Mazda3 people, rec tires and other stuff for me...

[phucheneh]

Checked on prices a few minutes ago. Gonna grab a couple of the Michelins on Monday. And no one tell me OMG OVERSTEER because I'm gonna run the decent pair of Bridgestones on the back for another few thousand miles. ;P

I think I'm gonna start a small 'Mazda fund' and try and grab those Koni shocks in a month or so. Sway bar...eventually. After rear tires, for obvious reasons.

JCH, you have any input on whether or not it's wise to run the Corksport bar on stock links? I've seen busted end links and even broken frame brackets on some cars (not Mazdas) with aftermarket rear bars. Granted, they were usually running max stiffness on an adjustable bar, whereas I would use the weakest.

 

[npaladin-2000]

Friends don't let friends mismatch tires.

 

[npaladin-2000]

How about noise? Is the Conti DWS quieter than the AS3? I'm going to be changing over to a set of the DWS or AS3 later this year, looking for opinions on treadwear, noise, etc.

They're both pretty noisy, then again, the Mazda3 is a relatively noisy car in general. Neither one is going to make the car quieter. The Contis lasted a lot longer than I expected treadwear-wise, but the Michelins just came out recently anyway, anyone's guess on those.

Anyway, if you want quiet, downsize to 16 inch rims and get a Grand Touring tire. I hear the Bridgestone Turanza Serenity Plus is really good, and has good snow traction (it's got a similar tread pattern to the Contis)

The ContiExtreme DWS and Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3 are low profile high performance tires, and noise reduction really isn't on the menu for that type of tire.

 

[phucheneh]

Friends don't let friends mismatch tires.

So if your friend was on the wearbars in the front, with 6/32" on the rear, you'd tell him to drive his car through frequent rain to get to work as-is, instead of OMG dangerously buying a different brand of a tire with the same speed rating to replace the worn out ones? Or perhaps I should view any car purchase as a contract with the OE tire manufacturer?

 

[npaladin-2000]

I'd tell friend to replace all four tires. And next time to rotate the suckers properly. Cheaping out on tires is always a bad move. Whether it's only replacing two or not properly maintaining them, whichever. They are the car's only connection to the road. Just how much is one's derriere worth in savings?

 

[phucheneh]

I'd tell friend to replace all four tires. And next time to rotate the suckers properly. Cheaping out on tires is always a bad move. Whether it's only replacing two or not properly maintaining them, whichever. They are the car's only connection to the road. Just how much is one's derriere worth in savings?

No; sorry, your opinion is wrong. Yes, I know, it's just, like, your opinion, man; how can it be wrong?

Well, you're giving your opinion on a moot issue. I don't like the level of traction I am getting on the steering axle of my car, especially in the wet. I am not going to buy four crap tires just because they match, nor drive on the shitty tires just to spite myself. I don't feel like letting go of $520 dollars right now if I can do without it. But I can part with $260 to replace the 'bad' tires on my front axle with 'very good' tires, and keep the just 'good' tires on the back. Your argument to avoid either:

A) Saying 'no, I would not recommend what you said to a friend' and admitting that you're wrong.
B) Saying 'yes, I would recommend my friend do that because I hate them and would rather they die than risk overall marginal differences in tire response and grip upsetting the balance of their car when they Take It To The Limit (the limit!)' and looking silly.

...can only be validated in your favor by saying 'yes, four new $60 tires right now is a better decision than throwing two $120 tires on it right now and grabbing the other two further into next month (i.e. once bills are paid and us mere mortals confirm that we still have discretionary monies left over).

And as far as 'that's what you get for not rotating your tires'...well holy shit, that argument changes everything. It totally puts hundred dollar bills in my pocket and/or unwears my tires. Oh wait. No. It doesn't. So it's a pretty damned stupid thing to bother bringing up.

My tires have been rotated about five times in 30k. How do you think I managed to get 30k out of crappy 20k mile Turanzas? I wore them super-even. Two of the tires managed to get about 2/32" more wear simply because they were about even at like 23k and oh noes the sky is falling, I went a whopping 7k without rotating them. And, whoops, look at that, I still need front tires; hasn't changed at all.

 

[996GT2]

They're both pretty noisy, then again, the Mazda3 is a relatively noisy car in general. Neither one is going to make the car quieter. The Contis lasted a lot longer than I expected treadwear-wise, but the Michelins just came out recently anyway, anyone's guess on those.

Anyway, if you want quiet, downsize to 16 inch rims and get a Grand Touring tire. I hear the Bridgestone Turanza Serenity Plus is really good, and has good snow traction (it's got a similar tread pattern to the Contis)

The ContiExtreme DWS and Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3 are low profile high performance tires, and noise reduction really isn't on the menu for that type of tire.

I'm looking for a tire with good performance characteristics and good noise characteristics. My Accord already has 16 inch alloys, so I'm hoping that 215/55/16s (a decent amount of sidewall) will not be too much louder compared to a touring tire like the Michelin Primacy MXV4.

Edit: sorry to go off-topic in OP's thread, carry on.

 

[phucheneh]

I'm looking for a tire with good performance characteristics and good noise characteristics. My Accord already has 16 inch alloys, so I'm hoping that 215/55/16s (a decent amount of sidewall) will not be too much louder compared to a touring tire like the Michelin Primacy MXV4.

Edit: sorry to go off-topic in OP's thread, carry on.

No, that's plenty on-topic. I was just trying to smother my mistaken decision to bother to mention that I was gonna throw a couple of the new, better performing tires on my car and pick up the other two in a month (before I buy suspension mods and am actually tempted to 'push' the car in any kind of intensive driving)...I do not feel like triggering the infamous-to-me 'better tires on front or rear' debate. So the above is what I got to say about it, and I can stick with talking about the performance qualities of high-quality modestly-sized daily driver tires.

I will report back on my opinion on the Michelins. Your Accord has almost identical tires and would probably do best (so far as simply having both good handling characteristics and decent ride on a hopefully a 40k mile or more tire) on whatever makes the Mazda happy.

Ugh, you know what sucks, though? I'll still hate my car on (4) brand new tires, no matter how good they are. I was driving home today and unleashed all 140 horses (LOL) on a curvy back road, and during said spirited driving, I could feel every reason my car's shocks were worn and underperforming. Then I drove more normally on a badly-paved road and felt every damn tiny imperfection in the road.

JCH's recommendation has ruined me for not spending an extra $500+ on freaking Koni FSD's.

edit: FWIW, I doubt the Pilots will be any quieter than the MXV4's, even if you get the H-rated tire (as opposed to V, I think). The Primacy's aren't the best tire out there, but I'd surely have to call them no worse than any half-decent tire so far as noise is concerned.

As mentioned by someone else above, increasing wheel size and decreasing sidewall height on the same vehicle pretty much always yields additional noise and harshness. The skinnier the sidewall, the better a tire needs to be to grant a decent, quiet ride.

 

[Kelvrick]

No; sorry, your opinion is wrong. Yes, I know, it's just, like, your opinion, man; how can it be wrong?

Well, you're giving your opinion on a moot issue. I don't like the level of traction I am getting on the steering axle of my car, especially in the wet. I am not going to buy four crap tires just because they match, nor drive on the shitty tires just to spite myself. I don't feel like letting go of $520 dollars right now if I can do without it. But I can part with $260 to replace the 'bad' tires on my front axle with 'very good' tires, and keep the just 'good' tires on the back. Your argument to avoid either:

A) Saying 'no, I would not recommend what you said to a friend' and admitting that you're wrong.
B) Saying 'yes, I would recommend my friend do that because I hate them and would rather they die than risk overall marginal differences in tire response and grip upsetting the balance of their car when they Take It To The Limit (the limit!)' and looking silly.

...can only be validated in your favor by saying 'yes, four new $60 tires right now is a better decision than throwing two $120 tires on it right now and grabbing the other two further into next month (i.e. once bills are paid and us mere mortals confirm that we still have discretionary monies left over).

And as far as 'that's what you get for not rotating your tires'...well holy shit, that argument changes everything. It totally puts hundred dollar bills in my pocket and/or unwears my tires. Oh wait. No. It doesn't. So it's a pretty damned stupid thing to bother bringing up.

My tires have been rotated about five times in 30k. How do you think I managed to get 30k out of crappy 20k mile Turanzas? I wore them super-even. Two of the tires managed to get about 2/32" more wear simply because they were about even at like 23k and oh noes the sky is falling, I went a whopping 7k without rotating them. And, whoops, look at that, I still need front tires; hasn't changed at all.

You're getting pretty defensive there. Why the high emotion when we're not in OT or P&N. He has made several postings with actual input.

Back to this thread though, on a fwd car, I think you would be fine with the fronts and rears mismatched. It isn't like you have to worry about power transfer clutches or differentials overworking themselves like an AWD car.

 

[michal1980]

No; sorry, your opinion is wrong. Yes, I know, it's just, like, your opinion, man; how can it be wrong?

Well, you're giving your opinion on a moot issue. I don't like the level of traction I am getting on the steering axle of my car, especially in the wet. I am not going to buy four crap tires just because they match, nor drive on the shitty tires just to spite myself. I don't feel like letting go of $520 dollars right now if I can do without it. But I can part with $260 to replace the 'bad' tires on my front axle with 'very good' tires, and keep the just 'good' tires on the back. Your argument to avoid either:

A) Saying 'no, I would not recommend what you said to a friend' and admitting that you're wrong.
B) Saying 'yes, I would recommend my friend do that because I hate them and would rather they die than risk overall marginal differences in tire response and grip upsetting the balance of their car when they Take It To The Limit (the limit!)' and looking silly.

...can only be validated in your favor by saying 'yes, four new $60 tires right now is a better decision than throwing two $120 tires on it right now and grabbing the other two further into next month (i.e. once bills are paid and us mere mortals confirm that we still have discretionary monies left over).

And as far as 'that's what you get for not rotating your tires'...well holy shit, that argument changes everything. It totally puts hundred dollar bills in my pocket and/or unwears my tires. Oh wait. No. It doesn't. So it's a pretty damned stupid thing to bother bringing up.

My tires have been rotated about five times in 30k. How do you think I managed to get 30k out of crappy 20k mile Turanzas? I wore them super-even. Two of the tires managed to get about 2/32" more wear simply because they were about even at like 23k and oh noes the sky is falling, I went a whopping 7k without rotating them. And, whoops, look at that, I still need front tires; hasn't changed at all.

blablabla

your better tires should go on the back

 

[thescreensavers]

Really? The PSS is one of the most popular high performance summer tires these days. It's pretty much the new benchmark among non R compound performance tires.

I got PSS on my WRX they are great

Its a very good Driving tire and have amazing amounts of grip

If you do autocross that is the only thing they do not do better than my dunlops that came on the car.

 

[JCH13]

Checked on prices a few minutes ago. Gonna grab a couple of the Michelins on Monday. And no one tell me OMG OVERSTEER because I'm gonna run the decent pair of Bridgestones on the back for another few thousand miles. ;P

I think I'm gonna start a small 'Mazda fund' and try and grab those Koni shocks in a month or so. Sway bar...eventually. After rear tires, for obvious reasons.

JCH, you have any input on whether or not it's wise to run the Corksport bar on stock links? I've seen busted end links and even broken frame brackets on some cars (not Mazdas) with aftermarket rear bars. Granted, they were usually running max stiffness on an adjustable bar, whereas I would use the weakest.

Not sure if the links/brackets would hold up. I assume they would because the CorkSport isn't some insanely stiff rear bar, the only sway bars that cause breakage that I've heard about are usually really over-sized hollow ones that are many more times stiffer than stock. Though there is one comment on CorkSport's website about a "sheared bracket."

However, I would tend toward getting adjustable end links so that you can be sure to eliminate any pre-loading in the sway bar.

Pro tip: the outer-most hole on the RSB will be the softest setting.

Other pro tip: put the better tires in the back. If only for the reason that if you put new tires on the back, and then later put new tires on the front, they'll come closer to wearing out at the same time than if you did it the other way around.

 

[phucheneh]

Well, so here's a little update:

Front tires are on the car. They are the full-on V or W rated ones. Remarkably smooth ride. It is a very bulky tire (the Mich AS3), probably the beefiest 205/55/16 I've ever seen outside of a runflat (hell, some runflats aren't made of such thick rubber). And there's noticeably more material on the outer sidewall...you don't have to look for 'inside/outside' markings...it's really obvious.

All that meat is somehow just made of rubber with enough compliance to not ride nearly as loud or rough as you might expect. And both the dry and wet handling is highly improved.

Gonna pull the trigger on other stuff with some tax return money. Obviously another pair of those awesome ties, and then is a rear bar, and a rear engine mount from corkspork, and a set of Koni FSD's to wear stock springs.

Still needed would some swaybar links, and perhaps some bracing. The $130 Corksport midbrace looks simple but probably beneficial. And I'd like one of their lower front braces to tie the odd (but fucntional) front subframe design together. I know a tower brace is wasted money (pretty damn braced up there from the factory), but it seems like a bar down low could help.

We move in phases. But great shoes and great dampers will be on this month.

 

[toronado97]

Well, so here's a little update:

Front tires are on the car. They are the full-on V or W rated ones. Remarkably smooth ride. It is a very bulky tire (the Mich AS3), probably the beefiest 205/55/16 I've ever seen outside of a runflat (hell, some runflats aren't made of such thick rubber). And there's noticeably more material on the outer sidewall...you don't have to look for 'inside/outside' markings...it's really obvious.

All that meat is somehow just made of rubber with enough compliance to not ride nearly as loud or rough as you might expect. And both the dry and wet handling is highly improved.

Gonna pull the trigger on other stuff with some tax return money. Obviously another pair of those awesome ties, and then is a rear bar, and a rear engine mount from corkspork, and a set of Koni FSD's to wear stock springs.

Still needed would some swaybar links, and perhaps some bracing. The $130 Corksport midbrace looks simple but probably beneficial. And I'd like one of their lower front braces to tie the odd (but fucntional) front subframe design together. I know a tower brace is wasted money (pretty damn braced up there from the factory), but it seems like a bar down low could help.

We move in phases. But great shoes and great dampers will be on this month.

Very nice. Let us know how things go.

 

[JCH13]

:awe:

 

[996GT2]

Well, so here's a little update:

Front tires are on the car. They are the full-on V or W rated ones. Remarkably smooth ride. It is a very bulky tire (the Mich AS3), probably the beefiest 205/55/16 I've ever seen outside of a runflat (hell, some runflats aren't made of such thick rubber). And there's noticeably more material on the outer sidewall...you don't have to look for 'inside/outside' markings...it's really obvious.

All that meat is somehow just made of rubber with enough compliance to not ride nearly as loud or rough as you might expect. And both the dry and wet handling is highly improved.

Gonna pull the trigger on other stuff with some tax return money. Obviously another pair of those awesome ties, and then is a rear bar, and a rear engine mount from corkspork, and a set of Koni FSD's to wear stock springs.

Still needed would some swaybar links, and perhaps some bracing. The $130 Corksport midbrace looks simple but probably beneficial. And I'd like one of their lower front braces to tie the odd (but fucntional) front subframe design together. I know a tower brace is wasted money (pretty damn braced up there from the factory), but it seems like a bar down low could help.

We move in phases. But great shoes and great dampers will be on this month.

Ride and noise are both good on the AS3s?

Sweet. Looks like I will be getting a set soon too.

Let us know how they are holding up after a few thousand miles.