Tire Dressing

[dgage]

I currently have the Michelin PS AS3+ which came before the PS4AS. I also had the DWS before and I hated them. Excellent traction but the sidewalls are so soft, it felt like I was driving my car with jello instead of tires. Granted, that was on a 50 sidewall so there was more rubber there. On a car with low profiles like 30/35, maybe even 40, it might be less noticeable.

I was actually going to mention the same but didn’t want to continue going back and forth with Coatings making him look bad. But yes, on a sedan, the DWS06+ did not feel composed when driving spiritedly but I didn’t know how to categorize it until you mentioned soft sidewalls, which is exactly what I was experiencing too. Like you said, Coatings doesn’t have to deal with that in his go-fast Camaro.

[chefwong]

I know this is a detailing forum after all but I'm glad to see others understanding or at least are halfway mindful of tires.
We literally have 4 things that size of dinner plates between the road and the chassis.

[DFB]

I know this is a detailing forum after all but I'm glad to see others understanding or at least are halfway mindful of tires.
We literally have 4 things that size of dinner plates between the road and the chassis.

100% agreed!

When you consider how little of that tire is actually touching the road at any given moment, having high quality tires sooooo important.

I'm going to give an example here. Two Ford Falcon's, both made in 2008, both have a 4.0 Inline 6 with 261 - 278 hp (depending on fuel used), both RWD, both 6 speed autos. Both the same Sensation Blue paint in fact.

This G6E was the dealer service loan car fitted with 235/50/R17 "Dayton" tires. I hadn't heard of them either by the way.





This XR6 is my car, fitted with admittably slightly bigger/wider 245/40/R18 Michelin Pilot Sport 3 -





So, both somewhat powerful RWD cars with what I would describe as acceptable or adequate tire specifications.

Driving the car with the "Dayton DT30" tires on a damp to wet road was an interesting experience to say the least. Braking grip was horrible, necessitating the assistance from the ABS system. The traction was non-existent. In fact, exiting a damp roundabout turning right and only just applying throttle to drive the car out of the junction, the car cranked sideways violently needing a healthy amount of opposite lock before the DSC chimed in to save the day. Let me say that I DO NOT drive like a hoon on wet roads, I know where that can lead and treat wet roads accordingly. I say that to explain that even with me driving to the conditions, those tires were absolutely dangerous and not up to the task of controlling a heavy, powerful RWD car. Also, the electronic driver aids like traction control, stability control, ABS ect are only as good as the tires will allow.

Contrast that to the Michelin clad XR6, those tires inspire confidence. Sure, you can light the rears up with smoke billowing from the arches if you want..............she will pull a mean burnout, on a private road of course, but it can be driven extremely hard before the grip is exceeded, and even then it's understeer and not oversteer.

Where am I going with this? NEVER, EVER scrimp on tires!

[Desertnate]

I currently have the Michelin PS AS3+ which came before the PS4AS. I also had the DWS before and I hated them. Excellent traction but the sidewalls are so soft, it felt like I was driving my car with jello instead of tires. Granted, that was on a 50 sidewall so there was more rubber there. On a car with low profiles like 30/35, maybe even 40, it might be less noticeable.

Alignment, vehicle weight, and suspension set up have a lot to do with the feel as well, not to mention the load rating of the tire for a particular size. It's also good to remember sidewall aspect ratios are a ratio and vary based on the width of the tire.

I too ran the first Gen DWSs for a year or so and then moved to a setup with the DWS as my winter tires and a set of PSSs as the summers. This allowed me to run them back-to-back in the exact same size on the exact same car (Mk6 GTI). While the PSSs clearly had a big advantage in grip, the sidewalls in the PSSs actually felt softer than the DWS. The DWS had a harsh ride, but really fast turn in. The PSS provided a smoother ride and slightly slower turn in but grip levels were far higher.

I'm really a fan of the DWS generation of tires. I ran them on my GTI. My daughter has a set of DWS06+ on her second gen Mazda3, and her husband runs a set on his Charger Scat Pack. I can't speak for the Charger, but I helped drive the Mazda cross-country with those tires and found them to be a fantastic match for the car. They offered great grip and a firm, planted ride across snow, rain, sleet, twisty mountain roads, and high speed stretches of highway.

Once the PS4s on my BRZ wear out, I'm waffling between the PSAS4 or the DSW06+. The Conti's are a known quantity for me, but I'm really tempted by the Michelins. Our winters are so mild here I don't really need the foul weather edge the DSW06+ might have and can experiment with something that might be a bit grippier like the PSAS4s. I'll have another set of wheels/tires for the real fun.

Love nerding out about tires....

[Coatingsarecrack]

CC -Just to clarify, as I do see both mentioned.


The Conti DWS06 is a good all season tire
IMO, if the sizes are made in what you need, I would actually err on the PS4AS - all season.

But if one is running dedicated shoes for summer/winter, PS4S hands down is the rubber of choice.

Agreed on the PS4 summer only.

Just getting info from People who drive MY car (6th gen Camaro) on the all seasons and Tire Rack


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Coatingsarecrack]

You spend good money on the things that come between you and the earth. Your shoes, mattress and tires.

And again completely agree and believe what you all are saying with your experiences. Just like LSP’s, polishes, polishers and even tire dressings we all experience something different.

Not that I don’t trust y’all’s opinion but you all haven’t had to drive an all season tire in a 305 width. A 30 series side wall is a whole different animal.

Even my last tires on my mustang in a 295 was a lot more tame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Big Dave]

Let's change direction, slightly. I'm sure you have this same issue over there, probably worse than we do. People putting big, chunky, off road rubber on their pickups and 4X4s that almost never get driven off road. They don't grip the road well, so they're slower, braking isn't as effective, and they don't corner as well. But they sure do look tough.

I tried an All Terrain LT tyre last time, it was ok in the dry, but they were downright treacherous in the wet, and that was in the recommended size for my vehicle. They were so bad that I changed before they were even half worn.

I replaced them with the same brand though, Yokohama, still an all terrain, but without the LT construction, but went from 265 width to 285, but took the profile from 70 down to 65, so I have the same rolling diameter, and a less off road oriented tread pattern. More rubber on the road, so better handling, braking, and acceleration. Also quieter and more fuel efficient, I went from a 17mpg average up to 18mpg.

And to get back on topic, I still like 303 Aerospace Protectant on my tyres, I've tried a few others, and I didn't see much difference in longevity, but I really like how 303 looks, especially a day or two after application, when it's really been absorbed into the rubber.

Sent from my motorola edge 20 fusion using Tapatalk

[DFB]

Let's change direction, slightly. I'm sure you have this same issue over there, probably worse than we do. People putting big, chunky, off road rubber on their pickups and 4X4s that almost never get driven off road. They don't grip the road well, so they're slower, braking isn't as effective, and they don't corner as well. But they sure do look tough.

I tried an All Terrain LT tyre last time, it was ok in the dry, but they were downright treacherous in the wet, and that was in the recommended size for my vehicle. They were so bad that I changed before they were even half worn.

I replaced them with the same brand though, Yokohama, still an all terrain, but without the LT construction, but went from 265 width to 285, but took the profile from 70 down to 65, so I have the same rolling diameter, and a less off road oriented tread pattern. More rubber on the road, so better handling, braking, and acceleration. Also quieter and more fuel efficient, I went from a 17mpg average up to 18mpg.

And to get back on topic, I still like 303 Aerospace Protectant on my tyres, I've tried a few others, and I didn't see much difference in longevity, but I really like how 303 looks, especially a day or two after application, when it's really been absorbed into the rubber.

Sent from my motorola edge 20 fusion using Tapatalk

Not too mention how noisy they are, especially annoying for bystanders.

I like the way 303 looks on tires too, a very subtle look, enhanced but not too obvious.

[dgage]

Not too mention how noisy they are, especially annoying for bystanders.

What? WHAT? Sorry, I can’t hear you because I’m passing a Jeep. But yes, I can’t believe how loud some Jeeps and trucks are as I pass them…quickly so I don’t have to listen to their drone. I’m sure they rule off-road (if they go there) but I utilize my car’s capabilities to get past those vehicles in an expeditious manner. What surprises me is that those same vehicles with the limitations you mentioned often drive 75 or 80 mph (~128 kmh) or more.

[Desertnate]

Let's change direction, slightly. I'm sure you have this same issue over there, probably worse than we do. People putting big, chunky, off road rubber on their pickups and 4X4s that almost never get driven off road. They don't grip the road well, so they're slower, braking isn't as effective, and they don't corner as well. But they sure do look tough.

I tried an All Terrain LT tyre last time, it was ok in the dry, but they were downright treacherous in the wet, and that was in the recommended size for my vehicle. They were so bad that I changed before they were even half worn.

I replaced them with the same brand though, Yokohama, still an all terrain, but without the LT construction, but went from 265 width to 285, but took the profile from 70 down to 65, so I have the same rolling diameter, and a less off road oriented tread pattern. More rubber on the road, so better handling, braking, and acceleration. Also quieter and more fuel efficient, I went from a 17mpg average up to 18mpg.

And to get back on topic, I still like 303 Aerospace Protectant on my tyres, I've tried a few others, and I didn't see much difference in longevity, but I really like how 303 looks, especially a day or two after application, when it's really been absorbed into the rubber.

Sent from my motorola edge 20 fusion using Tapatalk

I"ve never understood how some people can handle driving with what is essentially a mudder tire on paved roads. Around here it is common with modified trucks despite the fact we're hours from any real off road terrain. Those tires howl like crazy at speed and really aren't safe for the road. Like you found, those big tread blocks are hard and don't grip the road very well. They may be great in soft dirt, but probably the worst possible choice for pavement...and insane in snow.

A couple vehicles ago, we ran a several sets for Firestone's Destination A/T on a Toyota Sequoia. It was a fantastic tire. Smooth on the highway with competent grip, fantastic in the rain, and had surprising levels of grip in snow. Looking back now, we probably could have gone with a highway all-season tire and done just as well and probably gotten even better tread life.

Increased width does offer a larger contact patch most of the time, but the downside is it increases the chances of hydroplaning and less grip in snow. it's all a delicate balance.