They show excellent dry grip mannerisms (although apparently I am mistaken on them being superior to the RE-11's, BTW -- maybe about equal -- the test numbers seem wildly different, even for the same tires [Neova] across tests... driver maybe?) -- is it because of their generally poorer wet performance?

Compare http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=118 vs. http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=197

EDIT: Aha, different cars. Okay, using the Dunlop's as the benchmark then, it would be down to RE-11's or BFG's, so I will defer to novelty and stick with the BFG's for now.

EDIT #2: Also see here for the newer RE-11A's vs the BFG's.... http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=172

OK. Sticking w BFG's then.


While the DW and S04 are pretty inexpensive, the PSS's are around or over $1200 for sizes I would want, and not in the same category -- I realize category judgments are somewhat arbitrary, but the price is prohibitive for me.

Also note, that (category aside), while personal feedback on preference matters to me (e.g., anecdotes, review survey data), I'm using track test results as my key metrics (dry slalom, dry stopping, g), and price/available sizes of interest to me as major determinants.

If you look at dry times on the detailed charts (ignoring more subjective opinion-based survey data, noise, comfort, and -- not at all subjective, but of lesser importance to me -- wet traction) the BFG's GF R's blow away the PSS's, DW's, and the S04's, and at a reasonable price point.

All three that you listed are shown to be better in the wet, but I drive gently in the rain, so my primary desire is ultimate dry grip, where all three are lacking.

With that in mind, as far as tire footprint, usually I'm less pleased when tires have smaller tread blocks and many water channels -- that's better for the rain, but that design tends to be slow on dry pavement by comparison.

Similarly, although UTQG's are somewhat arbitrarily determined, I find that when they are over 200, you can expect tires to last longer but not grip very well. As you creep over 300, we're talking a tough, rather than sticky, tire, generally.

If I regret the BFG's, I'll try something else next time, but none of the test data I've reviewed suggest it lags except in wet track conditions. I'll risk a bit of that for max dry grip.

These are new. Supposed to replace the RE-11s?

Tire Rack - Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R

maybe for the sport compacts ? the sizes are kinda tiny..

^^^ yeah. Not much for 19's :(

I wish the Dunlops came in a wider size for the 19's -- I'd almost definitely go for them.

Well they have stock sizes at least. 225/245/255/275 widths available in 19s.

I was really tempted to go with them on stock sizes, but I definitely prefer a wider rear tire. If they came in 285's I would go with them.

Basically it looks like Dunlops are overall excellent -- but narrower widths available than desired for me.

RE-11's excellent dry and wet, but not the absolute best on either.

BFG's, kinda suck on wet, but seem to fare generally better than the others on dry, come in sizes I want (and, curiously, have lower rolling resistance, so that means slightly better gas mileage) -- and I kind of wanted to try something new.

Compare and contrast here, BFG vs RE-11 vs Dunlop's: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/...y.jsp?ttid=172

They are within $6 from the RE-11's, so I think I'll try them out and see what I think. I kind of expect to like them more than the RE-11's except when it rains, but we'll see.

I went through this sort of back-and-forth between the Falken Azenis/RT-615 and the Kumho Ecstas/MX's on my old SC'd Celica -- sadly neither come in sizes I can use on the Z.

I considered Advan's too, but too expensive for sizes I want.

Thanks again, folks, for all the input! :tup:

The ZII in stock sizes feel awesome and I would go that route in your shoes. For me they lasted about 12 track days and ~2500 miles.
I heard the RS3 handled the heat better and I wanted to stuff more tire on the stock Rays so for my current set I went with the RS3 in 275f/305r. This combination is faster around the track but the car doesn't feel as sharp. I suspect that is a combination of the softer side walls and the wider tires but since it is faster I'll stick with it until I go to a square 18" setup.

ZII when new
http://www.the370z.com/members/dr_-a...dunlop-zii.jpg

^^^ One of the things that makes the BFG's sound especially promising is they are alleged to have pretty stiff sidewalls.

Commentary here https://www.facebook.com/notes/holli...09412972476008

I found some other commentary in that vein, which of course I cannot locate now...

EDIT: Hey, bonus -- the tires are also a few lbs lighter than the RE-11's :tup:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....=g-Force+Rival

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....=Potenza+RE-11

RE-71R in 255 front/ 275 rear!!! guinea pig for us! :stirthepot:

Hmm. I like the tread design -- maybe a bit more oriented towards dry grip.

Check out the crazy tread pattern on this one...

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....=Potenza+RE070

Argh... long story short, I've ended up going for the Advan Neova AD08 R's.

Now for the part I'm unsure of -- and yes, I should have checked this before ordering...

Should there be any issues with running 295/30/19 in rear, stock Rays, 25mm spacers on swift springs and about -2.38* rear camber.

I'm pretty sure that will work, but confirmation would be greatly appreciated :o

nice jordo :tup:

wish they were asymetric.

Same here -- and thanks :tup:

More than I had intended to spend, but it was looming in the background as a fourth option...

But, just to ease my overly neurotic nature: You are indeed confirming that these should definitely fit without rubbing, and without any issues given my setup:
295/30 in rear, stock 19 Rays, 25mm spacers on swift springs and about -2.38* rear camber ? :o

ahhh, no. i was only referring to the tires themselves.

Very little owner like Michelin Pilot Super Sports now.?