Bloody Conti's

[Roodosutaa]

Yep... blew another tyre, rubbed it lightly on the kerb pulling out of a driveway on the way back to work from lunch, drove a short distance back to the office, dind't realise until I knocked off for the day and saw the car and thought "wtf?"

There's a few scrapes and cuts on the sidewall, exactly like the one last year that blew after hitting a pothole, god these tyres are WEAK!!

Swapped it with the dirt-cheap Kumho Ecsta SPT I bought as spare last year, now I need another one of these cheap tyres to make a pair (no way in hell I'm gonna get another Conti at $280 a pop), hope these Kumhos aren't gonna be too bad... But at $110, i'm a bit sceptical

grrrrrrr

[Gti Dave]

Personally I think the conti's sidewalls are quite thin and weak.

[noone]

Nothing wrong with the KU31's (assuming thats the one you have).

I prefer them for comfort, so on the track day I'm taking the Conti's so the Kuhmo's don't get shredded.

[Umai Naa!!]

We found one on a Golf GT the other day that had splits in the sidewall, but no obvious damage to the tyre or rim. Volkswagen are now aware of it.

Give the Australian Continental distributor a ring, and see what they can do for you.

[Joe Chu]

We found one on a Golf GT the other day that had splits in the sidewall, but no obvious damage to the tyre or rim. Volkswagen are now aware of it.

Give the Australian Continental distributor a ring, and see what they can do for you.

Absolutely nothing!!! That's what they'll do, they are aware of the sidewall being weak, thats why they are so quiet. If you hit a pot hole and pinch the sidewall bad luck, if you scrape a kerb and split the sidewall even worse luck.I know the importer and nothing can be done. Sorry for the bad news.

[SmutsGTI]

Had the same happen to my wifes car, just clipped the gutter and bang tyre blew like she'd mounted the kerb at 80. Would not even consider rebuying that and the fact they are very noisy as well.

Smuts

[Maverick]

Yep... blew another tyre, rubbed it lightly on the kerb pulling out of a driveway on the way back to work from lunch, drove a short distance back to the office, dind't realise until I knocked off for the day and saw the car and thought "wtf?"

There's a few scrapes and cuts on the sidewall, exactly like the one last year that blew after hitting a pothole, god these tyres are WEAK!!

So you scraped the gutter, cut up the sidewall on a a low profile tyre performance tyre and you're complaining about the it failing?

There are lots out there with the Conti's and plenty that have gone 30, 40, 50k on the CSC2's (Golf GTI's) with no problems. I've never had a problem with them and they're highly regarded and come up around the top on tyre tests.

If you damage them in a pothole claim the cost of replacement from whoever is responsible for the road. If you damage them on the kerb you have no-one to blame but yourself. I wonder how many times you've done it before where it hasn't caused a problem but been weakened each time.


Had the same happen to my wifes car, just clipped the gutter and bang tyre blew like she'd mounted the kerb at 80. Would not even consider rebuying that and the fact they are very noisy as well.

How many times has she clipped gutters before this and not had the problem?

[G-rig]

Yeah people should learn how to drive before blaming the tyres all the time.. there have been a few of these pothole/ kerbing threads lately.

[pixl]

I had an issue with my tyres (or so I thought) --

Got in contact with Continental and they took care of everything. Told me to visit one of their approved tyre places. The guy there had my car for a couple of hours, testing the tyres, checking the alignment and balance.

In the end, all I needed was a wheel alignment which wasn't done right (twice) from the dealer. Even though it wasn't the tyres in the end, Continental picked up the bill for the inconvenience.

I keep hearing about how "bad" these tyres are, but honestly, how bad could they possibly be if Mercedes, Audi and VW approve of their use on their cars.

I've ridden Michelin PP2s and Marangoni Zeta Linea and neither one made me feel as confident in taking corners than the ContactSport 2s.

[Maverick]

I keep hearing about how "bad" these tyres are, but honestly, how bad could they possibly be if Mercedes, Audi and VW approve of their use on their cars.

The "issue" is that they're oem fitment to most GTI's (Golf and Polo's) so with a much larger install base of course you'll hear of more problems with them.

Does this mean the CSC2/CSC3 is a bad tyre? No just that's it's a common tyre and being a performance low profile tyre you can't go bouncing them over gutters or scrape them along gutters and expect them to not fail.


I've ridden Michelin PP2s and Marangoni Zeta Linea and neither one made me feel as confident in taking corners than the ContactSport 2s.

All the reviews back this up as well, the only tyre that is consistently better than the CS2 (CS3 now) is the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric but both are excellent tyres.

[G-rig]

Apparently the Michelins have thin walls and they were still excellent for years on my previous cars..

Neither will be as good as semi slicks with reinforced walls.

[Chuck]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool :P

now am on the Marrangonis (spelling) good dry grip, not so in the wet (compared to the Conti's)

the contis were awesome grip both wet and dry

[Roodosutaa]

OK let's put things into perspective here before you get too carried away with the knee-jerk generalisations - and we all know where that would lead on an internet forum.

I don't need to read reviews to know the tyres are good performance-wise - yes in that regard they're at least on par with the better road tyres I've had in my previous cars (Bridgestone Adrenalins, Toyo Proxes and Yokie A539s - showing my age as well), that was never in question.

The issue here is being road tyres all the same, in my experience they took the kind of wear and tear and general abuse one comes to expect of road tyres very poorly. In 15 years of driving and track days I've only had to replace tyres due to wear or occasional punctures from nails/screws etc. Definitely not from driving over potholes in traffic or rubbing a kerb leaving a car park. If I clipped a kerb hurtling into a corner or rode on the ripple strip and ripped up the tyre, then I copped it fair and square.

I take offence at your suggestion that I "go bounce off gutters" on just one occasion. I'm sure in your divine mightiness you've never hit a pothole or rubbed a kerb in a car park, ever.

Perhaps I should learn to drive better but certainly not as much as you need to learn a little more social etiquette.

[Maverick]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool :P

I find that very very hard to believe.

There is no way a cats eye would cause a tyre to blow, not at 80kph or 180kph.

[Maverick]

I don't need to read reviews to know the tyres are good performance-wise - yes in that regard they're at least on par with the better road tyres I've had in my previous cars (Bridgestone Adrenalins, Toyo Proxes and Yokie A539s - showing my age as well), that was never in question.

The CSC2's are way above all of those tyres performance wise but I digress.


The issue here is being road tyres all the same, in my experience they took the kind of wear and tear and general abuse one comes to expect of road tyres very poorly. In 15 years of driving and track days I've only had to replace tyres due to wear or occasional punctures from nails/screws etc. Definitely not from driving over potholes in traffic or rubbing a kerb leaving a car park. If I clipped a kerb hurtling into a corner or rode on the ripple strip and ripped up the tyre, then I copped it fair and square.

The tyres are low profile performance tyres, what was the profile on the other tyres that you've had? 60? 70?

How often do you check the tyre pressures, if you weren't running correct pressures (or higher) the tyre will be a lot more susceptible to damage especially from potholes.


I take offence at your suggestion that I "go bounce off gutters" on just one occasion. I'm sure in your divine mightiness you've never hit a pothole or rubbed a kerb in a car park, ever.

Tyres don't just fail, there's always an external influence involved (lack of tyre pressure, careless driving or potholes on roads) and blaming the tyres when clearly that's not the problem is not going to stop it from occurring again.

If you read what I said it was factual and to the point, the sidewall must have been scraped on more than one occasion for it to fail in that way.


Perhaps I should learn to drive better but certainly not as much as you need to learn a little more social etiquette.

Perhaps you should learn not to take offence when being given the facts, the contis are not at fault here, they are an exceptional tyre but like all tyres subject to damage if not treated correctly.

[Roodosutaa]

The CSC2's are way above all of those tyres performance wise but I digress.



The tyres are low profile performance tyres, what was the profile on the other tyres that you've had? 60? 70?

How often do you check the tyre pressures, if you weren't running correct pressures (or higher) the tyre will be a lot more susceptible to damage especially from potholes.

50 profile, and a consistent 32-34psi checked every time I washed the car and topped up from the compressor in the garage if necessary. That is exactly the kind of generalisation I was referring to.


Tyres don't just fail, there's always an external influence involved (lack of tyre pressure, careless driving or potholes on roads) and blaming the tyres when clearly that's not the problem is not going to stop it from occurring again.


If you read what I said it was factual and to the point, the sidewall must have been scraped on more than one occasion for it to fail in that way.

You've done it again.


Perhaps you should learn not to take offence when being given the facts, the contis are not at fault here, they are an exceptional tyre but like all tyres subject to damage if not treated correctly.

I won't take offence at facts but I certainly do with assumptions.

[G-rig]

i had one blow crossing over a cats eye on the highway - doing bout 80km/h

that is not normal or cool :P

now am on the Marrangonis (spelling) good dry grip, not so in the wet (compared to the Conti's)


I find that pretty hard to believe too, as they wouldn't put Cat-eyes (RRPM's) on the road if you weren't meant to drive over them.




I won't take offence at facts but I certainly do with assumptions.

Didn't mean to assume you or your missus is a bad driver, but perhaps give VW or Continental a call and say you think it's a warranty claim or fault of the tyres... then report back ... :biggrin:

[philthy]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

[Gti Dave]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

I agree with that.

[Maverick]

Why did you even pipe up about this Maverick?

Same reason you did.


The continentals have very soft sidewalls and are extremely easy to damage. I know this from experience of stuffing three of them from driving over potholes. I have had no such problems with my Kumhos, which perform just as well as the OEM contis IMHO.

The continentals don't have very soft sidewalls and are not easy to damage. The only recent issue that came up was with a young user on the golfmkv forum who managed to bubble two csc2's in a few thousand km's, turns out the user was hitting kerbs and performing long burnouts.

There are plenty of people out there that never have a problem with the CSC2's and they are used on a wide range of cars from the factory.

And kumhos don't perform as well as the continentals and this is backed up by the tyre reviews which use controlled tests to measure the performance.


The OP was just letting off a bit of steam, not inviting you to tell him he is stupid.

I never said he was stupid but blaming a fault with the tyres when the real problem is how the tyres are treated is.

[JCM308]

It's not uncommon for most tyres to get damaged from hitting potholes. It comes down to how fast you were going, how much tyre pressure, how deep the pothole was, and a few other factors.

I had a friend that hit a pothole and not only punctured his tyre but buckled his rim (in this case sidewall strength wouldn't have meant squat).

Yes different tyres are made to different qualities (this is generally shown in their cost) but they all still have to meet specific safety standards and will generally hold up well under "normal" driving conditions.

[Chuck]

I find that very very hard to believe.

There is no way a cats eye would cause a tyre to blow, not at 80kph or 180kph.

believe it kids...why would i lie about this????

maybe that tyre was just a faulty one...it litterly detonated as i crossed a cats eye

[brad]

The continentals don't have very soft sidewalls and are not easy to damage.
How many plies are in the CSC2 sidewall & what material are they? (I did a quick search & I can't find any information).

How does this compare to the sidewall construction similar/better performing tyres like the Goodyear F1 Assymetric or the Bridgestone RE050A?

I know the RE050A has a very stiff sidewall & haven't heard any issues with sidewall damage from potholes/kerbs/etc.

[ACTGTI]

I had two conti's bubble in the sidewall. I'm sorry Maverick but these tyres are clearly softer in the sidewall - visually as well as feel driving around corners. I have one in the garage off the rim at home. From memory, they are only 1 ply but I'll check. Marangoni's are 2 ply.

At the same tyre pressure, conti's bulge out when on the car (giving the impression pressures are low, Marangoni's don't.

I've never had a tyre bubble on me. I've had a wheel buckle from a pothole yet the tyre (Pirelli) was fine.

[G-rig]

There is still no way that tread going over a cateye would cause a bubbled wall or blow out.. maybe it wasn't a cateye or he's calling something else a cateye.

[Chuck]

There is still no way that tread going over a cateye would cause a bubbled wall or blow out.. maybe it wasn't a cateye or he's calling something else a cateye.

there is the possibility that there was a nail on the cateye...il give you that much

but i drive over a cateye - if the tyre was faulty/supspect/not up to standard then driving over a bottlecap could cause it to blow out...please stop doubting what really did happen. i was there, it happened to me, i was the one changing the tyre then sourcing a replacement....search the forum, you will find the same story posted long ago and nobody had anything to say other than bad luck

[G-rig]

That is bad luck and what are the chances..
Did you find a nail in the tyre?

I don't see how a tyre could blowout from driving over a bottle cap either.. unless the tyres were well over inflated.

Amazing!

[brad]

I think the greater possibility of the "catseye blowout" was that the tyre already had some damage and the catseye was the straw that broke the camels back.
I've seen heaps of tyres that look fine on the outside but have internal damage from nails or hitting debris.

[philthy]

Same reason you did.

For your own amusement? Fair enough.



The continentals don't have very soft sidewalls and are not easy to damage.


Yes they do, and yes they are.




The only recent issue that came up was with a young user on the golfmkv forum who managed to bubble two csc2's in a few thousand km's, turns out the user was hitting kerbs and performing long burnouts.



I'm glad you've spoken to everyone who has ever owned a car with continental sport contact 2 tyres and made a log of their experiences. I bow before your omniscience.

[G-rig]

I think the greater possibility of the "catseye blowout" was that the tyre already had some damage and the catseye was the straw that broke the camels back.
I've seen heaps of tyres that look fine on the outside but have internal damage from nails or hitting debris.

Could have been the case but not the catseye's fault :).

Just unfortunate..

[brad]

Could have been the case but not the catseye's fault :).

Just unfortunate..
yep, sheize happens

[pologti18t]

50 profile, and a consistent 32-34psi checked every time I washed the car and topped up from the compressor in the garage if necessary. That is exactly the kind of generalisation I was referring to.

.

32-34psi? That's (for the front) between 4-6psi UNDER pressure.

[pixl]

I've held a crosssection of a ContactSport2 in my hands. Believe me, the sidewalls are far from weak. Roughly 6mm in thickness and something like 40 different compounds of latex in that thing. I'm no tyre expert, but this thing was amazingly crafted and my experience in using them backs this up.

As Maverick said, these are OEM tyres on so many cars, it's normal to hear a few complaints about them. But given the sheer volume, I'm sure there would be even more complaints if some other brand of tyre was used.

I wouldn't dare to assume I know anything of the driving habits of someone I don't even know, Roodosutaa. Perhaps you have indeed received a faulty lot of tyres, in which case I would be calling Continental as I've had nothing but brilliant service from them. If you still weren't satisfied after speaking to them, then by all means, let rip on Continental.

I was about to do the same thing when I had issues, but after realising that the issue I had with the tyres came from improper wheel alignment from the dealer, it's hard to stay angry at Conti.

[brad]

I've held a crosssection of a ContactSport2 in my hands. Believe me, the sidewalls are far from weak. Roughly 60mm in thickness


WTF? 6mm? at most

[pixl]

WTF? 6mm? at most

Yep, 6mm. Fixed.

[Chuck]

Could have been the case but not the catseye's fault :).

Just unfortunate..

i would agree with those statements...indeed could have been the last straw for a ****ty tyre (not in general, just that one - i love the contis!)

[GoLfMan]

Im on Conti's at the moment and I cant say I find anything wrong with them...

Good grip in the wet, exceptional grip in the dry with great communication on the limit of traction!

just avoid shoving them into gutters and potholes and you'll be fine! :)

remember folks, you're driving a 'hot hatch' not a 4wd ;)

[PeterHBne]

The Contis are crap - in terms of mildly hiting anything or running over anything.

They will puncture on a human hair. They will sidewall bulge on a small undulation.

I have never ever had so many problems with a tyre as the Conts in 27 years of driving. I've lost count of the punctures i've had fixed (at one stage once a week for 6 weeks) and three of them buggered with huge bulges because of minor low speed curb/pothole incursions.

[Maverick]

The Contis are crap - in terms of mildly hiting anything or running over anything.

They will puncture on a human hair. They will sidewall bulge on a small undulation.

I have never ever had so many problems with a tyre as the Conts in 27 years of driving. I've lost count of the punctures i've had fixed (at one stage once a week for 6 weeks) and three of them buggered with huge bulges because of minor low speed curb/pothole incursions.

Clearly you'd be better off with a 4WD with off road tyres if you hit that many potholes and curbs :eek:

Mounting kerbs and hitting potholes must be a polo thing because the golfs don't have these problems with their CSC2's :moonie:

[PeterHBne]

Clearly you'd be better off with a 4WD with off road tyres if you hit that many potholes and curbs :eek:

Mounting kerbs and hitting potholes must be a polo thing because the golfs don't have these problems with their CSC2's :moonie:

1) Dunno where you live in Qld - car swallowing potholes are a fact of life after a bit of torrential rain

2) Maybe you girly Golf drivers aren't up to pursuing racing lines through roundabouts, chicanes, etc..... the odd curb clip is to be expected. You just dont expect your $300 tyre to be f****d up becase of a slight bump.

[goodfella]

I had a ground maintenance guy whipper snip an edge and clipped my conti sidewall, leaving a mark and some rubber missing....unfort I noticed this long after he had gone...but back to the point, the tyre has lasted several punishing drives without any failures, infact it still holds ok to this day. However, i have since changed my rims and tyres, so its a mute point.

[G-rig]

2) Maybe you girly Golf drivers aren't up to pursuing racing lines through roundabouts, chicanes, etc..... the odd curb clip is to be expected. You just dont expect your $300 tyre to be f****d up becase of a slight bump.

Damaging your tyres and wheels is a risk you seem to be prepared to take by going through roundabouts fast.. It's not the indy.

Otherwise just don't buy the Conti's next time, and get a non-R compound semi slick if you want something to knock about.

[Maverick]

And the Contis are not great IMO, rather buy a proper performance tyre if you want performance ......

You might want to tell all the reviewers that as it's constantly come out in the top 3 in every performance tyre review. The tyre reviews unlike the opinions here are based on facts and performed under controlled conditions.

Maybe it's not the tyre at fault but the agricultural chassis and suspension of the car that it's attached to not being able to make use of the tyre :driver:

[brad]

I've had 2 punctures in 12 months, which is quite odd. I'd guess I've had 4 in the previous 10 years. Maybe a dozen in 30 years.

I think the straight grooves of the CSC2 help line the nail/screw up so that it goes into the tyre rather than being flicked out to the side.

[brad]

You might want to tell all the reviewers that as it's constantly come out in the top 3 in every performance tyre review. The tyre reviews unlike the opinions here are based on facts and performed under controlled conditions.

The only problem is, tyre tests only cover a small selection of the tyre brands/models available. In addition, they usually only cover one size & they only use a particular car, in specific weather conditions & generally on a single road surface.

Therefore, in the Motor Annual Tyre Test (for instance), the only real conclusion you can draw is that the "winner" was the best of the 10 tyre models that were tested, in size "X" when used on a 1800kg rear wheel drive SS Comodore at an ambient temperature of 25 degrees on a fine grit hotmix surface.

The results on the day might be very different if they used tyre size "y" on a FWD 1100kg Clio Sport on a 15 degree day on course chip or a 35 degree day on concrete.

The fact remains that there are probably 60 other tyre makes/models out there that weren't tested & some of them might be superior to those on test.

BTW: I think Sharkie means R-Comps & semislick style (RT615/KU36) when he refers to "performance tyres". Which, just like any other tyre, are a compromise & not suited to everyone.

[Maverick]

The only problem is, tyre tests only cover a small selection of the tyre brands/models available. In addition, they usually only cover one size & they only use a particular car, in specific weather conditions & generally on a single road surface.

The EVO tyre test was conducted at one of the tyre manufacturers testing grounds which has many different surfaces. They used a Golf GTI and electronic instruments to measure lap times, braking (dry and wet), cornering ability, traction and so forth. Top tyre was the F1 Asymmetrical and in third place was the CSC3.


Therefore, in the Motor Annual Tyre Test (for instance), the only real conclusion you can draw is that the "winner" was the best of the 10 tyre models that were tested, in size "X" when used on a 1800kg rear wheel drive SS Comodore at an ambient temperature of 25 degrees on a fine grit hotmix surface.

Hence why those tyre tests really are not much help.


The fact remains that there are probably 60 other tyre makes/models out there that weren't tested & some of them might be superior to those on test.

The EVO test was conducted on the ten highest performing tyres and had a tyre from each manufacturer. It's pointless testing the F1 GSD3 when this is nowhere near as good as their new flagship tyre the F1 Asymmetrical.

IMO the EVO test is the most comprehensive and as it uses a Golf GTI (2 in fact) and was conducted under all circumstances is going to be the best way to choose a performance tyre. The whole "my new tyres are great and better than my worn out old tyres" is pointless and the only real way to compare them is on a track under controlled conditions.

You can download a copy of the tyre test from here (http://www.liam27.com/stuff/EVO_TyreTest_2007_GTI.pdf).

The 2002 version is also available from here (http://www.hantsscoobies.plus.com/temp/tyre_test_low_res.zip)and the F1 GSD3 just beat the CSC1 which came in second place.

As you can see the CSC (now 3) is an excellent tyre that constantly is near the top of the tyre tests.

[G-rig]

The EVO test is obviously flawed as they don't include kerbs, potholes and roundabouts on the test course, then drive straight into/over them.

[Petrina Polo]

Nothing wrong with the KU31's (assuming thats the one you have).

I prefer them for comfort, so on the track day I'm taking the Conti's so the Kuhmo's don't get shredded.

aha... so tracking car does shred tyres..


but for everyday use, do you notice a difference in which tyres you use? cheapie vs expensive?

[JCM308]

Well spotted captian obvious.

Of course driving hard will effect your tyres, this has been well documented before. Another thing to note is you will get drastically reduced fuel economy!

But back on topic...... I do notice a difference between cheap tyres and expensive tyres (to a degree) but does it justify the price difference? Each to their own but how much value do you put on you safety (or that of anyone that gets in the car with you)?

Not saying cheap tyres are no good, but it's something to think about.

[CatonaPC©]

It is possible that VW only specify cutdown imitation tyres for the Polo GTI, after all it's only cutdown imitation of a Golf GTI :nana:

Ha ha! :bowdown:

Sorry! :frown: I had to laugh at that one.

[brad]

The EVO test was conducted on the ten highest performing tyres and had a tyre from each manufacturer. It's pointless testing the F1 GSD3 when this is nowhere near as good as their new flagship tyre the F1 Asymmetrical.
So they did a test to determine what tyres should be in the test?

Nowhere in that test does it say how they came to choose the tyres that are tested or what style of tyre they were looking for. EVOs demographic gives a clue but the range of tyres in that test aren't what I would describe as "the best from each manufacturer".
Bridgestone do better tyres than the RE050A (RE11, RE070), Dunlop has the Direzza; Kumho has the Exsta MX & XS; Yokohama the Advan range (why you would put the S-drive in there is a mystery & the results show that); The Pirelli PZero (assymetric) might have been a better choice as well.

Conspicuous in their absense are Sumitomo HTR Z-III, Marangoni, Toyo, Falken & Hankook - I think all these brands would have a tyre that would slot into the EVO test and give a fair showing.


IMO the EVO test is the most comprehensive and as it uses a Golf GTI (2 in fact) and was conducted under all circumstances is going to be the best way to choose a performance tyre. The whole "my new tyres are great and better than my worn out old tyres" is pointless and the only real way to compare them is on a track under controlled conditions.
Yes, very comprehensive & great for us folk with an A5 chassis VAG car.

There's a good AutoBild test using a GTI as well.
/searches..... Here (http://www.autozeitung.de/zubehoer/sommerreifen-der-dimension-22545-r-17) Translated (http://translate.google.com.au/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.autozeitung.de%2Fzubehoer%2Fsom merreifen-der-dimension-22545-r-17&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0=) Third party analysis (http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/2009-Auto-Zeitung-Summer-Tyre-Test.htm)


As you can see the CSC (now 3) is an excellent tyre that constantly is near the top of the tyre tests.
I think my CSC2s are great. Progressive & they let you know what is happening between the road & the tyre. Excellant in standing water. They need some heat to grip & they don't like a damp surface. A little noisy.

Would I buy them again? Probably not.

[pologti18t]

My COntis lasted for 20K KM with no blowouts etc Just a couple of punctures. Car was driven quite hard on rough country roads with no incidents.

Keeping the pressure up to manufacturer's standard is essential though.

[Maverick]

but for everyday use, do you notice a difference in which tyres you use? cheapie vs expensive?

Expensive tyres will keep you alive, cheap tyres.. well you get what you pay which is a compromise on all fronts.

There's 4 small patches keeping you on the road so why compromise safety?

I'd like to see all the cheap poor performing tyres banned and tyres have to meet a certain standard before being sold, not to protect the stupid people that buy cheap tyres but to protect the others on the road.

[G-rig]

Keeping the pressure up to manufacturer's standard is essential though.

Same as road bike tyres, they could have been well under inflated by the sound of it, in which case it's easier to 'pinch' them when u go over a pot hole.

Btw, Continental make some of the best tyres in the cycling world, not cheap just like with their car tyres.

[noone]

I'd like to see all the cheap poor performing tyres banned and tyres have to meet a certain standard before being sold

I would be AMAZED if tyres could be sold in Australia without meeting any testing criteria...

[Roodosutaa]

Man... have I created a monster, post a topic about tyres, let it stew for a few days, come back and it's turned into a schoolyard Polo-/Golf-bashing thread. I don't know what the average age of Polo/Golf drivers are in the real world, but judging by the quality of some of the posts here 12 seems to be about right.

I think we've established pretty firmly what Maverick has chosen to be in this thread and there's not much point in descending to his level (judging by the attitude he's shown, he would probably think ascending is the better word). Who knows, he might be a good bloke in real life but if that's what he wants to be on the internet, then so be it.

Anyway, back to topic, here's an update on the tyres: they're out of Kumho KU31's so I got a pair of KH11's instead <== (Maverick take note: golden opportunity to do some cheap tyre bashing!!). At that price I'm under no illusion they'll perform as well as the Conti's but they more than fit the bill for my daily 80km commute in traffic, reviews seem to be good as well. They're on the back for now but I'll know how good they are once I rotate them to the front after they've been bedded in. To suggest the Contis are the be all and end all for safety and speaking in absolutes is beyond ridiculous.

If I were serious about performance I'd get a separate set of semi slicks for the track as I used to do for the MX5 (Maverick feel free to fire some cheap shots at my choice of car too!:)) and have road tyres for the daily grind. But that's a separate discussion.

[noone]

aha... so tracking car does shred tyres..
but for everyday use, do you notice a difference in which tyres you use? cheapie vs expensive?

Tracking the car will reduce the life of:
- brake pads
- petrol in tank
- tyre tread
- other consumables

The Kuhmo's were cheap ($120 each). I got them as I had heard good things about them (for the $$$). I think i'll have a better impression when I swap back to the Kuhmo's after the track day. Conti's are holding much more grip than before with a good alignment, toe adjusters on the rear and RSB, if you think the tyres are crap but have not tried others, maybe there are other places to look to improve the handling...

[brad]

I would be AMAZED if tyres could be sold in Australia without meeting any testing criteria...

No tests done AFAIK. There used to be a requirement for a DOT certification but I haven't heard that one for ages.
/searches..... tyres are covered by ADR23 (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/720C17256610B4D5CA257257007C6177/$file/ADR2300comp1FINALFRLI.pdf). I haven't read it & have no idea what it says.

You realise that you can still buy retreads & remoulds (AFAIK) plus all the imported 2nd hand tyres that have an unknown history; possibly inapropriate rubber compound (for European winter temperatures); AllSeasons/Mud+Snow patterns/compounds; or aged beyond the lifespan designated by other registration authorities.

I bought a set of 2nd hand Japanese Bridgestones that came off a grey import. The tyres weren't suitable to get over the pits but were OK & legal for the tyre place to sell to me - work that out:frown:

[brad]

Expensive tyres will keep you alive, cheap tyres.. well you get what you pay which is a compromise on all fronts.

There's 4 small patches keeping you on the road so why compromise safety?

I'd like to see all the cheap poor performing tyres banned and tyres have to meet a certain standard before being sold, not to protect the stupid people that buy cheap tyres but to protect the others on the road.

Cheap tyres aren't necessarilly total *****ters. I'd rather someone fit some LingLongs or Nexens than drive around on bald tyres because they can't afford better. At least there is some tread there for when it rains.

A fair rule of thumb for tyres is:
Cheap
Good Grip
Long Lasting
Pick two -all three is impossible.

[DeanB]

Tracking the car will reduce the life of:
- petrol in tank



Really ? Are you suggesting the heat from going so fast results in losing the volatile components of the fuel, therefore lowering the octane of my petrol by the end of the day ?? :nana:

Gotta take these things literally ... Petrina will :moonie:

lol

[hkogti]

I have use both on my car/s.

Good year is good when new, but worn quicker then the conti.

In wet, the conti give you safer feeling (more stable). But in dry, the grip and feeling of the GSD3 is superior then conti.

My last conti 225/40R17 lasted 50000km, and good year only lasted 28000km.

I tracked both tyres, conti give me better lap time (1s only, maybe just have a bad day...), but GSD3 is more progessive and fun. It seems there are not enought safety margin on the conti, when it let go, it let go. But with the GSD3 you can feel the limit is coming.

Just my personal feeling, not technical. :moonie: so i might be wrong...

By the way, i got both of them pretty much the same price, the conti is only 20-40 bucks more per corner.

[G-rig]

This thread wont achieve much anyway, but it's a good way for the OP to let off some steam.

[philthy]

Well I'm ordering these next time:

http://www.vwwatercooled.com.au/forums/images/imported/2009/07/DesertDueler_604VWZ_OWT_side-1.jpg

Just need to make a few adjustments to the guards with a jigsaw.

:driver:

[noone]

Well, guess its time I joined the Anti-Conti movement.

Took out front left tyre on a pothole doing 50kms, i love Sydney roads.

Is it worth trying to get the tyre fixed? Is this expensive?

[Maverick]

Well, guess its time I joined the Anti-Conti movement.

Took out front left tyre on a pothole doing 50kms, i love Sydney roads.

Is it worth trying to get the tyre fixed? Is this expensive?

Depends on the damage. You need to see a tyre shop for their opinion.

Put a claim for the new tyre through the responsible party for the road. Take photos of the pothole and the tyre damage and make them pay for it. They have a duty of care to maintain the roads in a safe condition and they fail miserably, potholes don't just happen, the occur because of poor road construction and lack of maintenance.

And check your tyre pressures, many people suffer tyre damage because their tyres are under inflated which is very dangerous.

[brad]

Well, guess its time I joined the Anti-Conti movement.

Took out front left tyre on a pothole doing 50kms, i love Sydney roads.

Is it worth trying to get the tyre fixed? Is this expensive?

If the sidewall is damaged then you are buggered.

You can fix problems in the tread area ($15-$20 a go) but sidewalls are 99.9% unrepairable.

[Blitzen]

Depends on the damage. You need to see a tyre shop for their opinion.

Put a claim for the new tyre through the responsible party for the road. Take photos of the pothole and the tyre damage and make them pay for it. They have a duty of care to maintain the roads in a safe condition and they fail miserably, potholes don't just happen, the occur because of poor road construction and lack of maintenance.

And check your tyre pressures, many people suffer tyre damage because their tyres are under inflated which is very dangerous.

Tried this earlier this year when I destroyed a tyre up in Townsville...I got nothing out of it...Even after Providing heaps of photos of the approach to the roundabout(it was hidden from view at the exit of a roundabout), the size of the pot hole, and the damage to the tyre,and my approximat speed(25km/h in the wet on semi slicks) they denied the claim saying that it was the reponsibility of the driver to watch the road...So I was down over $300. And this was in a brand new housing estate on a well used road, and during the wet season...I mean, its not like the wet season is an un natural occurance in Far North Queensland!! Yes, I appealed, but it was denied again.
At one point, I saw 4 cars parked beside the road with flat tyres caused by the same pot hole, and it took a week to get fixed!!

[brad]

At one point, I saw 4 cars parked beside the road with flat tyres caused by the same pot hole, and it took a week to get fixed!!

My understanding is that the pothole has to be reported to the relevant authorities first & only after it has been reported (and not fixed within a reasonable time frame) will a claim be considered.

It's something to do with "we can't fix what we don't know about, and we can't patrol the hundreds of kilometres of roads that we own on a daily basis."

[Maverick]

My understanding is that the pothole has to be reported to the relevant authorities first & only after it has been reported (and not fixed within a reasonable time frame) will a claim be considered.

It's something to do with "we can't fix what we don't know about, and we can't patrol the hundreds of kilometres of roads that we own on a daily basis."

Not quite true, that is what they will claim however pot holes don't just appear overnight and there are signs that they will occur in an area well before the hole opens up. Often it's an area where there has been a previous repair and that repair was done incorrectly.

They also have a responsibility to maintain roads and this requires inspections and proactive sealing of roads (not that this occurs). There is technology out there to drive a vehicle over the road and pick up problems months before they occur as well that the councils and governments don't use even though it would save a lot of money.

Potholes occur because either the road base was not prepared correctly (most likely), a faulty surface (less likely) or because of a previous repair in that area (quite likely).

If required take them to the small claims court, cost is minimal and they will often make a payout.

I picked up a payout of $1140 for tiny chip on the edge of a GTI alloy and some tar last year. Took a while and the department of incompetence (main roads) were useless and tried to say they're not responsible because they contract out the work however I was going to file my small claims against them not the contractor if the contractor didn't pay up.

Cheque (http://www.golfmkv.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=31348&stc=1&d=1220436919)

[Blitzen]

Nice work...I might get on their bum again about this...Just for the record, there was no signage at the pothole when the damage occured...Anyway, better move on...

[noone]

Sounds like a lot of work...

Guess if I have to replace it I'll be more interested in getting my own back...

[noone]

was a spit in the section where the tyre meets the wheel, hard to find at first.

Tyre replaced with cheap Kuhmo, don't think I've got the patience to go up against North Sydney council to get my money back...