Michelin Super Sport and PS2 - terrible traction

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
One of the unique features of my newer Pilot SS is that they are non-directional, this really helps you to milk the miles out of them...

Which is 20K.
I have 11K on them, and 20K seems like limit.


Fine with me as I have a written treadwear warranty for 30k miles! Since I have never had any of my 6-7 sets of tires last that long I am delighted...

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
One of the unique features of my newer Pilot SS is that they are non-directional, this really helps you to milk the miles out of them...

Which is 20K.
I have 11K on them, and 20K seems like limit.


Fine with me as I have a written treadwear warranty for 30k miles! Since I have never had any of my 6-7 sets of tires last that long I am delighted...

Do not get e wrong. I think 20K is OK. I do not expect from tire like Michelin PSS to go 30K.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
One of the unique features of my newer Pilot SS is that they are non-directional, this really helps you to milk the miles out of them...

Which is 20K.
I have 11K on them, and 20K seems like limit.


Fine with me as I have a written treadwear warranty for 30k miles! Since I have never had any of my 6-7 sets of tires last that long I am delighted...

Do not get e wrong. I think 20K is OK. I do not expect from tire like Michelin PSS to go 30K.

A lot of the applications for the Super Sport are different sized tires without the ability to rotate. I'm wondering if the treadwear warranty accounts for these setups?

OK - looked it up. It's on page 2.

Quote:
http://www.michelinman.com/mediabin/Appr...romise_Plan.pdf

Note that if you use different size tires on the front and rear axles your
tires cannot be rotated as recommended by Michelin. As a result, the
mileage warranty on each rear tire will be half that specified.

However, it can be interesting. I know FWD cars definitely wear the fronts faster because they're drive wheels and due to steering. My AWD car wears out the fronts faster, probably because of steering. I've heard that RWD tends to wear the rears out slightly faster, and a lot of these performance cars are RWD. However, there's still wear on the fronts due to just steering.

 

[edyvw]

In my application, both axels have same size.
I still do not expect more then 20K.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
In my application, both axels have same size.
I still do not expect more then 20K.

I don't quite get it though why half would be the fraction they choose. In my experience when there's one axle that gets extra wear, it's substantially faster. Something like 4 times the wear rate.

 

[Rand]

with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.


of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: Rand
with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.


of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

My 2004 WRX 5-sp has a 50/50 power split. I find that the front wears maybe 2-2.5X that of the rears. And the rears have some funky inside shoulder wear - I'm guessing from the high negative camber, although I might have a toe issue too.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: edyvw
In my application, both axels have same size.
I still do not expect more then 20K.

I don't quite get it though why half would be the fraction they choose. In my experience when there's one axle that gets extra wear, it's substantially faster. Something like 4 times the wear rate.

Yeah, but you rotate them.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: Rand
with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.

of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

The S2000 has stagger tires, front is 215/45-17 and rear is 245/40-17. The rear wear out twice as fat as the front, when I dropped the clutch at 4k and floor the gas pedal to metal to 8k few times a day, the rear wear out three times faster than the front. It's normal for the rear of an S2000 lasted less than 10k miles.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: edyvw
In my application, both axels have same size.
I still do not expect more then 20K.

I don't quite get it though why half would be the fraction they choose. In my experience when there's one axle that gets extra wear, it's substantially faster. Something like 4 times the wear rate.

Yeah, but you rotate them.

Sometimes. However, I can get a feeling for how much faster one axle is wearing, especially if they're new tires at about the first rotation.

I've also tried doing it where I didn't rotate the tires on a FWD car. I'd just let the fronts wear down to the wear bars and then rotate the rears to the front and get new tires for the back. Rinse, repeat. I did that on my 1995 Integra GS-R. The rears looked low-mileage while the fronts were at the wear bars. I did the same with my wife's Civic, although that might have been me being too lazy to bring it in to the tire shop for the courtesy rotation.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: edyvw
In my application, both axels have same size.
I still do not expect more then 20K.

I don't quite get it though why half would be the fraction they choose. In my experience when there's one axle that gets extra wear, it's substantially faster. Something like 4 times the wear rate.


Or simply a weekend at the strip!

On my car the tires were all the same size, but they also sold it with a staggered setup too.

I used to run staggered sizes, 245/45 up front and 275/40 rear, because I loved the look.

But at the "stagger-ing" price of PSS's I sincerely hope that a little rotation may give me longer life...

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Rand
with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.


of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

My 2004 WRX 5-sp has a 50/50 power split. I find that the front wears maybe 2-2.5X that of the rears. And the rears have some funky inside shoulder wear - I'm guessing from the high negative camber, although I might have a toe issue too.


Weight distribution also factors into the wear equation as well.

 

[Rand]

I'd agree, cant make a few sentence generic statement that applies perfectly to every car

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Rand
with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.


of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

My 2004 WRX 5-sp has a 50/50 power split. I find that the front wears maybe 2-2.5X that of the rears. And the rears have some funky inside shoulder wear - I'm guessing from the high negative camber, although I might have a toe issue too.


Weight distribution also factors into the wear equation as well.

 

[KitaCam]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: Rand
with rwd the front and rear wear differently but at aprox. the same rate except in very spirited driving.

with FWD the fronts usually wear 2-4x faster than the rears.

awd .. really depends on the system.


of course this doesnt take into account the fact that many cars with a staggered size setup have wonky performance alignments that wear tires at an accelerated rate for handling and performance.

My 2004 WRX 5-sp has a 50/50 power split. I find that the front wears maybe 2-2.5X that of the rears. And the rears have some funky inside shoulder wear - I'm guessing from the high negative camber, although I might have a toe issue too.


Weight distribution also factors into the wear equation as well.

Just as an example...the 05 Camry I4/MT has a 60F/40R weight distribution, very much a factor in increased front tire wear...not to mention other driving characteristics...