Hercules vs Falken vs Kumho

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
676
Location
Toronto, Canada
Hi guys. I was hoping some people here could give me a suggestion as to which tire I should get for my Mom's 2000 Mercury Cougar. I'm not looking so much for performance as I am treadlife.

Anyways, here are my current options:

Hercules G3000 - $410
Falken 512 - $435
Kumho Ecsta ASX - $480

Prices are including installation, balancing, taxes, and everything.

Who can give me a good suggestion?

I was gonna go with Costco, until I realized the previous owner of the car was an ****** and didn't put the right tire size on the car. I was quoted $460 at Costco for the BFGoodrich Premier Touring, but that was for 205/65/15, which is the size of the tires currently on the car. After calling back to confirm with Costco that they have them in stock, he checks it in the system, and tells me the car actually requires a 205/60/15 size tire. So the cheapest they have in that size is $575 for the BFGoodright Touring T/A.

First question: Is it ok to go with the wrong size tire, and get the 205/65 instead of 205/60?

Second question: If I go with the proper size, which tire is the best choice out of the list above?

Thanks!
 
Is the Kumho a V-rated tire? I wouldn't get any V-rated tire if treadlife is more of a concern than performance for this car. It will be fine with an H-rated tire.
Have you visited Tire Rack for reviews and available tires?
 
yup. tire rack doesnt carry the falken or the hercules. so all i got was reviews on the kumho.

as far as purchasing goes - i need to buy locally. getting tires from tirerack.com to canada is a bit of a ________. then i'd have to get a shop to install + balance anyways, so its not much cheaper, if at all.
 
Falken is ________. 2 bubbles on one tire? When have you ever seen that before? This is in addition to the set I had to return because they could not be balanced, cost me time and money.
falken2s.jpg


I never hear bad things about Kumho and I bought a set to try later this winter.
 
I just bought a set of 215/60/16H Kumho Solus for my Forester from Tirerack.com. They were $US 250 delivered plus $60 mounting and balancing. I am quite happy with the results and the price. Discount tire couldn't even come close. Whether this works north of the border I have no idea, but I will continue to buy tires from the same place.
 
well, it looks like my Dad doesn't give a sh*t that 205/65/15 isn't the right size for the car. he says i should go to costco and get the BFGoodrich Premier Touring in that size for $460. it definitely the best deal. the tire size is off by a bit, but he says its no big deal. especially considering the car has had that size on it for the past 6 months anyways.

meh... what ever.
 
Quote:


Hi guys. I was hoping some people here could give me a suggestion as to which tire I should get for my Mom's 2000 Mercury Cougar. I'm not looking so much for performance as I am treadlife.

Anyways, here are my current options:

Hercules G3000 - $410
Falken 512 - $435
Kumho Ecsta ASX - $480



You are looking at those options when you could get four Dunlop SP Sport 01 tires in the 205/60-15 size for $360+shipping? (From TireRack.com; local installation typically runs about $20/tire.)

Quote:



Prices are including installation, balancing, taxes, and everything.

Who can give me a good suggestion?

I was gonna go with Costco, until I realized the previous owner of the car was an ****** and didn't put the right tire size on the car. I was quoted $460 at Costco for the BFGoodrich Premier Touring, but that was for 205/65/15, which is the size of the tires currently on the car. After calling back to confirm with Costco that they have them in stock, he checks it in the system, and tells me the car actually requires a 205/60/15 size tire. So the cheapest they have in that size is $575 for the BFGoodright Touring T/A.

First question: Is it ok to go with the wrong size tire, and get the 205/65 instead of 205/60?




A 205/65-15 will give you slightly slow speedometer/odometer error, a slightly taller gearing (less rabbit leaving the stoplight, longer legs on the highway), but, assuming it does not bump the top inside of the wheel well, it will work just fine.

Quote:



Second question: If I go with the proper size, which tire is the best choice out of the list above?




The Dunlop SP Sport 01 that you forgot to list.
cheers.gif


(I know that you stated that treadlife is most important to you, but I ask you to consider the possibility that when your Mom needs to step on the brakes, you really hope that the Cougar will stop fairly soon thereafter. The longer the treadlife, the harder the tread compound is going to be, and the longer the braking distance. Give your Mom a brake.)
 
I assure you the right size is 205/60-15 and they should cost way less than you are looking at. Dunlop SP A2 would be a good choice, not for handling, but wet/snow grip and quiet comfortable ride. Look at the Kumho line too. Mail order is the way to go.
 
hey, GC4lunch. i have to really thank you for that lengthy reply. its nice to see people actually read threads and post some really thoughtful answers. i do appreciate that alot.

that being said, i have to apologize, and notify you of the following: we Canadians get SCREWED on tire prices (and oil and gas and alot of other things). i honestly have NO clue why its possible for a company like tirerack.com to offer such amazing prices in the USA, but no company can do the same thing here in Canada. look, Dunlop and Kumho are both made outside of North America. if I purchase either of those tire brands and ship them across the border, I'm looking at paying LOTS of additional taxes and duties. it simply doesnt pay off.

it sucks, and i know it. i am actually considering driving down to your side of the border, getting new tires installed, and driving back next time i need tires. the prices here are ________.
 
The Dunlop SP Sport A2 tires are made in Union City, Tennessee.
So, just how much higher (%) is it to purchase the tires from TR and ship them to you? Or, will TR simply not ship to Canada?
 
Quote:


Quote:


Dunlop SP A2 would be a good choice, not for handling, but wet/snow grip and quiet comfortable ride.



Snow grip, o.k.; wet grip, no. The A2 is, after all an "all season" tire, with all of the liabilities of grip in the wet that that implies.





Umm, compared to what? ...a full-on rain tire such as Dunlop SP9000 like Bentley used to take 3rd at LeMans in the rain? That's nice and everything, but these are for his mom, who unless she is very cool, will not be taking on Team Bentley Speed in the rain at Lemans. All-Season Sport A2 in, however, one of the best gripping in wet all-season tires out there. When the SP9000 gets COLD and wet, things might sway toward the silica tread in the A2. (pun intended)
 
Quote:


Quote:


Quote:


Dunlop SP A2 would be a good choice, not for handling, but wet/snow grip and quiet comfortable ride.



Snow grip, o.k.; wet grip, no. The A2 is, after all an "all season" tire, with all of the liabilities of grip in the wet that that implies.





Umm, compared to what? ...a full-on rain tire such as Dunlop SP9000 like Bentley used to take 3rd at LeMans in the rain? That's nice and everything, but these are for his mom, who unless she is very cool, will not be taking on Team Bentley Speed in the rain at Lemans. All-Season Sport A2 in, however, one of the best gripping in wet all-season tires out there. When the SP9000 gets COLD and wet, things might sway toward the silica tread in the A2. (pun intended)



Compared to a NON "all-season" tire. Calling the A2 "one of the best gripping in wet all-season tires out there" is like calling a 5'6" player "one of the tallest really short guys in the National Basketball Association."

The point is not "go"; the point is stop, and from highway speeds, the difference in stopping distance on a wet surface of an "all-season" tire compared to a three season tire is a couple car lengths. Everything in tire design is a trade-off, and the snow traction of an all-season tire is bought, almost entirely, with the loss of wet braking ability.
 
Oh, ok. Performance tires on every application. That's a novel idea that I have never encountered before. Do you want to break the news to the OP's mom that she not only should get tires that wear out 2x-3x as fast, but she'll need another set of tires and rims just for winter. I'd pay to see that.
laugh.gif
You also failed to address the temp issue. Are you sure that at +30f wet slush the "performance" tire really has more traction? Are you familliar with compounding techniques for colder temps? Now, think...the original poster is from Canada. Get the picture? Also, can you back up the "coupla car lengths" claim? Let's get a grip, shall we?
smirk.gif
 
Last edited:
har har har. the "get a grip" pun was quite entertaining. i had a good larf at that.

anyways, i'm getting an all-season tire, cuz thats what my Dad wants and thats what works best for us.

so - looks like i'm seriously considering driving down to Sam's club in Buffalo (Niagara Falls) and getting tires there. looks like i can get the BF Goodrich Traction T/A for $300 installed. thats a steal if you ask me. Compared to the prices here, at least.

also in the price range at Sam's Club:

Goodyear Eagle GT-HR
Dunlop GT Qualifier

Both seem to have gotten ________ reviews on tirerack.com so I think the BF Goodrich is the best choice.
 
oh, and just to compare... same tires from tirerack.com would be $256 + shipping. so if Sam's Club offers it for $300 installed, i think thats obviously a better deal.

plus, i just looked up reviews on tirerack.com for the Dunlop SP Sport A2. the BF Goodrich Traction T/A scores better in every category, and the Dunlops are only 30 bucks cheaper on the whole set. so i think the BF Goodrich is a pretty solid choice.
 
Quote:


Oh, ok. Performance tires on every application.



That is not what I wrote. Go back to the previous post and read again.

Quote:


That's a novel idea that I have never encountered before. Do you want to break the news to the OP's mom that she not only should get tires that wear out 2x-3x as fast, but she'll need another set of tires and rims just for winter. I'd pay to see that.
laugh.gif




Actually, that is not a novel idea; it is the law in much of the world, where the mounting of "all-season" tires is illegal, for the very reason of their compromised wet braking. "All-season" tires are very much a North American phenomenon where, unlike much of the rest of the world, most jurisdictions do not even have mandatory vehicle safety inspections, nothing to ensure that the car coming towards you at 65 mph has even working brakes.

Quote:


You also failed to address the temp issue. Are you sure that at +30f wet slush the "performance" tire really has more traction? Are you familliar with compounding techniques for colder temps?



Yes, to the latter question; a usual yes to the former question. There is a reason why real winter tires generally have low wear ratings: compounds that stay flexible at low temperatures generally are relatively soft and wear quickly. There is a reason why all-season tires generally have high wear ratings: all-season tires are specifically marketed to purchasers who think they are getting something for nothing in getting an "extra" season thrown in for free with an all-season tire, people who tend to be the same people who think that there is no trade-off in having a tire that wears better, that a better-wearing tire is for that reason a better tire than a tire that wears faster. In fact, there is no secret in how to make a tire wear well, and very hard, very unsticky, tread compounds are a major part of the formula. Hard rubber does not have as high a coefficient of friction with the pavement as soft rubber does.

With very few exceptions, a three-season tire with a grippy tread compound will behave better at above-freezing temperatures in the 30s and 40s (F.) than an all-season tire with a tread compound hardened for long wear. The best performing tires of all under such conditions, of course, are the Finnish Nokian three-season tires (NR-V, NR-Z, etc.) optimized specifically for that temperature range. Nokian, however, does not recommend those tires for snow; for snow, Nokian recommends real winter tires.

Quote:


Now, think...the original poster is from Canada. Get the picture?



Yes; in winter, she needs real winter tires, not pseudo-all-season tires.

Quote:


Also, can you back up the "coupla car lengths" claim? Let's get a grip, shall we?
smirk.gif




Yes, I can. The most accessible tests published on-line are at TireRack dot com. You have to be careful making comparisons across test groupings at Tire Rack, because each set of tests is conducted outside under ambient conditions that are not replicated in other sets of tests, and the personnel conducting the tests varies from grouping to grouping; but the tests yield fairly reliable data within each test grouping. Unfortunately, the size of Tire Rack's test facility limits brake testing to 50 mph. However, even with that restriction, Tire Rack has performed several comparison tests of sets of tires in which one set of tires under test were all-season tires. Looking just at the wet braking results, here is an incomplete sampling:

2003 August 1: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2004 May 28: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2004 September 22: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2004 October 14: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2004 November 12: three sets of "summer" tires, one "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2005 April 15: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

2005 May 13: four sets of "all season" tires. Interesting result is that the same tire (Goodyear RS-A) that had finished dead last in several of the above tests against "summer" tires finished first of four -- by a comfortable margin -- against fellow "all season" tires.

2005 May 27: three sets of "summer" tires, one set of "all season." All season finished fourth of four.

Do you detect a pattern?

Now, I have a question for you: do you know of any controlled test that shows any all-season tire having wet braking performance superior -- or even equal -- to any three-season tire? I should be interested to see it.
 
GC4lunch,

I would take Tire Rack's wet traction with more than just a grain of salt - maybe the whole shaker. Their track doesn't produce enough water depth to really test the "wet" traction (that would include some hydroplaning effects) - it just seems to test a lower than dry mu. It would, then, not be surprising to see all season tires fair poorly compared to summer tires.
 
Quote:



I would take Tire Rack's wet traction with more than just a grain of salt - maybe the whole shaker. Their track doesn't produce enough water depth to really test the "wet" traction (that would include some hydroplaning effects) - it just seems to test a lower than dry mu. It would, then, not be surprising to see all season tires fair poorly compared to summer tires.



Wet traction is a term defined by NTHSA regulations; it is different from, and completely independent of, hydroplaning resistance. (Hydroplaning resistance is much more important for tires mounted at the front of a vehicle than for tires at the rear that run in the track already cleared by the front tires.)

That said, as we have discussed in another thread, the NHTSA test procedure for the UTQG (wet) Traction grade that must be moulded into the sidewall of tires sold in the United States is completely inadequate for discriminating among the wet traction capabilities of tires mounted on cars equipped with antilock braking systems. It measures drag 1.0 to 1.5 seconds after the wheel on which the tire under test has been completely locked and -- at the test 40 miles per hour -- the same contact patch has been dragged, locked, over at least 59 feet of pavement. On a car equipped with antilock brakes, new contact patches would have replaced the original contact patch several times in that interval. This is significant to the differences between the tread compounds of all-season tires, which are designed to hold onto water, and the tread compounds of three-season tires, which are designed to shed water: the former are constantly presenting fresh wet contact patches on ABS-equipped cars, while the fresh contact patches presented by three season tires are -- relatively -- dry.

Be that as it may, I am not aware of any publically accessible comparative tests among different brands and models of tires other than the very infrequent enthusiast magazine reports (such as that in the December 2005 issue of Car and Driver) and those on the Tire Rack website. (Of course, all the tire manufacturers conduct tests internally on their own and competitors' tires all the time, but they generally do not allow the public to have access to the results.) So we have to make do with what we have, and the Tire Rack test results between all-season and three-season tires are telling.
 
Skip the Kumho Ecsta ASX & Falken Ziex if treadlife is more important than performance. Falken has a very short life but is a great tire.

For your requirements maybe price Coopers, they typically give up performance for treadlife in performance sizes at a reasonable price.

Are there any other Kumho's that fit in their touring models?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top