Printable View
Quote from a friend........what do you think?
"Used Falken 452's and then Bridgestone RE001. The RE001's are heaps worse in the wet and no better in the dry! What a waste of money!"
I've always thought that was the case for RE001's due to their pricing!
Opinions.........experience.........stories....... .?
PS....not Bridgestone bashing here, just starting conversation :)
hmm.Ask him this. Made in Japan or Australia (states on sidewall)
Bridgestone RE001 is actually fairly priced and good performance and wear. Fantastic tyres.
Taken mine thru about 20,000ks over 2 years , a few wakefield events and alot of WSID runs. Still atleast 70+% tread remaining and fine in dry and wet
definately the Re001's are the most overated in terms of the hype behind them and how they actually perform. they are pretty shocking in the wet and dry grip isnt substantial for a "performance" tyre. i wont buy thee again especially for 230 a tyre
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevanbonic
Interesting. Wheels magazine ( or motor?) did a tyre review recently and the RE001 came out of top with a few other performance/road tyres. I stand by and agree with that review.
Yet again the question is - where are your RE001's made ?
I dont think re-001's are overrated at all.
I am doing more kilometers now than when I first bought them, yet they are still wearing very well, and the grip is great.
yeah i think it is abit overratted. but the wear rating on them is not bad i have 35k kms. still got a lil meat left in them. wet grip is quite terrible though ... dry grip isn't that bad tho. mine is made in japan
re001 best bang for buck i think.
ku36 is not bad if you can find them for cheap
im pretty sure mine are australian made Re001's, just a comparison between this set and a mates kumho's, his were like velcro on the road. mine are on nitrogen and i just had the pressure checked and topped up at bridgestone yesterday, they arent that bad its just that like i mentioned for the price and the hype they arent resiprocatingly outstanding.
i will add that they do in fact wear well, i have quite a bit of neg camber on the rears and there is only a 1mm difference between inner and outter tread over 5 months.
Surprise no mention of Euro tyre brands here..
Michelin PliotPrimacy series and ContiSportContact series just to name a few.
They are slightly better than same category Asian brands but not worth doubling of price
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevanbonic
Thats the thing , there is APPARENTLY a difference between locally made and Japanese made bridgestone RE001's. That is , in materials used.
The actual mould is exactly the same tho.
so, i can assume that the material engineer working @ bridgestone au is being a smartarse and insisted the compound should be reformulated to suit the so called "australian road condition" and somehow succeded in convincing/wow'd his boss with a 100 page compound formulation proposal.:pQuote:
Originally Posted by bennjamin
I have liked my set of RE001s. 205/55R16 on a DC5R. Generally decent wear and okay grip, although they are the worst of all the tyres I have used and only adequate for street use. I don't like to skimp too much on tyres.
For the price and the level and wear and performance they provide I would happily buy them again though.
Other tyres I have used are Bridgestone RE030, S03, RE01R, RE55s, Advan AD07, Hoosier R6 and they all lived up to their reputation and I wouldn't call any of them over-rated Of them the RE55s probably had the best ratio of track performance and longevity to cost.
wheels mag or (motor) are all very bias when it come to reviews for anything i was reading one of the above mags and they said that the new civic type r is all talk no action.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennjamin
So I take it Japanese > Aust made Adrenalins?Quote:
Originally Posted by bennjamin
where can u get jap made andrenalins?
> so, i can assume that the material engineer working @ bridgestone au is being a smartarse and insisted the compound should be reformulated to suit the so called "australian road condition"
Not sure if there is any sarcasm here.
Goodyear F1's had a similar case not too long ago.
The Euro version were a silica compound rubber and had RAVE reviews.
The local version didn't have the silica compound technology and caused a lot of people to question the original reviews.
> Used Falken 452's and then Bridgestone RE001.
Really, RE-001's beaten by falken 452's?
On what planet?
Advan AD07 :thumbsup::thumbsup: the price :thumbdwn::thumbdwn:
Nick.
So does anyone actually know what the real differences are between the Jap and Aust made RE001's?
But yes, the RE001's are somewhat overrated.
They're absolutely shite in the wet.
Having said that, they're somewhat decent when dry, treadwear is pretty good and not too expensive either.
im surprised by the negative comments re their performance in de wet...they stuck like glue when it was absolutely pouring and i was amazed by how much grip they had..close to dry conditions..best tyres ive used so far...btw they r de jap ones.
this is the point i have made initially , and others have over time.Quote:
Originally Posted by racerwannabe
There must be a compound difference between locally made RE001's and japanese made RE001's.
Yet again , i cannot falter my RE001's. Great tyre. NFI why people harp on about wet cornering ability because all other road tyres are the same if not worse in the wet from my experience
Quote:
Originally Posted by blabla
While maybe true , their "tests" dont lie and dont show any bias.
The RE001 came out on top on all tests bar the wet cornering test i think -
But isn't that true compared to an EK9, EP3R or FD2R? And isn't that true when you put the FN2R against the WRX, Megane, XR5 and 3 MPS?Quote:
Originally Posted by blabla
Mine are Australian-made RE001, and they are good. You have to remember that in the wet, road conditions make a big difference, sometimes more than the tyre itself. With my RE001, there is a section of epping road that is rough and in my opinion a bit oily because of the daily traffic jams. When there, I have no traction in 2nd gear part throttle. Yet in the Olympic Park area, the road is a bit smoother, but not oily and I have traction in 2nd gear full throttle and even 1st gear part throttle.
FALKEN RT615 is over-rated. Not enough track grip, and less grip in the wet than a semi-slick on the road.
Do not buy. Buy real semi-slicks instead. TOYO R888 is a great semi-slick on the road, warms up quickly so you don't feel like you're driving on ice. Also great in the wet believe it or not.
When buying a daily driver I bought a renault clio 197 instead of the civic type R... it's too slow for what it's supposed to be and all that money you pay!Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronng
not a fan of re001's.....theyre "fail point" is too sudden. great for the daily driver but not for the daily driver that thinks every road is the track.
lol
ive used toyo t1r and for the price theyre much better.
same! i have the jap ones from Tyre Factory. They are great in the wet, and excellent in the dry.Quote:
Originally Posted by racerwannabe
not the best tyre around, but for $175 for 205/50/15 it is good value.
only downpoint is they squeel alot when pushed to the limit whereas the kuhmos dont.
T1R is mad in small sizes (not so good in GTR sizes)
The Falken RT615 isn't a "semi-slick" or even a competitor for the Toyo R888. One is a high performance summer tyre and the other is a street legal R-compound. Of course a street tyre is going to have less grip, even in the wet, than a R-compound.Quote:
Originally Posted by STiR
Besides; R888 on the public road is nonsensical. There's tyres out there offering 90% of the performance and 500%+ of the durability.
Good News for everyone about the shitty australian made re001s.
Bridgestone are closing up their tyre factories in SA and NZ.
http://www.bridgestone.com.au/media/articles/p1125.aspx
:)
If there were, i wouldn't use semi slicks on the road. If there were tyres offering 90% performance i'm sure there wouldn't be much place for semi slicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by string
I've bought most of the highest performance road tyres previously and they do not have anywhere near the grip of semi slicks. The RT615 isn't even as good as the old RT215.
A street tyre probably will probably overheat long before a race-oriented tyre, not that it's relevent to street performance. Besides; there is no shortage of people willing to pay 100%+ more for 10% more performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by STiR
Do you have any empirical data to quantify "not [] anywhere near"? A minor 10% increase in maximum lateral tyre force could translate to a profound increase in perceived "grip".Quote:
Originally Posted by STiR
RE001s are good enough for straight 2nd outright @ an ozhonda trackday meet compared to semis...
http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/re...7/2008.WAKE.S2
Whats the issue? LOL...The RE001s are good for what they are. Happy with them and will I get them again, yeah, probably will - Although I do want to try the KU36
'Anywhere near' my question to you is does that sound like i have empirical data?Quote:
Originally Posted by string
Lap times are a good indicator. If the car coming 2nd at ozhonda meet was on road tyres that's great, but it's safe to say if it was on semi slicks (assuming suspension is set up to run semis) then it would be quicker, more consistent and generally longer lasting on the track.
Back to the point. Question is what is the most overrated tyre and I'd have to say the AZENIS range based on my personal experience with both RT215 and RT615. Buy a real road tyre or a real track tyre instead.
can anyone elborate on the falken 452's??? how do they perform against the RE-001 or the AD07's?
What does everyone think about...
Bridgestone G3's or Kumho kh11 or KU31's or Toyo T1s
I have used the AD07 and the RE001 and the RE001 is not in the same league as the Advan in terms of performance. The AD07 are a lot louder though. I very much doubt that the Falken 452 will perform any where near as well as either of the other tyres since the AD07 is considered by most to be a much better performing tyre than Falken's flagship RT615.Quote:
Originally Posted by quang
If you want performance get the AD07 (or AD08 it's successor), if you want longevity then get the Falken. If you want a balance of the two then get the RE001.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quang
Cant really compare Falken 452's and AD07's now......its like comparing a upspec Hyundai with a Merc or BMW......no in the same league!Quote:
Originally Posted by chargeR
Having driven Falkens and RE001 equipped cars (on same type of car) id sat they're comparable. Price wise Falken wins hands down.....just google comparisons :)
I had AD07's on my other cars and they were awesome!
Ive got G3's on my car, great tyres, had them 4 years/30000km, still got tread, good in the dry and are great in the wet. I believe they are now discontinued and are superseded by RE001.Quote:
Originally Posted by TONTON
I had re050a on my eg 215/45r17.very grippy and quiet usually used on high end luxury mercs and bmw..350 rip off lol lucky I get em 99each lol.. Re001 over rated