RE-960 versus Ecsta MX

[Superman]

I've narrowed my tire search to two tires:

Kumho Ecsta MX
Bridgestone Potenza RE960AS Pole Position

I was just set to pull the trigger on the Kumhos when I noticed the "survey results" on Tirerack.com suggests the Bridgestone out-performs the Kumho. I expect that with wet traction, but not with dry traction. Nevertheless, the 960 scores a "9.2" for dry traction and the MX scores a lesser "8.8". Should I trust these scores? Again, I was expecting the Kumho to out perform the Bridgestone on dry traction, so it was a surprise to see these scores.

Any comments or suggestions?

[azasadny]

I've had great service from my Bridgestone RE950's and was told by two tire shops in the area that the RE960's are even better. I will buy the RE960's next based upon the excellent experience I've had with these tires on my 911.

[toddu]

FWIW, I just had my car aligned and had the tires (Khumo's) spin balanced. The shop has a spin balancer that allows them to check the "roundness" of the wheel. My rear wheels where quite out of spec for that measurement. They said it's not uncommon with Khumo's as they are a cheaper tire. The source of my bit of shimmy in the back end at speeds > 75mph

[KTL]

You're comparing two tires from rather different categories. One is an all-season high performance rated tire and the other is a more true "max performance" tire. A more apples-apples comparison would be the RE050, RE-01R or the RE-750.

Given the tread designs of the two, i'd be willing to bet the 960 is the better all around tire. If you're looking for wet performance and longevity, then you should go with the 960. Bridgestone tires are some pretty darn good tires. Even those that are in the lesser-seeming categories like the RE-750 are good performers. A friend has these and they perform great in the wet or dry and wear like iron.

[JP911]

You didn't ask for more tire options, but if you're considering the Kumho MX then I would look at the Hankook RS2 Z212. I had the Bridgestone RE750s and really prefer the Hankooks.

[Superman]

Thanks. The Discount Tire guy said that if I'm interested in the Kumhos, then I might not be happy with the Hankooks. The Bridgestones were his suggestion, largely for wet traction. I suspect I would be happy with any of those but I do want max performance. I was certainly happy with my Bridgestone S-03's, but those puppies are $200 each.

[KTL]

Another tire that's got good wet traction abilities is the Firestone Wide Oval. The Z06 guys run these and have good things to say about them. You missed these by a month though. Last month Tire Rack had a $100 rebate on a set of four.

The MX and the Hanky Z212 are not the greatest wet performers from what friends have told me. So you'd definitely be better off with the 960- the tread alone gives that away. The follow-up to the S-03 is supposed to be the RE050 Pole Position but it doesn't seem to be performing like the old tried and true S-03. Seems like tires don't always improve. Some people still want for the old Bridgestone RE-71

[gunlover05]

+1 for the Hankook Rs2.....just got a set on my 85 carrera, rides smooth and quiet, sticky @ twisties, very good value.

[PatrickB]

Originally posted by gunlover05
+1 for the Hankook Rs2.....just got a set on my 85 carrera, rides smooth and quiet, sticky @ twisties, very good value.

+3 on the Hankook RS2's! Great dry AND wet tire! Superb on the track if you go!
Another one to consider is the Falken 451&452. Excellent in the wet/dry, but not so good on the track... No affiliation, but try Edge Racing for the cheapest price!!

[Superman]

Whoa! The Edge Racing site certainly has some good prices. I'm dashing to a meeting, but I'm going to be curious about those sixty dollar tires later this morning.