Help me choose between 2 tires: Hankook vs. Falken
- Thread starter MM BOOST
- Start date
Nliiitend1
Member
While we're on the subject of mounting/balancing, I'd like to take the time to recommend you fork over the extra $$ to have them "Road Force Balanced." It can make a huge difference on large diameter, low-profile wheel/tire combos like the MS3 has.
Nliiitend1
Member
"Road Force Balancing" is a process where the mounted wheel/tire is pressed and rolled against a rotating drum (which simulates the wheel/tire rolling down the road under load). Since tires (and wheels for that matter) and never really perfectly round, the tire's orientation about the wheel can produce an oblong shaped wheel/tire combo. Road force balancing identifies these irregularities and helps the technician to orient the tire on the wheel in the optimal position for "roundness." The process can also greatly reduce the number of weights that must be used to get a good balance.
You can read more about it here:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=40
You can read more about it here:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=40
Actually, Road Force Balancing is not intended to reduce the number of weights on the wheel. In fact, it may actually result in more weights being required. The purpose of RFB is to reduce vibrations that are not caused by mass balance. Those vibrations result from two sources, which the RFB machine measures and the technician may try to resolve by rotating the tire on the wheel and / or swapping tires around on different wheels. The two sources are out of round tires and / or wheels plus variable spring forces generated by the tire.
This all sounds great, but there are two big issues. First, new tires and wheels are made to very precise tolerances, thus making this extra effort usually unnecessary. And second, it is a well known fact that very few technicians will actually dismount and remount a tire based on the RFB results. Therefore, the RFB typically ends up becoming a Road Force Check. Which means you pay more, but don't end up with any significant advantage for your money. Unless you are trying to troubleshoot an actual vibration problem, I would suggest saving your money on the Road Force Balance.
This all sounds great, but there are two big issues. First, new tires and wheels are made to very precise tolerances, thus making this extra effort usually unnecessary. And second, it is a well known fact that very few technicians will actually dismount and remount a tire based on the RFB results. Therefore, the RFB typically ends up becoming a Road Force Check. Which means you pay more, but don't end up with any significant advantage for your money. Unless you are trying to troubleshoot an actual vibration problem, I would suggest saving your money on the Road Force Balance.
Nliiitend1
Member
I never said that was what it was intended for...I simply said that it can often reduce the number of weights needed.
I don't know what kind of hack shops you're familiar with, but the place I get all my tires mounted and balanced at definitely does it right. I watch them do it...and anyone who thinks that tires are really manufactured to such "tight tolerances" is fooling themselves.
The main purpose of Road Force Balancing is to optimize the shape of the wheel/tire assembly to be as round as possible under load, and I, for one, think it makes a noticeable difference on large diameter combos that have low profile tires. I've been having it done ever since I was having an issue with a particular set of tires (was getting an annoying vibration) that balanced on a traditional machine just fine (static and dynamic balance were nearly spot on), but after taking them to another shop that had Road Force capabilities, found 2 of the tires to have some significant radial run-out. After having them properly Road Force balanced, it was smooth sailing.
Take it for what it's worth.
Have you actually seen them dismount and remount the tires? The "hacks" around here will not remount a tire unless there is a significant issue found.
Anyway, it sounds like you did exactly what I suggested... you had a vibration problem and you used RFB to solve the problem. Good for you... but still not a reason to waste money on it every time you buy tires.
And I know that good brands of tires are manufactured to tight tolerances - I am not fooling myself at all. I have been refusing to even have my tires balanced at all for the last 20 years. Only when I got my Mazda with the stupid TPMS sensors has balancing been required. Oh - by the way, I balanced those myself...
Anyway, it sounds like you did exactly what I suggested... you had a vibration problem and you used RFB to solve the problem. Good for you... but still not a reason to waste money on it every time you buy tires.
And I know that good brands of tires are manufactured to tight tolerances - I am not fooling myself at all. I have been refusing to even have my tires balanced at all for the last 20 years. Only when I got my Mazda with the stupid TPMS sensors has balancing been required. Oh - by the way, I balanced those myself...
Last edited:
Nliiitend1
Member
Yes, I've seen them dismount and remount the tires EVERY TIME I'VE HAD IT DONE. What do the techs around there consider "significant"? 20 lbs road force variation? 15 lbs road force variation? Do you even know?
My time is worth enough that the extra ~$10 a tire my shop charges for RFB is worth it the FIRST time so that I don't have to waste any more of my time taking it back and having it done all over again and paying extra the second time to get it done right.
Is it possible for a tech to orient the tire in such a way initially that it won't need to be dismounted and remounted to get the road force variation down to a number that most people would consider "good enough"? Absolutely. But's it's worth the ~$40 to me to know before I leave the place that I'm not going to have to bring it back to have it fixed, and to know my mounted wheels/tires have ~6 lbs of road force variation on the first harmonic.
And yes, some tire manufacturers probably have better quality control than others and need this type of balancing less often, but would you rather spend $800+ for a set of Bridgestones that don't need an extra ~$40 worth of balancing (for a set of 4), or spend ~$600 for a set of (comparably performing) Kumhos or Hankooks that do? (dunno) I know what I'd rather do...
My time is worth enough that the extra ~$10 a tire my shop charges for RFB is worth it the FIRST time so that I don't have to waste any more of my time taking it back and having it done all over again and paying extra the second time to get it done right.
Is it possible for a tech to orient the tire in such a way initially that it won't need to be dismounted and remounted to get the road force variation down to a number that most people would consider "good enough"? Absolutely. But's it's worth the ~$40 to me to know before I leave the place that I'm not going to have to bring it back to have it fixed, and to know my mounted wheels/tires have ~6 lbs of road force variation on the first harmonic.
And yes, some tire manufacturers probably have better quality control than others and need this type of balancing less often, but would you rather spend $800+ for a set of Bridgestones that don't need an extra ~$40 worth of balancing (for a set of 4), or spend ~$600 for a set of (comparably performing) Kumhos or Hankooks that do? (dunno) I know what I'd rather do...
goodness what an argument lol. I will bring this up when I go to the shop this week. BTW, my tires come in on Wednesday
me too! i went with the hankook, btw. i'm attracted to the tread life.
Installed my Hankook Ventus v12 evo K110 last Tuesday and love them. I will never buy the Bridgestone’s again. Most of my driving is highway so the “little in traction” I am giving up is well worth the $100 bucks per tire I am saving. Though only a week and time will tell, but I see no reason to purchase other tire. The Speed handles well with them, is a quieter ride and they look good – this was a no brainer for me, but I’m not running on the track either. Good bang for your buck!
I'm jealous...got my Hankooks last week, but they're sitting in my garage at the moment while I try to kill off the little amount of tread left on my current tires. I'm slippin' and slidin' in the rain though, so it's probably time to switch over. Especially since current tires are now loud as hell. Can't wait for the quieter ride on the Hankooks, I've really had it with loud, low tread-life tires. If I really want to track I'll buy dedicated track tires and wheels.
I've had the V12's for 10,000 miles and they are great. Someone in this thread said they won't grip as well as the stockers but they are wrong. The V12's out perform the stockers in every aspect. They have much more straight line grip when accelerating which is most important to the average driver. You get on it, you don't want to spin. They are very quiet and the ride is great. They do have more sidewall flex but the tire does not break loose. I have not had them break loose yet. I run 35 psi in the front and 40 in the rear which has helped reduced said flex. This is the tire most are getting after the stocker wear out.
Just a preview shot, I have a few more things to do.
These Falken's are Falken awesome
They handle great, super quiet and they look badass. Handling is unbelievable, but of course I have them coupled with BC coils and progress rear sway with awr endlinks. I am severely happy with the car.
