MaysEffect

Whats wrong about what i said?

I'm not talking about the grip levels, but the sidewall and compound. There are several higher treadwear tires with soft compounds that will wear extremely fast with heat abuse or normal day to day driving. The treadwear rating isn't only a measurement of its potential adhesion, most of it has to do with tread thickness, not the compound. And the differences between the 200utqg and 300utqg tires are becoming increasingly small. Thus these "cheater" tires that potentially outmatch the comparative competition.

And i never said they weren't better, i said its not worth the additional cost IMO. With consumable products, value means a lot to some people, and i don't mean that by simply suggesting cheaper is always better. I waste money on expensive hooplah all the time lol.

The test you posted Goldy is not even comparable tires outside of the fact they have a similarly rated UTQG and tread depth. There are several tires in the specific category that may share the same designation, but completely varying characteristics. One may have a hard compound/soft sidewall, and another may have a soft compound/hard sidewall. Such is the case with the OLD nero GT tires. Hard as diamonds compound, soft sidewall.

The PS4s is directly comparable to the PZ4, ContiSport, S007 and the somewhat distant V105's, in which they are all well within the handling window of the PS4 for almost 100 dollars less a set (if not more). And if you are going to pay that difference for the 20-30k miles, why not get something like a set of extremes. If you are measuring lap times and stopping distances then they are unquestionable better at this. The RE-71r has a measured dry 50-0 of 72.0 feet, the PS4s is 80.2 (tirerack tests-same car same size tire)

Two guys here that would be great test markers for this argument is Rusty and Firehawk. They will be able to say which will last longer (contisport vs ps4's) and how well they last in varying conditions and its overall longevity.