Tyre adivce, Falken Fk452 v Conti Sport Contact 3

[Andehh]

I need front tyres on my Octavia vRS (diesel, remapped to 200bhp).

I have the Falkens on them currently (all 4 wheels) and havn't had any problems with them, but I have been recommended the Contis. It is £99 vs £165 and their reviews on tyrereviews have them fairly even.

Has anyone had any experience of either? Are the Contis really worth an extra £130?

Reviews:
http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Continental/Spor...

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Tyre/Falken/FK452.htm

Cheers guys!

[V8mate]

If the Falkens are meeting your requirements, why spend extra?

[nouze]

Contis Sport Contact 3 aka the softestest tyres that ever hexsisted, ever. I've lost count of how many I had to have replaced because of nails.

[Andehh]

V8mate said:

If the Falkens are meeting your requirements, why spend extra?

Always worth considering options, I am siding with them but didn't want to rule any others out!

[Simbu]

Can't speak for the Contis, but i had the 452's on my Focus and they were perfectly good tyres. Certainly more grippy than the ZE912's that they replaced.

[haggy]

Got falkens on my M6. no matter what i do the rears just wont wear out! good tyres.

[Caulkhead]

I've had both tyres and there's not a lot in it - neither are brilliant IMHO. The Contis didn't like damp weather and greasy tarmac but were OK in proper rain. The Falkens are very hard and take forever to warm up.

Hankook V12, Vredestein Ultrac Sessanta and Michelin PS3 are all better IMHO.

[V8mate]

I'd also throw in the Bridgestone RE050A as a very good mid-price tyre.

[*Fletch*]

Thought I'd try the FK452s on my Evo as they were relatively cheap and had a good reputation. In the dry they're excellent, decent feedback, turn in nicely where cheaper tyres scrub wide. In the wet, theyre not brilliant, understeer and oversteer readily available on small roundabouts, but then I don't drive quickly in the wet. Straight line braking in the wet they're decent. For the money, theyre a good shout.