Are these right?

[Mickeywheelspin]

Hi,

 

I'm currently running Bridgestone REO40's on the front (225/45 R18 91W) and need to get some new front boots prior to MOT and potentially selling the car. I don't want to put ditchfinders on but am struggling to believe the Bridgies are worth £180 each.

 

I'm looking on Camskill for Falken 452's but they only have "FALKEN FK 452 - 225/45R18 95Y XL TL" The speed and load ratings are different from the Bridgestones - are these the right ones? If so, for £100 each they're a bit of a bargin and hopefully at least as good as the REO40's.

 

http://www.camskill.co.uk/m61b443s557p6 ... 95Y_XL_TL_

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[Neilp]

They're better all rounder that bridgestones and yep that is correct

[brillomaster]

The 91W and 95Y are the load and speed ratings, so higher is better here - the Falkens are rated for a higher weight, and rated for a faster speed - 'W's are rated up to 270kph, 'Y's are rated for up to 300kph (186mph ) The XL in the falkens refers to these tyres being able to take extra load, so are fine for heavier cars (not that the zed is particularly heavy.

 

http://www.boosttown.com/wheels_tyres/tyre_markings.php

[brillomaster]

duh, i see you knew they were speed and load ratings...

 

but point still stands, as long as the tyres are rated higher than the maximum speed of the car, you'll be fine. I believe running tyres with a lower speed rating than the car is capable of invalidates insurance.

[Mickeywheelspin]

What will do more will do less as they say - thought that was the case.

 

I'm impressed with the price too!

 

Thanks guys

[dave1221]

the 452s are very good. took my GT4 round the nurburgring during what can only be described as a monsoon, and the handling was superb