s wider plateau of grip also made it easier to drive at the limit than the edgier Hankook. Running Harris Hill counterclockwise, our best laps were 1:28.9 for the Continental and 1:29.2 for the Hankook.

Round 2: Time Trials

Time trial day dawned cloudy, with temps remaining in the low 80s all morning–ideal conditions for multi-session consistency. We bolted on the Falkens first for a warmup practice session and then ran them again for times. These are our current favorite time trial tires for this car, and familiarity delivered consistent performance: five laps all within a half second, with 1:26.9 being the quickest.

Moving to the Continentals, we noticed a similarly responsive feel but noticeably less grip. Adjusting quickly to this intuitive tire, we cracked off eight laps all within two-tenths of 1:28.0–impressive performance and ideal for a lapping tire. We connected all the dots perfectly one time for a flyer of 1:27.6.

Coming to bat next were the Hankooks, and they came out swinging: six laps within two-tenths of 1:28.1 and a flyer at 1:27.8. Reviewing our AiM Solo data logs backed up our subjective observations: The Continental gained an edge in every braking zone, but gave some of it back on corner exit. The data also showed an acceleration advantage for the Hankook, and that could be credited to its shorter diameter: 24.5 inches versus 24.8 inches.

Finishing up the day back on the Falkens, we again put down consistent laps right at 1:26.9. Feeling good about our data quality, we packed up.

Round 3: Endurance

Endurance testing is a challenge, both in terms of logistics and execution. Using a familiar car and track helps, but we also made certain to have fresh brakes and a full tank of fuel (each hour burned about 9 gallons). Proper nutrition and hydration are keys to driver performance.

We did have minor traffic to negotiate on track, but the results showed it had little impact. The one variable we could not control was the weather; ambient temperatures increased about 10 degrees between the first and second sessions. 

To properly evaluate the warmup requirements of each tire, we took a single easy out lap and then pushed it to the limit for a full hour. 

The Continental turned on immediately and delivered its quickest lap, 1:28.0, right out the box. Pace fell off consistently for several succeeding laps while heat built up in the tire, accompanied by a commensurate increase in audible feedback. 

When we were forced to back off a little to keep the heat in check, lap times again improved. This cycle repeated for the entire hour. Average lap times did start to fall consistently toward the end of the stint as the weight of the fuel load burned off.

The Hankook needed some heat to reach optimal grip, so it dropped a half second on each of its first three laps, eventually reaching a best of 1:28.5. Like the Continental, it then lost some ground as heat built up further, then cycled up/down within that range for the rest of the session. Lap times again improved toward the end as the 50 pounds of fuel were consumed.

Conclusions

The lap charts show that the Continental had a clear half-second average over the Hankook and similar consistency–plus a bonus of immediate cold-tire grip. The latter could be very important on cooler race mornings.

With track running completed, we checked tread depth to evaluate wear characteristics. Each tire used up not quite 1/32 of an inch of rubber over 90 minutes of run time. Extrapolating, that means each tire should be able to complete an 8-hour race at 10/10ths pace, especially considering that wear usually slows as the void areas disappear. It is interesting to note that the Continental comes molded to 7/32, while the Hankook measures not quite 9/32. So the Hankook might last a little longer, but confirming that is beyond the scope of our testing.

End Game

Continental has clearly raised the Endurance 200 performance bar with its new tire. The ExtremeContact Force is a bit quicker on track, remains consistent and durable, and comes in some unique, motorsports-oriented sizes. 

For example, the widest Hankook Ventus R-S4 is a 305/30R19, while the Continental ExtremeContact Force comes in two different 345s–an 18 and a 19. Further, we’re told that more sizes for the new tire are on the way for 2022, including a 245/40R15 and six 20-inch-diameter fitments. 

The only downside to the Continental is the price: At least in our test size, they cost about 25% more than the Hankooks. (Racing is expensive, so how fast can you afford to go?)

More to Come

Continental and Hoosier made a deliberate choice to attack the endurance market with their first 200tw offering. The quantities of tires these racers consume will more easily amortize the development and tooling costs. 

But now that the molds exist, the resources required to step into the Super 200 autocross and time trial market are much more manageable. A simple compound change, something Hoosier has a lot of experience with, could potentially deliver a winner in that category, too. 

Can Hoosier deliver a faster, more consistent tire than the top 200tw models while offering enough durability for 100 to 200 runs? Don’t bet against Hoosier–it doesn’t often lose. Watch for this in early 2023.