Falken 452's or Vredestein Sessanta's?
Discussion
Just wondering what people would choose out of these 2 tyres.
I understand both have had excellent reviews, i've even had the Falken's on a previous car and found them to be good myself.
I've not used the Vredestein's but they seem to get equally good reviews. I'm particularly interested in these as I know other Z4 owners have switched their runflats to these and found them to work well.
In the sizes I need (225 40 18 front) (255 35 18 Rear), the Falken's work out to be about £70 - £80 cheaper.
Anybody had both of these and know what the differences are. Is the Falken tyre likely to wear a bit quicker?
Would appreciate any advice.
I understand both have had excellent reviews, i've even had the Falken's on a previous car and found them to be good myself.
I've not used the Vredestein's but they seem to get equally good reviews. I'm particularly interested in these as I know other Z4 owners have switched their runflats to these and found them to work well.
In the sizes I need (225 40 18 front) (255 35 18 Rear), the Falken's work out to be about £70 - £80 cheaper.
Anybody had both of these and know what the differences are. Is the Falken tyre likely to wear a bit quicker?
Would appreciate any advice.
Cracking stuff, many thanks to all of you for the advice.
Just to clear a few things up, in the end, I'm going to be ditching the runflats in favour of some normal tyres so getting anything is going to be a bit of a lottery and wont have been tested by the manufacturer, but I do understand that. I still think, as do many of you it seems, that there is a good budget choice that will perform as well, or nearly as well as the manufacturers suggested RE050 runflats I have currently though.
I'm interested to hear that the Vredesteins seem to be a little better in the wet and the cold than the Falken's and that being the case, I might give those a try this time round.
Having said that, if things have moved on a bit since 2007, what is the current flavour of the month (without spending mega bucks)?
Just to clear a few things up, in the end, I'm going to be ditching the runflats in favour of some normal tyres so getting anything is going to be a bit of a lottery and wont have been tested by the manufacturer, but I do understand that. I still think, as do many of you it seems, that there is a good budget choice that will perform as well, or nearly as well as the manufacturers suggested RE050 runflats I have currently though.
I'm interested to hear that the Vredesteins seem to be a little better in the wet and the cold than the Falken's and that being the case, I might give those a try this time round.
Having said that, if things have moved on a bit since 2007, what is the current flavour of the month (without spending mega bucks)?
jon- said:
otolith said:
This was the Evo test in which the Vredesteins beat offerings from Continental, Bridgestone, Michelin, Pirelli and Dunlop.
Times change, that was 2007 and this is 2010 
I've literally just finished translating the latest AMS tyre test, it's a little rough around the edges but is very relevant to this thread:
http://tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2010-AMS-Premium-...
In short, the Vredestein Ultrac Sessenta places 9th out of 10 premium tyres, with the comments:
Positive: good-natured handling on dry roads, less road noise, good aquaplaning properties.
Negative: Strong load change reactions in the wet, average braking.
Fortunately the tyre industry doesn't stand still. I can't help but think the big brands have pulled a gap again on the smaller players this year.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff