In a message dated 12/9/99 9:46:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, Ron writes:
<< I think I mentioned this to you back in Evansville last year, but some of
the feeling you are describing is just the difference in feel between the
Kumho and BFG. While the BFG's are very crisp and usually non-forgiving,
the Kumho's like to slide a little more. A lot of people that have tried
driving on the Kumho's were initially slower just because they thought they
were overdriving the tire. The Kumho's can also be a lot more forgiving
since you can usually feel the edge coming in a more gentle manner. >>
Yes, this is true but there was a larger problem with my car that I did not
find until I switched to G-forces (my alignment was off by quite a bit) so, I
can't really say that my experience with the K tire was a negative one since
my observations were tainted. My question, however, was this: Is the 245
better or the 225 (in Kumhos, at least) for my application? I know that the
245 is *much* heavier than the 225. The bowing of the sidewalls on the 245
was considerable as well. The "loss" of usable tread face is negligible
thanks in part to the absence of camber. Any thoughts?
Daniel Ledford
|