StevoD

lists a bit odd only tvr allowed is the griffith i would have thought a cerbera or sagaris would be more of a super car than a griffith, any if an NSX can be in there dont see why a Zed cant be

intresting NOW WHERE MY SUPERMODEL TO GO WITH IT

whats the latest mpss is it 3?

Should have bought a Jaaaaag Sent from the golf club... And have 75 year old men walking their whippets doffing their flat caps at me as I drive by... i went to a jaguar owners meet and great once

and be associated with

a few members who have decats unrated exhaust and uprev have managed it

you know only if he had had mpss instead of pirelli this wouldn't have happened

STS Bedford.. Say i sent you might hook it up cheers buddie will do

unless im blind were did you go for this as mine could do with a refresh

its my signature i can do what i want with it

Can't speak for Renault or Honda, but Seat use MPSC2s. "Wheel offset and tyre size (235/35R19) remain as before but the Bridgestones or Pirellis of standard cars are replaced by the Michelin Pilot Cup Sport 2s." http://www.pistonhea...?storyId=29599‎ Fair call good spot

didnt notice it was Ps2, but i dunno this sounds like the design them around the speed criteria Motor Tend: What special technology goes into building a supercar tire versus a standard performance tire? Michelin: Supercar tires are essentially 'tailor made' - even more so than less demanding non-supercar original equipment radial tires. Supercar tires must withstand the increased horsepower, torque, traction, aerodynamic loading, high-speed stability and other engineering demands imposed by the Supercar chassis and manufacturer. Most original equipment manufacturers (not supercar makers) have extensive lists of engineering criteria - some with hundreds of individual tire design targets - to be met in wet, dry, and everyday driving conditions if the tire is to be accepted (homologated) as an original equipment fitment. Supercar manufacturers have much longer engineering tire design criteria lists than most other manufacturers. Here's an example of one high speed handling criteria: "the vehicle and tire combination shall not drift or pull at 160 mph in either direction beyond the specification target allowed and when cross winds are factored out" Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/tuners/112_0606_sf_supercar_tires/#ixzz2xjW7icrN

Honest question here curious to your ideas why Seat Renault and Honda opt for bridgestones over mpss when tryng to set and setting ring lap records in there hot hatches?

of cause it makes a difference, you going to recommend the same tyres for someone who hits the track 3 times a month in the south of france to someone who takes there car to see family in Scandinavian or someone out in iceland where 90% of the roads are gravel

ooops. How fast were you, allegedly, going? That depends on which tyres he was using was some rubbish falkens so i think im for the chop, just to clarify a ban from the forum not the road my licences is squeaky

this looks very high speed specific http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/tuners/112_0606_sf_supercar_tires/high_speed.html

o not far from me then, but i dont think ill be around here much long feel a ban coming on

taken from one of the Global time attack evo guys in the states i think he puts it into words better than me I think it needs to be said that these tires are "better at speed" than others is because that is their main hoorah. They're on super cars because they're one of the few tires that will stay in one piece at 250mph. They're built to have a high speed rating, such as top speed in excess of 200mph in a straight line. Now; since they're on super cars everyone jumps on the wagon because "they're on super cars, they're the best tire, they're super car tires…" Some tires are built for "lateral grip in the dry" or "snow tire" "wet race tire" "drag slick". There are many different purposes for different tires. You don't want a hoosier wet tire for drag racing, but you sure don't want a wide/high aspect ration drag radial for a wet road course either. Extreme examples, but just trying to get across tires are built for one main purpose, then the other attributes take the background. The PSS #1 goal is top speed… that's the purpose for the build to win the manufacturer over so they buy Michelin tires to go on their 200+mph super cars and Michelin gets a good pay day and advertisement. Then it trickles down to cheaper cars who want to be like the big guys and have their tires. Marketing, negotiations. Boom. You get the "PSS in the best tire ever for everything period" thread on internet forums. I'm not saying it's a bad tire, it's a GREAT tire for it's intended purpose/design, but it is not the best performance tire that many make it out to be.

So Good year eagle f1, Maxxis Maz1, falken fk543, P zeros ,Khumo Ecsta etc are all ditch finders now interesting they wernt yesterday funny how things change over night you find anywere ive stated you should buy fulder or autogrip tyres or any other economy brand tyre, my argument is you dont need mpss for everyday driving over that off the above, im not being aggressive you just dont seem to be stuck on your soap box and wont accept that for everyday driving mpss arent required to not be dangerous if you feel you need mpss for your epic skills or for your piece of mind thats fine and i understand that but suggestion to people they must have this tyre is unreal for what the op wants a flag ship hankook, khumo, pirelli, good year would be just as good and less money

this guy, reads me to having a better tyre allow him to drive better because he wont crash Not sure how you came to that conclusion, the point is a better tyre is a safety net to some degree. Who said anything about it makes me drive better? Stop reading things that aren't there, that would be a good start to this debate. Basically I was trying to say if I make a mistake on the road, having a decent tyre on could be the difference between an accident and not. I know there are a ton of variables and a tyre will not save you in most instances but if you can help reduce a risk... Why wouldn't you? I got what you meant fella and I think 99.9% of people did. By Stevo's logic is there no point upgrading brakes either as they won't stop you any quicker Sent from the golf club... on an everyday road car driven only on the run at legal speeds no there is no point in a cost to reward basis doesnt make sense, if for example you going to race around and sit up peoples arse and then rear end someone and argue if i had uprated brakes i would have stopped in time isnt an excuse a OEM set up is more than capable for normal driving at normal spends with normal distances between cars Just like a normal mid range performance tyre is just as capable for everyday activites as a mpss is Oh yeah sorry I forgot that all Zed owners are aggressive idiots who can't drive... Just going to cancel Wales don't want to be anywhere near those idiots with their expensive tyres and upgraded brake & caliper set ups.... Thanks for the heads up Sent from the golf club... now whos reading stuff that isnt there, so by contrast your saying every 350z owner who doesnt have mpss or upgraded brakes is and idiot who cant drive intresting

this guy, reads me to having a better tyre allow him to drive better because he wont crash Not sure how you came to that conclusion, the point is a better tyre is a safety net to some degree. Who said anything about it makes me drive better? Stop reading things that aren't there, that would be a good start to this debate. Basically I was trying to say if I make a mistake on the road, having a decent tyre on could be the difference between an accident and not. I know there are a ton of variables and a tyre will not save you in most instances but if you can help reduce a risk... Why wouldn't you? I got what you meant fella and I think 99.9% of people did. By Stevo's logic is there no point upgrading brakes either as they won't stop you any quicker Sent from the golf club... on an everyday road car driven only on the run at legal speeds no there is no point in a cost to reward basis doesnt make sense, if for example you going to race around and sit up peoples arse and then rear end someone and argue if i had uprated brakes i would have stopped in time isnt an excuse a OEM set up is more than capable for normal driving at normal spends with normal distances between cars Just like a normal mid range performance tyre is just as capable for everyday activites as a mpss is

welcome wheres about in north herts as im royston

this guy, reads me to having a better tyre allow him to drive better because he wont crash

But to that degree having decent tyres actually saves you. I would hasten a guess that a pro driver could drive better on ditchfinders than I could on MPSS. If you have a cheaper tyre on, driving enthusiastically might cause you to easily lose control of the vehicle whereas a more expensive performance tyre will help to keep you in check. First lesson Of the Institute of advance motoring you drive to the condition of the road and car if your driving beyond the the car/tyre capability which i very much doubt 98% of people on this forum can if we use fk453 on a 350z ( having the car oversteer because your bad pedal movements or road positioning isnt exceeding the tyre limit) for an example doesnt mean the tyres @*!# means you cant use the tyre to the best of its ability, if your driving beyond your capability of controlling a car on any tyre thats your issue as a driver not the car not the tyre so what people are saving is you cant have a spirited drive on toyo,federal,maxxis,falken etc because you might crash