Continental DWS

Not open for further replies.
Jan 12, 2005
I have been planning to get new tires to replace the front two Falkens on my car since April and was set on the Kumho Ecsta Platinums, but Discount Tires Direct stopped carrying them and I get a feeling that they might be discontinued soon. The same tires on Tire Rack carries a $30 shipping charge so I thought I would use the difference for better tires. The Falkens still haven't reached the wear bars but they will soon and the vibration from being out of balance and maybe out of round is getting annoying. Right now I'm considering the DWS and from what I've read they seem good. Members on here seem to know their tires and I remember opinions of them were favorable a few months back. What are your opinions of them now? Do they last the claimed 50k miles? Anything else I should consider in their price range ($133/tire for 235/45/17)?
The DWS I had on my focus were phenomenal for the 5,000 miles I drove them. They were better in every single way than the solus KH16s that the car came with.
Have you considered the new Bridgestone Ecopia EP422? Price is about $150/tire. Many Priuschat members are reporting significant fuel economy increases (near 10%) and Bridgestone occasionally runs $70 off through selected retailers.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: The Critic
Have you considered the new Bridgestone Ecopia EP422? Price is about $150/tire. Many Priuschat members are reporting significant fuel economy increases (near 10%) and Bridgestone occasionally runs $70 off through selected retailers.
I think that alone shows what type of car it's geared at. My car isn't a sports car or anything but the torque the engine puts out can easily spin a low grip tire. And I think I want something that's been around for enough time to be tested by users.
They are actually grand-touring all-season tires that are being marketed for the average commuter car.
We like the DWS's on our Fit. No complaints from the wifey, since it's her car. No complaints generally means it's all good...
My wife is very happy with the set on her Legacy turbo wagon in 215/45/17. They have decent winter capability which may cause an imbalance if you replace them in pairs.
Originally Posted By: rjundi
My wife is very happy with the set on her Legacy turbo wagon in 215/45/17. They have decent winter capability which may cause an imbalance if you replace them in pairs.
Psst... Hey rjundi... You know the OP is in Florida, right?
I'm going to put a set of the Continentals on the Kizashi before the snow flies. The Dunlops are good handlers but at 11,000 miles are showing wear and getting louder (they are known to be short-life tires and lousy in the snow). I've decided that I'm not going to go with winter tires on the Suzuki (car has AWD) and my research on a good all-season alternative indicates that the Continentals get good reviews in all categories and are great in the snow. My other choice is the Goodyear Comfortred Touring which gets slightly better ratings on TireRack but is pricier. I don't think you can go wrong with this tire...especially for the price.
Originally Posted By: Rand
you cant really compare tirerack's ratings between performance groups.
QFT. However - you can look at Tire Rack's tests and compare objective test results. It won't be an ideal comparison since the testing won't have been performed under the same conditions, but the weather isn't going to account for one tire pulling 0.95 g on the skid pad versus another only getting 0.85 g. Speaking of Tire Rack's test results, you may note that in the first test they ever did on the ExtremeContact DWS, the tires actually managed a better stopping distance on the wet track than on the dry test. This piqued my curiosity enough to get me to write to them and ask if this was a typo. The response that I got was that the section of track that they use for wet testing has a rougher surface that allows for more mechanical grip (as opposed to pure friction grip). Either way, I can affirm that the DWS is an excellent rain tire on my Mazda. The acid test for me was when I drove them through about 2" of standing water at 40 mph - the water slowed the car down, but the tires never lost contact with the pavement. With my OE tires, hitting a sudden downpour at highway speed was a white-knuckle adventure, but not with the Continentals. They might not give the highest level of ultimate grip or feedback from the contact patch, but I'll gladly take the tradeoff in exchange for their sustained performance in rain and their demonstrated winter performance.
I'm considering the DWS for the wife's C300. I just hope they're not too mushy with pathetic steering response, but then again, I rarely drive her car and she doesn't drive spiritedly, so she wouldn't even notice. It's either that or the Michelin Primacy MXM4, but the Michelins are a lot more expensive, and based on my past experience with Michelin, you mainly pay for the logo...
There's the thing that put my mind at ease about the Continentals - you're comparing them to a Grand Touring All-Season. Yeah, the ExtremeContact DWS isn't the greatest UHP all-season out there, but it's still better than just about any GT all-season you can buy. People who write bad reviews on Tire Rack and other places, complaining about the poor steering response or 'soft sidewalls', often compare the Continentals to summer performance tires. Of course it isn't going to compare to the steering feel of a Hankook Ventus V12 or Michelin Pilot Sport PS2... it isn't going to leave you stranded in a ditch when you see a quarter inch of snow, either.
Speaking of Hankook, anybody know anything about the Ventus V2 H437? They seem pretty new and there isn't a whole lot on them. Now also considering the Hankook Ventus V4 ES H105
Last edited:
I would never replace tires in pairs. Are you buying a complete set, or just the "front two Falkens"? If the rears are nearly new, I'd buy the same tire to match them.
What's wrong with replacing in pairs? I don't have AWD? The rear Falkens still have a good amount of tread on them due to the tire place goofing up when I bring them for rotations, but will be due in a year or so if they go on the front They would balance and align but would always never rotate even though I asked for it. So the front pairs wore down quicker. And I'm not really fond of the Falkens because they constantly go out of balance and are noisy. I don't want to buy another pair and I don't have money to throw away so I'm not replacing all four.
If the front tires are significantly better than the rears, you can get sudden oversteer in adverse conditions like rain, snow, or ice. I've replaced tires in pairs a few times (with the new ones going on the back) but I'll avoid it in the future. You can get some funny handling characteristics having different sidewall stiffness between front and back. That said, it doesn't always work out bad. The ex's MX-6 is more neutral in the corners with her mismatched tire setup. The rear tires have a softer sidewall and less grip on dry pavement, but are better on standing water and snow, so it's safe. She had destroyed one pair of a new set by hitting a curb and not realizing that a car shouldn't head for the ditch every time you let go of the steering wheel. That was many years ago. They'll be replaced as a set when either pair is done. I tried putting the softer sidewalls on the front one time and the understeer was so bad that I drove home and swapped them back around.
I'm pretty much convinced that people can't tell the difference between tread squirm and sidewall stiffness. The meme of Continentals (especially the DWS) having soft sidewalls seems to have really stuck, but I don't see it. What I do see is the effect of having relatively tall, small-area tread blocks (which is why the tire has great winter traction) in the way the tire communicates what's going on at the contact patch.
Not open for further replies.