Funny thing is that his BMW was equipped with good Michelin tires.
In my experience "good Michelin tires" is an oxymoron.
I don't want to alienate too many people, and I'm obviously nit picking here. But I haven't been impressed with the Michelins that are sold to people concerned with staying street legal. I find a good set of Bridgestones to be ideal.
More along the lines of the argument, I agree with matsu. AWD is not the greatest thing out there. A well designed and well balanced RWD car that's 300 pounds lighter is usually the better bet.
Rubber is an interesting material. Its static coefficient of friction is higher when the normal force is lower. So a lighter car has better grip given the same tires as a heavier car.
Lastly, I'm going to be a dork and cite the success the RWD RX-7 had in world rally during the 80's. Bizzare. a 3 rotor concoction on the 3rd gen Rx-7 also set a blisteringly fast Pike's Peak hill climb time. So Balanace is important, and something that can't be fully remedied by giving an unbalanced car AWD.
I've never owned an Audi, although there's some theory that the tranny on my 944 is an Audi.
The 924 (predecessor to the 944) had an Audi 100 engine converted from a pushrod to an OHC. In fact, the 924 originally was supposed to be an Audi then Porsche decided they needed something for the lower end of the market.
I don't want to alienate too many people, and I'm obviously nit picking here. But I haven't been impressed with the Michelins that are sold to people concerned with staying street legal. I find a good set of Bridgestones to be ideal.
ha-HA! A point we can agree upon, at last! I have had good experiences with Bridgestones (RE910), as well. The Dunlop SP A2 was a bit underwhelming, considering how much people seem to rave over it (still a good MS/performance tire, but a bit overhyped, IMO). Michelins just seem unnecessarily more expensive no matter what model you are interested in (making me wonder if they really are that good to demand the premium, or are they just like any other good tire but with a hefty Michelin markup?).
I agree with Matsu, as well. You have no idea how much hostility I've experienced in selling a similar point (on a car forum, no doubt). People seem to think that AWD is embodied with seemingly mystical uber powers. They are deadset to believe that they are invariably better handlers even on ideal, dry track conditions, but literally wordless when it comes to actually explaining how and why this could be. All you get are the popular marketing lines from AWD car advertisements and those "banned in the xyz series" comments as "proof" of AWD superiority. All I ask is a compelling technical explanation, but this seems to be a bit of an elusive thing to ask for. This is not to say that AWD cars do not deserve respect. I just wish more people would consider that it isn't the ultimate "trump card" in car-dom, either (unless you are in some slippery pavement conditions, of course)
Yeah, I give thumbs up to the RE 730. It's a nice summer Z. The 9 series I believe is "all weather," and I haven't tried them. I also give thumbs up to the S-03, but there's no mystery about the capabilities of those tires.
Comments
Originally posted by satchmo
Funny thing is that his BMW was equipped with good Michelin tires.
In my experience "good Michelin tires" is an oxymoron.
I don't want to alienate too many people, and I'm obviously nit picking here. But I haven't been impressed with the Michelins that are sold to people concerned with staying street legal. I find a good set of Bridgestones to be ideal.
More along the lines of the argument, I agree with matsu. AWD is not the greatest thing out there. A well designed and well balanced RWD car that's 300 pounds lighter is usually the better bet.
Rubber is an interesting material. Its static coefficient of friction is higher when the normal force is lower. So a lighter car has better grip given the same tires as a heavier car.
Lastly, I'm going to be a dork and cite the success the RWD RX-7 had in world rally during the 80's. Bizzare. a 3 rotor concoction on the 3rd gen Rx-7 also set a blisteringly fast Pike's Peak hill climb time. So Balanace is important, and something that can't be fully remedied by giving an unbalanced car AWD.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
In my experience "good Michelin tires" is an oxymoron.
Pilot Sports (especially Cup variants
Originally posted by GardenOfEarthlyDelights
I've never owned an Audi, although there's some theory that the tranny on my 944 is an Audi.
The 924 (predecessor to the 944) had an Audi 100 engine converted from a pushrod to an OHC. In fact, the 924 originally was supposed to be an Audi then Porsche decided they needed something for the lower end of the market.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I don't want to alienate too many people, and I'm obviously nit picking here. But I haven't been impressed with the Michelins that are sold to people concerned with staying street legal. I find a good set of Bridgestones to be ideal.
ha-HA! A point we can agree upon, at last!
I agree with Matsu, as well. You have no idea how much hostility I've experienced in selling a similar point (on a car forum, no doubt). People seem to think that AWD is embodied with seemingly mystical uber powers. They are deadset to believe that they are invariably better handlers even on ideal, dry track conditions, but literally wordless when it comes to actually explaining how and why this could be. All you get are the popular marketing lines from AWD car advertisements and those "banned in the xyz series" comments as "proof" of AWD superiority. All I ask is a compelling technical explanation, but this seems to be a bit of an elusive thing to ask for.