amg_rx7 wrote: Check out the Kumho 4X. They are the company's latest sporty all season. I'm running them on the Mini and am liking them. -2.5* rear camber is too much for most street cars. More than what is needed anyway.
I like mine, but they are noisier than the Platinum LX's I've run in the past. I think they have a little more over all grip than the PLat's, but give more road noise.
Methinks you need to get that rear alignment checked.
OK, I misspoke up thread on the tires I've had. I said Pirelli to Khumo to Sumitomo. I was remembering incorrectly, I was planning on buying the Khumo's but wet traction concerned me so the actual order is as follows:
First set. OEM Pirelli Pzero Rosso - 215/45R18 lasted approx. 14k miles - 200 tread wear 25.7" diameter
Second set. Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K111 - 225v45R18 lasted approx. 16k miles - 280 tread wear 25.9" diameter
Third set. Sumitomo HTS A/S P0 BW - 235/40R18 lasted approx. 16K miles. - 360 tread wear 25.5" diameter (aiming for longer life with these with TW and width)
In the winter I've got a set of Dunlop SP Wintersport 205/55R16 that I bought one season old at least 24-5k miles of my driving on them, let's call it at least 30k miles on those. Given the # of days over 40 in the winter, I'm very very happy with the wear of them. Same car, same driver, same alignment and they last fine despite being the softest, shortest (more rev's mile) and narrowest (less rubber contacting the road)
Three sets of summer tires, all with E36 M3ty tire life and getting noisy very fast. One set of winter tires, which while now worn (twice the miles of the summer tires) are still quieter than any of the others.
I'd buy the alignment (may still do) issue as the cause if it weren't that the winter tires last so well.
Squeezing that 235 onto your 7" wheel is going to pinch the sidewalls enough to distort the tread. While it works for Ho-Ho's it doesn't work well for street tires.
Go back to the stock size or the 225 at most, get the highest treadwear you can get in the michelin or Conti and get your rear camber checked. This will fix your issue.
I'd buy the alignment (may still do) issue as the cause if it weren't that the winter tires last so well.
If you feel the need to bolt on winter tires in the first place, that means you almost certainly arent subjecting them to the same kind of driving as your summer tires,due to road conditions. 
If the conditions were ok for summer tires you'd KEEP summer tires on and drive the same way, and then you'd blow through tires in the winter too. 
Im with bobzilla on his last point there.. Stock or nearly-stock tire size in a higher treadwear tire and a tire-friendly alignment, and you'll be golden!
I have personally witnessed the goofy tread life of Michelins many times. I always say they age out before they 'wear' out. There are lots of people driving around on dry-rotting michelins with good tread depth who think they are god's gift to tire life, but i dont count that as a healthy tire, just an unbalanced design. BUT, i think if you wear through them before they cycle out and start dying, Michelins are still a great, long lasting tire. 
I would set my goal at 3 summers, and if they aren't 1/3rd of the way down by the end of the first summer, drive harder next year. 
"High Performance" tires usually don't wear well.
We have DWS on the Wife's C30 and love them. We have the regular C30 so it's 225/50/17 for the tires and for around the town it handles nice and comfy on the highways. Not sure what is killing them so fast on your car though. We only changed tires at 30K miles because the wife put holes in 2 of the OEM Michelin and they were really loud with the plug.
Get rid of the 18's for 16's, narrow up the section width, increase the aspect ratio, and buy a set of 400-500 treadwear Michelins.
There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car. I bet it drives down the motorway much better on the winter tires.
I used to get 35-40k out of 235/40/18 Toyo Proxes4 in a Maxima. And I drive hard. I'm going to have to go with bad alignment or poor tire choice for you. 18" has nothing much to do with it.
Adrian_Thompson wrote:Bobzilla wrote: From his previous choices on tires this is clearly a "all tires are the same, I'm going to get the cheap ones" case where you got what you paid for.Not sure what you mean by this. The OE tires were the worst. The second set were Khumo ST type tires, last set Sumitomo high performance tires. None of these are "all tires are the same" mentality. I don't cheap out on tires, but I want something that's going to last better, plus an improvement in ride and noise would be appreciated now I don't count this as my 'performance' car.
I'm with Adrian here. I use Sumitomo and Kumho all the time. Great tires. I've never been unhappy with them.
Streetwiseguy wrote: Get rid of the 18's for 16's, narrow up the section width, increase the aspect ratio, and buy a set of 400-500 treadwear Michelins. There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car. I bet it drives down the motorway much better on the winter tires.
What exact numbers do you mean here? My current ride has 20's on it and I think it's overkill. I'd much rather have 18's or smaller on the car.
Another vote for the Continental DWS here! I was running a set in the exact 215/45/18 size on a Saturn Astra and after about 30K miles, the wear was minimal. They did well in the winter and are actually very grippy. I actually won the H-Stock class at the local region autocross twice on those tires.
There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car.
If fashion = not looking bad, then sure. A lot of cars do not look right with 16s on them these days.
Of course, i think you can make a small wheel look good on lots of cars, but you have to have a tire that's proportional to it, which means the tire has to shrink too for it to look right, and once you do that you have to lower the car to adjust for the wheelgap growth, and it's a vicious cycle. I could probably make 15s look good on a C30, but it would have to be with 23" diameter tires and it would be lowered so much it would have very little suspension function left, if any.
Vigo wrote: If you feel the need to bolt on winter tires in the first place, that means you almost certainly arent subjecting them to the same kind of driving as your summer tires,due to road conditions.
silly Texan, you don't understand winter driving if you think I'm easier on the tires in any way in the sub freezing months. Every salt, grit, ice covered corner becomes a special stage. I honestly get more dry pavement front wheel spin in winter than in summer. Summer tires don't work in cold weather and are leathel in ice and snow, but htat doens't mean the fun stops.
OK, attempting to measure the alignment on the driveway met with limited success. I really couldn't get a good camber measurement, but if I had to put a # on it I’d say just over -1deg each side. I couldn't get a good measurement across the wheel, I need to make a fixture to get more accurate. Toe was more successful, using the tape measure across two of the groves in the tire at a known height front and rear, I came up with 1.1 deg total, or .55 degree toe in each side (assuming it's the same side to side).
Cold pavement covered in salt, grit, and ice is easier on tire wear than warm, relatively clean pavement.
Also, toe-in is for babies. When you go get an ACCURATE reading, have them set all your toe numbers to ZERO! 
Id say throw a little toe OUT in the rear except we're in this for tire life.
Vigo wrote:There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car.If fashion = not looking bad, then sure. A lot of cars do not look right with 16s on them these days. Of course, i think you can make a small wheel look good on lots of cars, but you have to have a tire that's proportional to it, which means the tire has to shrink too for it to look right, and once you do that you have to lower the car to adjust for the wheelgap growth, and it's a vicious cycle. I could probably make 15s look good on a C30, but it would have to be with 23" diameter tires and it would be lowered so much it would have very little suspension function left, if any.
Nope. You are just being a slave to fashion. If you have a 40 series 18, replace it with a 50 series 17 or a 60 series 16, or whatever gives you the proper rolling diameter. I couldn't possibly care less if somebody doesn't like my tires having actual sidewalls. Function over form in everything, and if your 40 series tires dart and crash and bend wheels on every pothole, thats not good function.
But I'm 53 and going bald, so I gave up on looking good a long, long time ago.
I am on my second set of 225/40x18 Michlein Pilot Sports on my 2001 Audi A4 with 86000 miles and these show very little wear. The car is lowered from the "sport" height with what was called "Eurosport" springs back in 2001 so the camber is slightly above stock. I too run 16" winter tires (Blizzaks WS-22 first, now Mich Alpins) for about 4 months a year.
I have yet to wear out a set of tires on this car. Both the original sets of summer and winter tires (I removed the OEM tires at 0 miles, put them on another car and mounted the winters on those rims) age hardened before I wore them significantly and grip became a concern as I like to drive with some spirit as well. I sold the first PS tires on Craigs list to some BMW "drifter" who loved them to death.
My message...get Michelins.
whenry wrote: It's a choice of evils. In your average street car, you wont notice the difference between 200 treadwear and 400 treadwear tires except for the tire wear.
Until the car in front of you stops short, then sticky rubber will seem like money well spent.http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/1211_rubber_matter_tires_test/
Try the Michelin A/S 3, it's supposed to be as good as a summer tire in the dry, better in the wet and have some snow capability mixed in with a 45,000mi. Tread life warranty.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: OK, attempting to measure the alignment on the driveway met with limited success. I really couldn't get a good camber measurement, but if I had to put a # on it I’d say just over -1deg each side. I couldn't get a good measurement across the wheel, I need to make a fixture to get more accurate. Toe was more successful, using the tape measure across two of the groves in the tire at a known height front and rear, I came up with 1.1 deg total, or .55 degree toe in each side (assuming it's the same side to side).
Hmm. Never saw a tape measure in degrees.
Streetwiseguy wrote:Vigo wrote:Nope. You are just being a slave to fashion. If you have a 40 series 18, replace it with a 50 series 17 or a 60 series 16, or whatever gives you the proper rolling diameter. I couldn't possibly care less if somebody doesn't like my tires having actual sidewalls. Function over form in everything, and if your 40 series tires dart and crash and bend wheels on every pothole, thats not good function. But I'm 53 and going bald, so I gave up on looking good a long, long time ago.There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car.If fashion = not looking bad, then sure. A lot of cars do not look right with 16s on them these days. Of course, i think you can make a small wheel look good on lots of cars, but you have to have a tire that's proportional to it, which means the tire has to shrink too for it to look right, and once you do that you have to lower the car to adjust for the wheelgap growth, and it's a vicious cycle. I could probably make 15s look good on a C30, but it would have to be with 23" diameter tires and it would be lowered so much it would have very little suspension function left, if any.
Actually, when you step down a rim size you go to the next half size. A 215/40/18 is a 215/45/17. or a 215/50/16 or a 215/55/15 etc. If you go wider by 20mm, you drop the aspect ratio by a half, so from a 215/45/18, you would go to a 235/40/18 to keep OD correct. A 225/50/17 would be a 245/45/17 etc.
I don't think he'd be a "slave to fashion" if he kept the 18s, they are the OEM wheels. Not wanting to spend a good chunk of change to replace perfectly good wheels seems reasonable to me.
Bobzilla wrote:Streetwiseguy wrote:Actually, when you step down a rim size you go to the next half size. A 215/40/18 is a 215/45/17. or a 215/50/16 or a 215/55/15 etc. If you go wider by 20mm, you drop the aspect ratio by a half, so from a 215/45/18, you would go to a 235/40/18 to keep OD correct. A 225/50/17 would be a 245/45/17 etc.Vigo wrote:Nope. You are just being a slave to fashion. If you have a 40 series 18, replace it with a 50 series 17 or a 60 series 16, or whatever gives you the proper rolling diameter. I couldn't possibly care less if somebody doesn't like my tires having actual sidewalls. Function over form in everything, and if your 40 series tires dart and crash and bend wheels on every pothole, thats not good function. But I'm 53 and going bald, so I gave up on looking good a long, long time ago.There is absolutely no reason other than fashion to have tires that big on your car.If fashion = not looking bad, then sure. A lot of cars do not look right with 16s on them these days. Of course, i think you can make a small wheel look good on lots of cars, but you have to have a tire that's proportional to it, which means the tire has to shrink too for it to look right, and once you do that you have to lower the car to adjust for the wheelgap growth, and it's a vicious cycle. I could probably make 15s look good on a C30, but it would have to be with 23" diameter tires and it would be lowered so much it would have very little suspension function left, if any.
I agree with everyone. 18" are a fasion statement, but that's what the car came with.
It's no so clear cut that 1" rim is a half size. Theoreticaly the aspect ratio is a % of the section width but even within the same theoretical tire there is a massive difference.
A 215/45R18 theoreticaly has a diameter of 25.6", but here's a couple of tires in that size with dimensions from the manufacturers (source Tire rack website specs)
Rim Meas. Sect. Tread Overall Revs
Width Rim Width Width Diam. Per
Sumitomo HTR A/S P01 (W) 7-8 7 8.4 7.7 25.8 805
Good Year Eagle F1 A/S-C 7-8.5 7.5 8.9 NA 25 837
So that's a diameter change of .8" or about 3.5%
With the C30 OEM tire sizes offered were/are:
205/55R16 Theoretical diameter 24.9"
205/50R17 Theoretical diameter 25.1"
215/45R 18 Theoretical diameter 25.6"
That's a pretty big spread, so I'm either going back too the stock 215/45R18's or see if I can find a 16/17 in the 215 range.
You have to go with the 215/50/17 to make that work. You cannot change both width and aspect ration like that. A 215/50/17 is a 25.5" tire compared to the 25.6 of the 215/45/18.
Trust me, keeping hte stock width and changing halfsize on the AR when going up/down is correct.
Hmm. Never saw a tape measure in degrees.
You have to know the radius at the point you're measuring. PITA. If you're shooting for 0 toe you dont have to do any conversions, just make the numbers match front and rear (even at different heights, although the greatest accuracy will be at the measuring points that are farthest apart from each other and the steering axis, i.e. the front and back halfway up the tire which usually isnt possible to measure at).
Nope. You are just being a slave to fashion. If you have a 40 series 18, replace it with a 50 series 17 or a 60 series 16, or whatever gives you the proper rolling diameter. I couldn't possibly care less if somebody doesn't like my tires having actual sidewalls. Function over form in everything, and if your 40 series tires dart and crash and bend wheels on every pothole, thats not good function. But I'm 53 and going bald, so I gave up on looking good a long, long time ago.
Well, i guess OEMs in decades past were slaves to form as well because there's no way you justify putting 75 series tires on anything based on function... Unless the function is achieving maximum LACK of control over the contact patch. LOL
Anyways, you can make a 50 series on a 17 look alright, but 60 series on 16s on a sporty car look like crap. And let's be honest, if you were in the market to buy a C30, and you came across one that, while functionally identical to the all the others (which isnt the case going from a 40 series to a 60 series, but let's continue) but had various things done to it that made it look like crap, would you pay the same price for it? Form has value. I only buy cheap cars that look like crap because they are cheap. If the same cars looked like crap and WERENT cheap, i wouldnt buy them, and neither would you!
I always say that BMW and MB have (for a long time now) had the best grasp on how tire/wheel/wheelwell fitment can make or break a car's look. BUT, they have still made wheels for people like you in recent memory! Take this for example, clearly by your rules the best looking wheel ever to come on an e46! I wonder why they didn't offer it on the M3? Probably because stupid ultimate driving machine customers dont recognize it's superior functionality!
You'll need to log in to post.
