Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K110 (Report)
05-26-2011, 07:54 PM
#77
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok tires are on so far the feel great ,,, only thing is the p---k at the shop scratched one of the rims ,,, he said it sliped, what a jerk off ,,, so now i'm thinking just to go with something different or have this repaired ....... who knows
05-26-2011, 09:23 PM
#78
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The stock tires on the 2010 sport coupe were the worst tires I have ever owned on any car in 20 years. feathered and bald at 10k miles. I got a 240/275 set of these and think its a huge upgrade. I was considering selling the coupe if I couldnt get a better ride out of it - Ill report back in a few months with more miles. The people who got 39k miles on the tire...wow...makes me wonder if my set was bad or something.
06-18-2011, 01:16 AM
#80
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I replaced the stock RE050A's with Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K110's. I got 20,300 miles out of the RE050A's.
My intent with this thread is to provide periodic updates on how the tires are doing as I put miles on them.
First thing to note is that I put 245/40-19's on the front and 275/35-19's on the back. Car came with 225/45-19's in the front and 245/40-19's in the back.
For those that don't already know, this is what is called a "+0" size. It is nearly the same rolling diameter as the stock tires so the speedometer is only off by 0.4 MPH. I personally could not tell a difference probably because the new tires have more tread and may actually have a larger diameter than the worn out ones they replaced.
I'm also using the stock rims. These larger tires fill out the wide factory wheel very well. Looks like the larger size belongs on these rims to me.
Also, there is absolutely no rubbing or clearance issues.
When compared to the stock Bridgestones the first thing I noticed was the reduced noise. They are quieter for sure.
The second thing I noticed is that they actually ride a little better even though they are wider. Sharp impacts feel like a road crew came out and rounded off the edges of all the bumps and potholes. I attribute this to the softer sidewall noted in comment #3 below.
Third thing is the turn-in. I realize these are not yet broken in but the turn-in reponse is much faster. Feels as though the steering ratio went up when it obviously did not, but thats how it feels. However, I've noticed a softer sidewall. The tire is definately not as "direct" as the RE050A. I noticed that when I tried a fast lane change type move that I could feel the rear end playing "catch up" after settling back into a lane. Once out of the car, I noticed the flexing sidewalls after I shook the rear end side to side. The RE050A's barely moved when I did this with them. I'll have to get used to the softer less direct feel, but keep that in mind if you like the immediate direct responses the RE050A's provide.
_______________________________
I've added some photos below. For larger sizes head over to my gallery "MyG37 - Renegar's Album: Hankook Ventus V12 Photos"
_______________________________
I will come back and provide updates to things such as dry grip, wet grip, noise over time, MPG changes, etc.
Drop a question and I'll be happy to answer regarding my experience with the Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K110's.
06-18-2011, 01:19 AM
#81
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question on Hankook tires
I replaced the stock RE050A's with Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K110's. I got 20,300 miles out of the RE050A's.
My intent with this thread is to provide periodic updates on how the tires are doing as I put miles on them.
First thing to note is that I put 245/40-19's on the front and 275/35-19's on the back. Car came with 225/45-19's in the front and 245/40-19's in the back.
For those that don't already know, this is what is called a "+0" size. It is nearly the same rolling diameter as the stock tires so the speedometer is only off by 0.4 MPH. I personally could not tell a difference probably because the new tires have more tread and may actually have a larger diameter than the worn out ones they replaced.
I'm also using the stock rims. These larger tires fill out the wide factory wheel very well. Looks like the larger size belongs on these rims to me.
Also, there is absolutely no rubbing or clearance issues.
When compared to the stock Bridgestones the first thing I noticed was the reduced noise. They are quieter for sure.
The second thing I noticed is that they actually ride a little better even though they are wider. Sharp impacts feel like a road crew came out and rounded off the edges of all the bumps and potholes. I attribute this to the softer sidewall noted in comment #3 below.
Third thing is the turn-in. I realize these are not yet broken in but the turn-in reponse is much faster. Feels as though the steering ratio went up when it obviously did not, but thats how it feels. However, I've noticed a softer sidewall. The tire is definately not as "direct" as the RE050A. I noticed that when I tried a fast lane change type move that I could feel the rear end playing "catch up" after settling back into a lane. Once out of the car, I noticed the flexing sidewalls after I shook the rear end side to side. The RE050A's barely moved when I did this with them. I'll have to get used to the softer less direct feel, but keep that in mind if you like the immediate direct responses the RE050A's provide.
_______________________________
I've added some photos below. For larger sizes head over to my gallery "MyG37 - Renegar's Album: Hankook Ventus V12 Photos"
_______________________________
I will come back and provide updates to things such as dry grip, wet grip, noise over time, MPG changes, etc.
Drop a question and I'll be happy to answer regarding my experience with the Hankook Ventus V12 Evo K110's.
06-18-2011, 03:47 PM
#82
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: San Diego/Lake Tahoe
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
i have these tires with 20,000 miles on them drope on eibachs. i like the smooth ride from it but it does break loose easy, and the side wall is real soft. other then that the tire tread seems to be holding up, and the ride feels smoother and quieter but maybe thats from the nitrogen in my tires.
06-24-2011, 12:16 AM
#84
For those of you putting nitrogen in your tires, stop wasting your money.
1 - the air we breathe is already 78% nitrogen. What are they adding? Another 20% and charging you for it?
2 - Consumer Reports did a 1 year test. Over that year the tire with the air in it lost 1.3 psi more than the tire with the nitrogen. Check your tire pressure once a month and you have nothing to worry about.
Not to get off topic, just a public service announcement.
When my wheels finally arrive, these will be going on in 255/35/20. If I don't like them, I will return to the old trusty Yokohama S Drives I have used in the past. The Stock RE050's have 7200 miles on them and I'll be lucky to get 3-5k more. What a crap freakin tire.
1 - the air we breathe is already 78% nitrogen. What are they adding? Another 20% and charging you for it?
2 - Consumer Reports did a 1 year test. Over that year the tire with the air in it lost 1.3 psi more than the tire with the nitrogen. Check your tire pressure once a month and you have nothing to worry about.
Not to get off topic, just a public service announcement.
When my wheels finally arrive, these will be going on in 255/35/20. If I don't like them, I will return to the old trusty Yokohama S Drives I have used in the past. The Stock RE050's have 7200 miles on them and I'll be lucky to get 3-5k more. What a crap freakin tire.
Last edited by MACS; 06-24-2011 at 12:21 AM.
07-21-2011, 11:42 AM
#86
You can run most any size that will fit your wheels and fender. However if you are trying to maintain a circumference/diameter that is closest to the stock size of the sport wheels, then 255/35/20 and 285/30/20 is the closest possible. Keeping the stock circumference diameter of your wheel and tire combo is more important to some than others who care mostly about looks rather than performance. It allows ABS and VDC systems to function properly. It keeps your speedometer more accurate. It keeps the suspension geometry closer to stock and makes the car handle as intended when set up to factory suspension specs. But since you changed wheel diameter and width, it still won't be exactly like stock. That's not necessarily bad.
07-22-2011, 06:18 PM
#89
OE pressures. They hold the same amount of air just in a different shape. Need at least door placard pressure to support vehicle weight properly, then you can increase from there (not exceeding the tires max psi) to tune handling and ride.
08-19-2011, 06:52 AM
#90
would 255/40-19 work up front instead of the 245/40-19 when paired with the 275/35-19 in the back? What are some downsides to having the 255/40 vs 245/40 up front?
When I did a tire compare, the 255/40 is actually closer to the original 225/45 tires than the 245/40 (only a 0.23% difference in speedometer reading). So why is it that people always go with 245/40?
When I did a tire compare, the 255/40 is actually closer to the original 225/45 tires than the 245/40 (only a 0.23% difference in speedometer reading). So why is it that people always go with 245/40?