Tires

[Robertwav1]

Hello all,

Going to need tires again. I know the tire situation changes all the time. I think I have Firestone Z's on my car which is only the second set on the car since it was new (93). I remember 15 years ago when the tire were put on what a difference it made. The Goodyear's I never did like, way too hard. Now, the rear Firestones are no longer available. They also told me the reason they lasted so long and didn't dry rot (15 years) cause of what the major mfg's use in their rubber. Cheap tires will dry rot in 3 years. I want a decent tire that will last like the firestones. I won't wear them out from driving. Anyone replace theirs lately?

 

[kenwa]

I liked Goodyear GS-D3's when they were available, but they never are any more. I switched to Contitech Extreme Contact DW and I like them okay. Smoother than the D3's and good test results. But I have not pushed them hard like I did the D3's.

Tirerack should have your size.

Don't mix brands front and rear. I tried that when I only needed rear tires and it was terrible.

 

[Karsten]

I put Nitto NT555 on the 1993 at the start of summer in the factory sizes...really sticky rubber. This last month I noticed the 1994 had some pretty bad weather checking on the BF Goodrich tires so I also replaced them with Nitto's 275/40 17 on the front and 285/40 17 in the rear. Slightly shorter in the front but I like the stance.

Karsten

 

[85RedSled]

Dont just rule out the "cheap" tires I am sold on Sumitomo. They are a reasonably cheap 40K miler tire. I am just replacing the fronts in the next week or two as they are worn out. I checked the date code and they were '06's. My '85 is a DD and it sits outside on the FL sun everyday plus a 40 mile trip to work 5-6 days a week. I just noticed a small amount of checking near the rim when I was looking for the date code so I think that is respectable for an 8 year old worn out tire that has given its 40K miles. For a $100 tire (275/40/17 eight years ago), thats pretty damn good.

As far as handling and stickiness, well I dont have anything really to compare to as I havent had any experience with high speed rated tires and the Vette is my first true performance car. I can say I have never broken the car loose except once when the roads were wet and that was more too much throttle than tire fail. I dont drive like a maniac so that has a bearing as well. I like the looks of the tread and absolutely no issues when the pavement is dry.

Call me cheap but I dont see the point of paying top dollar for something that will eventually "time out" when it is only 3/4 to 1/2 way worn out. Kinda like taking a few sips out of a beer and you let it get warm and throw it way. Brings a tear to my eye.

 

[Robertwav1]

Well thanks, I looked on tire rack and they have them for the front not the rear....think it would be okay to put different tires on the rear? I don't race, maybe get on the car once in a while....rarely do 170mph...hover around the 140 mark every so often but not all the time. I didn't know if mixing tires is a good idea or not. Just kidding about the speed thing. Here in Florida the roads are like glass and highway speeds are 70.....maybe 80, rarely above that and if it is it's short. Thanks again.

 

[catbert]

I personally would never mix lines for a given manufacturer, let alone brands. Tire specs are different and developed for handling as a set of four. Not worth it brother.

 

[kpic]

I personally would never mix lines for a given manufacturer, let alone brands. Tire specs are different and developed for handling as a set of four. Not worth it brother.

As it isn't wise, ditto and I'll add really not worth it.

Some rubber compounds are stickier than others which means the front tires could stick better or worse than the rear tires. A Corvette is capable of ~1g and going around a corner will more or less traction on one end than the other might increase one's pucker factor.

Sooner or later, everyone will make a mistake on a corner.