Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fisher.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!hoxna!houxm!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!bellcore!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!djl From: djl@fisher.UUCP (Dan Levin N6BZA ) Newsgroups: net.auto Subject: 50 Series Tire Test Message-ID: <522@fisher.UUCP> Date: Wed, 6-Feb-85 16:50:07 EST Article-I.D.: fisher.522 Posted: Wed Feb 6 16:50:07 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Feb-85 09:31:01 EST Organization: Princeton Univ. Statistics Lines: 46 The Feb. 1985 Road and Track includes a comparison test of 7 50 series hi-performance tires. The tires were tested, blindly (the driver does not know which tire he is on), on a stock 944. The tires were all 225/50VR-16, front and back, mounted on identical Rial 16x7 mags. The following information is reprinted without permission. Tires Tested: BFGoodrich Comp T/A Bridgestone Potenza RE91 Dunlop SP Super Sport D4 Fulda Y2000 Goodyear Eagle VR50 Pirelli Cinturato P7 Yokohama A-008 Tests Conducted w/ winners(others in confidence interval): Ride/Comfort Comp T/A (RE91) Dry Braking from 60mph A-008 (none) Wet Braking from 60mph P7 (RE91,Y2000) Dry Skidpad Eagle (A-008,Comp T/A) Wet Skidpad A-008 (none) Slalom Comp T/A (A-008,RE91) Lane Change D4 (Y2000,Eagle) Autocross Eagle (Comp T/A) Road Course Eagle (Comp T/A) Seems to me that the Eagle, Comp T/A, and A-008 are the clear winners here, with the Japanese tire doing better in the handling and braking tests, and the Americans in speed. For more info (the article goes on for some pages...) see R&T. How about some real life comments from people with good tires? How do these results compare with reality? BTW: The A-008 did *very* well on the wear measurements they did, it seems to lack the sticky but short lived characteristics of the A-001. Yours for "I can't Drive 55", -- ***dan {allegra,astrovax,princeton,twg}!fisher!djl The misplaced (You call *that* a ski slope??) Californian