Discussion
Hi
Anyone tried these on a Caterham yet?
http://www.nankangtyre.co.uk/performance/motorspor...
Would be interested in feedback and discussion.
P
Anyone tried these on a Caterham yet?
http://www.nankangtyre.co.uk/performance/motorspor...
Would be interested in feedback and discussion.
P
6speedmanual said:
Hi
Anyone tried these on a Caterham yet?
http://www.nankangtyre.co.uk/performance/motorspor...
Would be interested in feedback and discussion.
P
Same here... Would love to know actual opinions from people who used them...Anyone tried these on a Caterham yet?
http://www.nankangtyre.co.uk/performance/motorspor...
Would be interested in feedback and discussion.
P
I read somewhere that they have a tread depth of 7mm when new.
Also would like to know to what the 180 compound compares to.
Edited by admaraujo on Thursday 29th January 18:06
7mm (new) to 2mm on rears (205) in 2100 miles of Alpine passes in R400 K series.
Just a function of working them hard.
Pretty sure, judging by some group blats that many have driving styles which would give more.
Also mostly in UK fewer opportunities for intensive working, except maybe Scotland.
Just a function of working them hard.
Pretty sure, judging by some group blats that many have driving styles which would give more.
Also mostly in UK fewer opportunities for intensive working, except maybe Scotland.
Anyway, aside from wear, what comment on grip (dry/wet), feel, turn-in, steering kick-back, ride, noise, etc?
+/- analysis v CR500 / ZZR / Toyo888 ?
My tyre choice for my 7 would have mileage fairly near bottom of selection criteria.
The other aspects are more important, explaining why after 500 miles on ZZR I took them off and returned to CR500.
Peter
+/- analysis v CR500 / ZZR / Toyo888 ?
My tyre choice for my 7 would have mileage fairly near bottom of selection criteria.
The other aspects are more important, explaining why after 500 miles on ZZR I took them off and returned to CR500.
Peter
yes but even if mileage isn't taken into account and you look at it on a price per mile the avon's still score higher.
E.g. £57 for one tyre that lasts 2000 miles or £90 for a tyre that lasts 5000+
The ZZR and ZZS perform superbly and are IMHO the very best tyres for a caterham (where ride height and clearances allow the 55 profile).
ZZS ideal for mostly road use with occasional track, ZZR better for mostly track use.
E.g. £57 for one tyre that lasts 2000 miles or £90 for a tyre that lasts 5000+
The ZZR and ZZS perform superbly and are IMHO the very best tyres for a caterham (where ride height and clearances allow the 55 profile).
ZZS ideal for mostly road use with occasional track, ZZR better for mostly track use.
So ZZS and ZZR are 7mm tread depth when new, like CR500 were? I read 5.5mm when new...
I agree with shrink1061. Price per mile seems a lot better on Avon's than the Nankang's, which begs the questions: If more expensive tyres like, ZZR, ZZS, A048R, or crazy Michelin TB5 (talking 13" only), usually do more miles, aren't these NS-2R, false economy? And if yes, why so popular? Plain price? Lack of experience with other tyres? Hype?
I agree with shrink1061. Price per mile seems a lot better on Avon's than the Nankang's, which begs the questions: If more expensive tyres like, ZZR, ZZS, A048R, or crazy Michelin TB5 (talking 13" only), usually do more miles, aren't these NS-2R, false economy? And if yes, why so popular? Plain price? Lack of experience with other tyres? Hype?
I think just price yeah. I think many people don't realise the wear rate is quite bad and just see cheap.
Also some users have very specific reasons for wanting the extra ride height. 185/60/13 is a bit taller than 185/55/13 (about 11mm of extra clearance I believe). When you have a sump 6-7cm off the ground, the extra profile comes in handy.
I myself had considered the Nankangs because i only do around 2000 miles a year in the caterham, and could use a little extra ground clearance on my wet sump K series.
I'd prefer ZZS but a tad concerned about how low they will make the car.
Also some users have very specific reasons for wanting the extra ride height. 185/60/13 is a bit taller than 185/55/13 (about 11mm of extra clearance I believe). When you have a sump 6-7cm off the ground, the extra profile comes in handy.
I myself had considered the Nankangs because i only do around 2000 miles a year in the caterham, and could use a little extra ground clearance on my wet sump K series.
I'd prefer ZZS but a tad concerned about how low they will make the car.
shrink1061 said:
I think just price yeah. I think many people don't realise the wear rate is quite bad and just see cheap.
Also some users have very specific reasons for wanting the extra ride height. 185/60/13 is a bit taller than 185/55/13 (about 11mm of extra clearance I believe). When you have a sump 6-7cm off the ground, the extra profile comes in handy.
I myself had considered the Nankangs because i only do around 2000 miles a year in the caterham, and could use a little extra ground clearance on my wet sump K series.
I'd prefer ZZS but a tad concerned about how low they will make the car.
Coke can time?Also some users have very specific reasons for wanting the extra ride height. 185/60/13 is a bit taller than 185/55/13 (about 11mm of extra clearance I believe). When you have a sump 6-7cm off the ground, the extra profile comes in handy.
I myself had considered the Nankangs because i only do around 2000 miles a year in the caterham, and could use a little extra ground clearance on my wet sump K series.
I'd prefer ZZS but a tad concerned about how low they will make the car.
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff