I've just bought some poverty Pork…
Discussion
The car I am looking to buy that needs new boots is a 2001 986 S on the original twist wheels, they look like the smaller 17s to me, which from a quick google suggests F 225 45 17 R 255 40 17
I'll have a look for recommendations, the F1s I was looking at didn't show as N rated...
The Chimp had aftermarket team dynamics wheels (previous owner), I can't even remember the rim size let alone the rest, seem to remember them being v. low profile, maybe 35, might explain the difference.
I'll have a look for recommendations, the F1s I was looking at didn't show as N rated...
The Chimp had aftermarket team dynamics wheels (previous owner), I can't even remember the rim size let alone the rest, seem to remember them being v. low profile, maybe 35, might explain the difference.
Jmsgld - that's the exact sizes I have Advan 105s in, recommended.
However note that's not the standard front size - they are 205/50 as standard. I went bigger as many people do do reduce the very pronounced stagger. It killed the understeer on track, however for a road car you end up with prodigious levels of grip and traction - it is completely unstickable on dry tarmac. And I'm convinced it has slightly dulled the steering feedback with the extra weight.
I reckon we agreed on here that the way to go is narrower on the rear, instead of wider at the front, in order to quell the understeer. That should give you the balance, but keep a bit more of lively lighter weight feel. It's certainly what I'm going to try once I've worn these out.
235mm on the rear is standard on the later Boxster and Cayman so there's no worries about it not being enough.
However note that's not the standard front size - they are 205/50 as standard. I went bigger as many people do do reduce the very pronounced stagger. It killed the understeer on track, however for a road car you end up with prodigious levels of grip and traction - it is completely unstickable on dry tarmac. And I'm convinced it has slightly dulled the steering feedback with the extra weight.
I reckon we agreed on here that the way to go is narrower on the rear, instead of wider at the front, in order to quell the understeer. That should give you the balance, but keep a bit more of lively lighter weight feel. It's certainly what I'm going to try once I've worn these out.
235mm on the rear is standard on the later Boxster and Cayman so there's no worries about it not being enough.
Timely topic of discussion for me, as I’m just eyeing up new tyres for my 986 S on 17”s.
Stick the OE tyre specs into any of the usual sites and you don’t get much other than Michelin PS2 recommended.
Search by tyre size only and then you’ve got the lottery of knowing a) what’s any good and b) what effect the different load ratings etc. will have.
A few recommendations based on experience might help to narrow the search...although now I’ll have to work out the correct profile for the reduced width to get the correct wall height
Stick the OE tyre specs into any of the usual sites and you don’t get much other than Michelin PS2 recommended.
Search by tyre size only and then you’ve got the lottery of knowing a) what’s any good and b) what effect the different load ratings etc. will have.
A few recommendations based on experience might help to narrow the search...although now I’ll have to work out the correct profile for the reduced width to get the correct wall height
I think the 986 16 sizes are 205 55 and 225 50. Then on 18 they are 225 40 and 265 35. So you have a range of overall diameters to play with if you stick them into a calculator type tool. If you are going with a 205 50 front then I think your choices for rears are 255 40 standard or 245 40 or 235 45 or 225 45 or maybe for the really playful 205 50 all round.
You need to think about the width of the rims too. The 17 fronts are really quite narrow and don't ideally suit a 225 45 so they bulge a bit. Could this be why they dulled the steering - no idea. The general advice for any car is wider fronts dull the steering feel even if you have correctly matched width rims.
Have you seen the Chris Harris video driving a C63 AMG round a track wearing 4 tiny space savers - food for thought.
Tyre technology has moved on massively from when the 986 was launched in 1997 - I think or even 1996. It must have been designed in 1995 maybe or possibly even earlier. We are at least 20 years on from that and to give you a comparison the modern 1 series BMW still use a 205 50 17 front tyre. So they are more than capable of stopping and turning a modern BMW of bigger size and weight.
You need to think about the width of the rims too. The 17 fronts are really quite narrow and don't ideally suit a 225 45 so they bulge a bit. Could this be why they dulled the steering - no idea. The general advice for any car is wider fronts dull the steering feel even if you have correctly matched width rims.
Have you seen the Chris Harris video driving a C63 AMG round a track wearing 4 tiny space savers - food for thought.
Tyre technology has moved on massively from when the 986 was launched in 1997 - I think or even 1996. It must have been designed in 1995 maybe or possibly even earlier. We are at least 20 years on from that and to give you a comparison the modern 1 series BMW still use a 205 50 17 front tyre. So they are more than capable of stopping and turning a modern BMW of bigger size and weight.
I'll have a look for the Harris video, ATM, sounds interesting.
I'm in complete agreement re. modern tyre technology Vs. what was available when the Boxster was new to the roads and I'm under no illusions that I need anything particularly special, given the car only has what is considered warm hatch power these days.
From a bit of reading on 911UK and Boxa I know that plenty of people have been more than happy with the Yoko and Kumho options already mentioned here, even without the N rating
I was planning to stick with the 205/50 fronts and go slightly narrower than standard on the rears, 245 or 235 depending on what's available. It's just frustrating trying to find a set of four matching tyres in the sizes / specs required from a single source, I've given up a couple of times now after I've found tyres for one axle only to find that the matching tyres aren't available for the other
I'm in complete agreement re. modern tyre technology Vs. what was available when the Boxster was new to the roads and I'm under no illusions that I need anything particularly special, given the car only has what is considered warm hatch power these days.
From a bit of reading on 911UK and Boxa I know that plenty of people have been more than happy with the Yoko and Kumho options already mentioned here, even without the N rating
I was planning to stick with the 205/50 fronts and go slightly narrower than standard on the rears, 245 or 235 depending on what's available. It's just frustrating trying to find a set of four matching tyres in the sizes / specs required from a single source, I've given up a couple of times now after I've found tyres for one axle only to find that the matching tyres aren't available for the other
As moose explained to me it's not about the best tyres have the best grip. It's also about how they feel and how they react to slip angles - going sideways. You need to decide what that's worth to you.
The bad news is the 986 18 tyre sizes are very common and the same price or cheaper then the 17. I have a stack of tyres and could easily make a set in 18 for my 996. Can't decide how foolish it would be to buy 17 when the time comes knowing that.
The bad news is the 986 18 tyre sizes are very common and the same price or cheaper then the 17. I have a stack of tyres and could easily make a set in 18 for my 996. Can't decide how foolish it would be to buy 17 when the time comes knowing that.
snotrag said:
I had a look last night and the new Michelin Primacy 4 is available in 205/50/17 for the front and 235/45/17 for the rear, and is a by all accounts a very good tyre but likely to have lower limits in the dry than the modern "performance" options.
Exceeding grip limits in the dry in a Boxster (or 996) is very hard on a road unless you are going way too fast or deliberately provoking it. I found that when a 986 lets go, it is pretty benign anyway.snotrag said:
edh said:
Exceeding grip limits in the dry in a Boxster (or 996) is very hard on a road.
That was my point 
I've quite a few miles on PS4s now and find them to be an excellent all-rounder as an every day car. Always dangerous to extrapolate from there but the less performance orientated tyre should be no less capable in most conditions.
I have tried, and failed, to find a tyre comparison test on a Porsche including back to back testing on N-rated tyres (of all generations) and their non N-rated competition.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Not a 986, cmoose but have a look at this, as it may clarify re. the lowering springs on the Koni dampers: http://911uk.com/viewtopic.php?t=126761&start=...There are coilover options for sub 1k where you'll get adjustable height, adjustable damping and adjustable top mounts (on the front). I had some Yellow Speed Racing ones on my old Boxster and I was impressed, I set the damping medium and didn't feel the need to try adjusting anything, the ride was great, firm but not crashy and that was on 18's. Big improvement over the standard stuff.
snotrag said:
Cmoose - just go for it, I am well happy with mine and would fit them to my other car If they made them.
Check out larkspeed for pricing too, local to me and were notably the cheapest. Most Koni stock will be coming from Holland.
I was looking at prices on Koni Sports for my 996. Larkspeed were pretty much the cheapest, but on enquiry there's no stock in the UK and the factory in Holland is shut for the summer, so would not even take an order let alone speculate on a delivery time. I've decided to take a gamble on The DesignTek coilovers instead at broadly the same money.Check out larkspeed for pricing too, local to me and were notably the cheapest. Most Koni stock will be coming from Holland.
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff