Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 9 months later...

Geez, this thread needs a bump to keep up with what's happening on the semi slick club race scene. OK I'm bitching, a set of new Hankook 214 SOFT worked great at Challenge Bathurst 2016 but that was it, plenty of tread left but zero grip, wheelspin in top gear, no grip whatsoever at Morgan park a few months later. So I'm thinking mediums instead for this year's Challenge but the price has gone up of course no doubt as a result of  their club popularity transferring to the propretend (TV exposure) lot. What was once a budget buy is now a greed grab in price, I'm looking elsewhere.       

I just picked up a set of 245/40r17 Kumho V70A in the K60 (medium) compound. 

I'll be trying them out at a tarmac rally next month. I think this tyre was more popular a few years ago. Although it's been manufactured quite recently (my set have a July 2016 manufacture date) it seems like they aren't as popular as the Toyos, Hankooks and Advans etc.

From what I can see they should be a good medium budget tyre, my set cost $1100 all up, but the other brands were more like $1600 - $1800 a set. 

V70A used to be our control tyre, I used to run the mediums and found them the best of the mid priced tyres.

of course then the hankooks came along at mid price and blew away even the most expensive ones which turned the market upside down for a while.  I haven't priced them lately but per Richard's post, if they have got expensive that may make v70a a good choice again.

One surprising thing about the v70a, they like really high pressures. Like 40-45 hot high. 

  • Like 1
20 minutes ago, Duncan said:

V70A used to be our control tyre, I used to run the mediums and found them the best of the mid priced tyres.

of course then the hankooks came along at mid price and blew away even the most expensive ones which turned the market upside down for a while.  I haven't priced them lately but per Richard's post, if they have got expensive that may make v70a a good choice again.

One surprising thing about the v70a, they like really high pressures. Like 40-45 hot high. 

Thanks very much for the feedback Duncan and recommendation about the higher pressure. 

I originally wanted the Hankooks but could only find them for $1800/set, so the Kumhos seemed like excellent value. 

Have you ever used them in damp conditions? The event I am using them in (Snowy River Sprint, Lakes Entrance VIC) is sometimes damp. 

Cheers. 

Good to see some input, there are quite a few tyres around described as semi slicks but which have road tyre type tread so that excludes them. Nitto NT01's  have their fans as do the new R888's .                                                                                                                .

Well from my point of view the hankooks at 1800 a set are still a better buy than the dunlops or yokos are 2500 a set since they perform better. They were are no brainer for the performance they gave at the old pricing but if you want to be at the front of a competition you would still have to buy them at whatever price since they are the best tyre.

But now the pricing has shifted I guess it is worth looking again at the 888, v70a etc for general/club use where price is more important than outright speed. The 888 used to be poor under heavy cars like GTRs but I'm interested to see results if they have changed them recently.

Bathurst in November will be my last run on 17" tyres so I'm a bit price sensitive having to buy a new set for only that event. With the Hankooks it looks like the price has gone up due to demand not to production cost, it's a bit annoying because it's always the club blokes looking for a bargain that first try out new tyres and so establish their reputation or not. Oh well, I'm going to try out a newbie and see how they go and keep quiet if they are good, stuff it :)

Richard, I don't think anything has really changed in the semi slick landscape since you asked the same questions last year, other than the R888R which are still a bit of an unknown quantity. I haven't seen any decent cars try them or heard any reviews. Price of every tyre has crept up a bit. Just go back a page or two and the advice is all still relevant, including the warnings about Hankook Softs giving up the ghost after not many heat cycles, and way before the tread wears out... the Mediums cycle well.

I've had the Nankangs on the Soarer for just over a year now. Wearing well and heat cycle well, although I have only used them twice since buying another car at the start of the year, they're still getting PBs when I dust the big Soarer off for a run. I also bought a set for my other car that I've mainly been using this year. Definitely the pick of the budget semis. 1.09sec faster than NT01 at Lakeside on the Soarer, and they're cheaper. Or compared to arguably the fastest semi available, Hankook Z221 C70 Soft, the Nankang is just 0.27 slower at Lakeside, for half the price. More sizes available than when they first came out too.

Edited by hrd-hr30

With you Harry, going with a set of the Nankangs. Pissed off with the advice I got, or did not get, about the soft Hankooks from the Q distributor. From what I know now for a track like Bathurst mediums are the go, they just take a bit more time to heat up but cycle way better than the softs which is irrelevant when you are doing 20 minute sessions.

mistake above. Levin's normal pressures were 32F 36R according to my notebook.

I did another hillclimb on the weekend with it and tried lower pressures 28F 32R. It had heaps more tyre squeal and heaps more understeer. Ran 50.72, 50.79 and 50.69 like that. Pumped then back up to 32F 36R and was instantly back to the normal  sort of times with a 50.06, much less squealing and noticeably improved grip. Ran them 2psi higher on Sunday and they felt a little better again, set a new PB of 49.92.

Based on that, I'm going to try the a bit more pressure in the Soarer next time too.

  • 2 months later...

32-34 hot.....most people prefer the lower end of the range.

cold is too hard to guess, depends on track, car and driver.  If you have no idea where to start set them to 28, do 3 hard laps, come into the pits hot and let them down to 32

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I think my main complaint with your idea is that there is a veneer of idealism spread across it. You want the simple numbers to make it easier, but all they will do is make it easier for someone to come to the wrong conclusion because the fine details will kick them in the nuts. As it is right now, the tiny bit of arithmetic is NOT the obstacle to understanding what will fit and what will not fit. The reality of trying it is what determines whether it will fit. If you had a "standard rule" that R34 GTT guards have that magic 100mm space from the hub face to whichever side you were worried about, and someone said "excellent, this wheel is only 98mm in that direction, I'll just go spend $4k on them and jam them on my sick ride".....they would just as likely find out that the "standard rule" is not true because the rear subframe is offset to one side by a fairly typical (but variable) 8mm on their car and they only have 92mm on one side and 108 on the other.
    • It still combines inches with mm, especially when you have .5 inches involved, and mm and inches that can go in either direction. This would give a clear idea on both sides of the rim, right away, with no arithmetic. Even better if somebody gives you the dimensions of the arch of multiple cars. i.e GTR may be 125mm, a A80 Supra may be 117mm, or something along those lines. Yes, you can 'know' that going from a 10in rim to a 10.5in rim with the same offset moves both sides about 6mm, but you still have to 'know' that and do the math. Often it's combined. People are going from 9.5 +27 to 10.5 +15. You may do the math to know it, but if it was going from (I had to go look it up to be sure) 241mm/2 - 27 - 93.5mm from the center line to (more math) 266/2 - 15 (118mm) from the center line. Versus 93mm vs 118mm. It's right there. If you know you have a GTT with 100mm guards you can see right away that one is close to flush and the other absolutely won't work. And when someone says "Oh the GTR is 120mm" suddenly you see that the 10.5 +15 is about perfect. (or you go and buy rims with approximately 118mm outward guard space) I think it's safe to say that given one of the most common questions in all modified cars is "How do offsets work" and "How do I know if wheels will fit on my car" that this would be much simpler... Of course, nothing will really change and nobody is going to remanufacture wheels and ditch inches and offset based on this conversation :p We'll all go "18x9+30 will line up pretty close to the guards for a R34 GTT (84mm)" but 'pretty close' is still not really defined (it is now!) and if you really care you still have go measure. Yes it depends on camber and height and dynamic movement, but so do all wheels no matter what you measure it for.
    • But offsets are simple numbers. 8" wheel? Call it 200mm, near enough. +35 offset? OK, so that means the hub face is that far out from the wheel centreline. Which is 2s of mental arithmetic to get to 65mm to outer edge and 135mm to inner. It's hardly any more effort for any other wheel width or offset. As I said, I just close my eyes and can see a picture of the wheel when given the width and offset. That wouldn't help me trust that a marginal fitment would actually go in and clear everything, any more than the supposedly simple numbers you're talking about. I dunno. Maybe I just automatically do numbers.
    • Sure! But you at least have simple numbers instead of 8.5 inches +/mm, relative to your current rims you do maths with as well, and/or compare with OEM diameter, which you also need to know/research/confirm..
×
×
  • Create New...