Cal Club Autocross Forums

My Contis didn't do all that bad for being rain tires.

Blind testing versus collective "wisdom"! I wouldn't mind trying out a set of those Michelins. Of course, I don't have $800 laying around...

The results in the C&D test are always a little bizarre from the perspective of an autocrosser. I suspect that the "wet" tests are quite a bit wetter than most wet autocrosses. Most autocrossers rate the Dunlop and Toyo as excellent wet tires, and the Hankook as really miserable. But in the C&D comparison they all were rated about the same: near the bottom. Back when they rated the Goodyear GS-D3 as their top tire, I got a set for street use, and they were miserable pieces of crap even for that. Cushy ride, to be sure, but a huge step down in steering response and feel from the Bridgestone S-03s I had before. Definitely not an autocross performer. The tests are generally done on 3-series BMWs, so you have to factor that in as well.

It isn't really testing vs conventional wisdom though; other groups have done their own tests, and those tests tend to match up better with the conventional wisdom of the autocrossers. I'll hang on to my Dunlops, thanks!

Do you have links to some of those other tests? The most referenced and popular tests online are Andy Hollis's, and that's on an ST civic on 15" wheels with shaved tires. I figure a 3-series is closer to my NC miata than that... especially given that I'm running 215-45/17s and the C&D article tests 225-45/17s.

It's true that the autocross community has more practical experience compared to a magazine head-to-head test, but how many autocrossers test out a lot of tires? When it came down to buy new tires for the miata, I got star specs since they are so popular, and I wanted something that was well behaved both dry and wet and had a decent tread life. I'm sticking with mine, too ( )... I like them a lot. But I'm open to the fact that there's something better out there.

Check out the comparisons in GRM and Sports Car. Though you'll still have some car/setup dependency, at least the ultimate goals are aligned with ours. No substitute for back to back testing on your own car, but how many of us can realistically afford that?

Davin Swanson wrote:Do you have links to some of those other tests? The most referenced and popular tests online are Andy Hollis's, and that's on an ST civic on 15" wheels with shaved tires. I figure a 3-series is closer to my NC miata than that... especially given that I'm running 215-45/17s and the C&D article tests 225-45/17s.

It's true that the autocross community has more practical experience compared to a magazine head-to-head test, but how many autocrossers test out a lot of tires? When it came down to buy new tires for the miata, I got star specs since they are so popular, and I wanted something that was well behaved both dry and wet and had a decent tread life. I'm sticking with mine, too ( )... I like them a lot. But I'm open to the fact that there's something better out there.

Top National Competitors test every tire that could give them an advantage.

Top National Competitors test every tire that could give them an advantage.

... which WE then benefit from.

Aaron Goldsmith wrote: Top National Competitors test every tire that could give them an advantage.

There's that conventional wisdom.

Aaron Goldsmith wrote:People With a Lot of Money test every tire that could give them an advantage.

Fixed that for 'ya.

Very slightly used tires sell easily

Count the Michelin ads in the Hearst Magazines magazines that are not C&D. Very common for automotive magazines to cross sell ads in their non-automotive sister magazines.