Sponsored article presented by Maxxis Tires.
When it comes to tires, sometimes we just want it all.
Then a little thing called reality gets in the way.
“But why?” we all cry. “Why can’t we have it all?”
So we asked someone who can tell us why: John Wu, an engineer by training and now director of product strategy …
And I know that everyone's still after the elusive tire that does it all: fast, long-wearing, easy to drive, huge size range and only costs $75. Hopefully some of these answers show why that's such a tall order.
Very cool - the one about slicks vs. bald has been on the top of my tire question list for some time now
The article touches on it a little bit but I've been curious for a while about what exactly the requirements for speed rating are, especially when most of the ratings are only separated by a few mph each. I've had some snow tires with super low ratings that I've either come close to or have exceeded the rating on for brief periods of time. At one point I asked a tire engineer friend and it seemed like either they didn't know or they weren't very firm guidelines.
P3PPY said:Very cool - the one about slicks vs. bald has been on the top of my tire question list for some time now
And I guess I forgot that snow tires also feature soft compounds. (Once John mentioned that, pretty sure I learned that at a winter driving program.) So, yay, we're learning stuff.
Another good one! Appreciated!
Compared to years past, we DO have it all! It's just that as technology advances, and the baseline moves, so do our expectations. A modern all season is likely both faster, longer lasting, and cheaper(inflation adjusted) than anything from the 70's. The competition will always be to have the fastest, longest lasting, quietest, etc. of what is CURRENTLY on the market. As performance increases, We'll always want more! (and thus never reach nirvana)
In reply to cbaclawski :
right-on!
if memory serves, we've gone from 0.5g street, 0.7g sport, and 1.5g race tires in the 60s progressively to 0.7, 1.2, and 3.0g now
and they cost less
and they are better in the wet
and they last longer.
I think R&T declared that tire tech is the single largest factor for better handling cars "now". SUVs out-hande many sports cars from 60-70s
tire engineers are yet another "un-sung hero"!
It still amazes me that the NT01 has yet to be dethroned after quite a few years of being on top of the dry weather HPDE performance category. Grip, treadware, cost, heat resistance, etc, etc.
Olemiss540 said:It still amazes me that the NT01 has yet to be dethroned after quite a few years of being on top of the dry weather HPDE performance category. Grip, treadware, cost, heat resistance, etc, etc.
It has been eclipsed by several tires at this point... The 200 Treadwear category is almost all better than the NT01.
collinskl1 said:Olemiss540 said:It still amazes me that the NT01 has yet to be dethroned after quite a few years of being on top of the dry weather HPDE performance category. Grip, treadware, cost, heat resistance, etc, etc.
It has been eclipsed by several tires at this point... The 200 Treadwear category is almost all better than the NT01.
Not in any testing I have seen or real world experience from those running them. The RE71R might be able to run head to head (or even be a touch quicker) but it has a narrow window before its overheated or heat cycled and is quicker wearing. The a052 is an autocross tire that cant handle the heat of DE sessions and wears amazingly fast, the rs4 is not up to pace but has the longevity. What am I missing?
The NT01 wears slow, is extremely heat resistant, and most wear them to the chords as they get quicker and quicker. I have gotten 35-40 HPDE DAYS out of a set on NT01s.
David S. Wallens said:P3PPY said:Very cool - the one about slicks vs. bald has been on the top of my tire question list for some time now
And I guess I forgot that snow tires also feature soft compounds. (Once John mentioned that, pretty sure I learned that at a winter driving program.) So, yay, we're learning stuff.
Old drag racers trick from way back. Use snow tires in street tire classes. More grip off the line because of the softer compound. Probably no longer relevant because of the better tire compounds of today.
In reply to jharry3 :
Sort of related to the snow tire idea, check out this piece about Old Yeller II on the Classic Motorsports site. Max Balchowsky ran white walls because they were softer.
Olemiss540 said:collinskl1 said:Olemiss540 said:It still amazes me that the NT01 has yet to be dethroned after quite a few years of being on top of the dry weather HPDE performance category. Grip, treadware, cost, heat resistance, etc, etc.
It has been eclipsed by several tires at this point... The 200 Treadwear category is almost all better than the NT01.
Not in any testing I have seen or real world experience from those running them. The RE71R might be able to run head to head (or even be a touch quicker) but it has a narrow window before its overheated or heat cycled and is quicker wearing. The a052 is an autocross tire that cant handle the heat of DE sessions and wears amazingly fast, the rs4 is not up to pace but has the longevity. What am I missing?
The NT01 wears slow, is extremely heat resistant, and most wear them to the chords as they get quicker and quicker. I have gotten 35-40 HPDE DAYS out of a set on NT01s.
35-40 days?!? What car? I feel lucky if I get 3 days! (not NT01's, never really tried those, but maybe I should...)
A fellow tire engineer once posed a scene: Picture all of the forces that a tire endures in one revolution. You have the g-forces trying to pull it apart, then you slam the tread into the ground before you drag it across the pavement. And that's before even bringing up turning, braking or acceleration. Or rain, snow, ice or a 75,000-mile warranty. There's a lot going on.
If the A052 could handle 4 or 5 weekends (HPDE), it would be pretty perfect. Sadly many of the reviews talk 3 or 4 DAYS!
P3PPY said:Very cool - the one about slicks vs. bald has been on the top of my tire question list for some time now
I remember back in the day you'd see dudes with totally worn-out tires claiming that they were now faster. Um, likely no.
David S. Wallens said:I remember back in the day you'd see dudes with totally worn-out tires claiming that they were now faster. Um, likely no.
Well, maybe. A worn tire that is not totally gone would have a smaller diameter and weigh less. Until you hit the last layer and the tire is gone. Of course it could just be "now I know the track better" also.
Just guessing.
Tires, like life, always involve compromise. That is why you want a second set of wheels
Toebra said:Tires, like life, always involve compromise. That is why you want a second set of wheels
Second? I wish I only had that many sets of wheels :-D
This is a pretty pessimistic way to look at things. Tire technology and electronic engine controls have improved more than anything else in the past 20 years. We do have it all. You can literally go to a Ford or Chevy dealer today and buy a track ready car and beat the you know what out of it and set lap times at VIR at near super car levels if you believe the Lightning Lap results. We do have it all when it comes to tires. Enjoy.
If you really want to dig deep into tires, here's a PDF that has the answers:
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/PneumaticTire_HS-810-561.pdf
Did this post get bumped by a canoe trying to claim their tires really could have it all?
Sort of related to this tire discussion, I have always wanted a 17-300mm f2.8 lens that's also lightweight and reasonably priced.
In reply to Olemiss540 :
super K ran the entire 1 lap event on the same set of AO52s. Seems pretty good to me
You'll need to log in to post.
