DeamonG37s

they wont be warrented because their a directional tire and staggered fitment. So u cant rotate them. I know the coupe is not sure about the sedan.

soundmike

iTrader: (6)

PSS is covered for 15k miles. 30k if a square set-up.

The key is to have the sheet marked by a tire shop to show the scheduled rotations, otherwise you have nothing to show Michelin, should a warranty claim be needed.

jddssc121

Yes, they are "better".

Are they worth the extra cash to you? Only you can decide that

If you want to compromise, the Michelin PS A/S Plus is a FANTASTIC All Season tire. They'll last way longer and give amazing performance for an all season tire.

MACS

iTrader: (3)

IF you're running the stock setup. I have after market wheels... all the same size and offset so I can rotate. I just do not understand the whole "staggered" fitment craze. Why would I want less tire up front? More rubber on the road, better grip, yes?

I understand going a little lighter, but you can go lighter and still get fat tires up front with Rays/Volk and a few others, too, and stay the same size/offset to rotate... which saves tire wear... which saves MONEY.

Can anyone explain to me why you would want a staggered setup, other than weight reduction??

soundmike

iTrader: (6)

The discussion can get rather technical and lengthy. But to help summarize certain aspects of it...

Wider rear tires help provide more grip to the rear, which tends to break loose. Properly set-up, it also provides more lateral grip -- however, this only works if the rear track is actually narrower than the front.

Most people will do the flush set-up, which pushes the rear track to the same width as the front, or more, which does more harm than good when it comes to performance. Fortunately, people who do this are going strictly for looks and will never push the car to the point that this difference is felt behind the wheel.

The differences in widths help with understeer/oversteer corrections.

understeer / oversteer corrections

Personally, i run a square set-up as well, and make the necessary corrections via tire pressure, sway and coil/damper adjustments. I find this to be a better way to go, personally, on the track. And it makes it a very practical way to go for daily driving as well.

soundmike

iTrader: (6)

Just to add, weight reduction is likely not a reason for it. True, the fronts may be lighter, but on our cars the rears are what need that reduction the most as they're the drive wheels. But in this day and age of going 20s and going as wide on tires as possible, that concept is lost.

MACS

iTrader: (3)

Thanks for the clarification. My car is a daily driver, but I do occasionally put her through her paces, so to speak.

I went with 20x9 +32 all around, but it IS more for looks because the wheels I went with actually added weight. (I plan to fix that eventually)

With the wheels/coils I have the car most certainly handles better than it did stock.

ashmostro

iTrader: (3)

It actually doesn't matter if the front or rear wheels are being driven... If you lighten any axle, the reduced inertia will improve acceleration because all axles have to spin as the vehicle moves.

soundmike

iTrader: (6)

It does since you're literally turning a wheel. It's akin to torque-braking. Put on the brakes and it'll take more power to get that wheel to move.

Of course, once all wheels are moving, the lighter weight is felt more in terms of braking, suspension and steering performance.

ashmostro

iTrader: (3)

It takes the same effort to move the non drive axle actually.

I agree to disagree on this one

ashmostro

iTrader: (3)

Think of it this way... resistance to motion at the front axle well essentially add inertia to the whole vehicle which will be felt at the drive axle. It's just transferred.

soundmike

iTrader: (6)

Note, i never said it won't help having lighter fronts.

ashmostro

iTrader: (3)

Lol. Uh huh. ;P