Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If you've got a few spare hours ;-) look through the "Tyres youd use" sticky - no reviews but on page 19 "PSI GTSII" bought some and posted pix. A number of posts have price info. Maybe PM PSI GTSII?

AFAIK the only other similar tyres are the Falken RT-615s, which were a little cheaper when i priced them in August last year.

The Federals aren't a true R rated 'semi', and as said above they are similar to the Falken RT615 with a treadware of approx 200, not 50-60 like the soft R semis slicks.

Motor magazine did a tyre test on these sometime last year in a 235/45-17 size. They said they had a RRP of $200 but that was wrong.

Edited by VHR32

They are definitely a good bang for buck tyre.

Federal are soon to restructure their labelling. The SS595 will be 595. A new entry will be the 595EVO, I am told they will be a touch softer than the 595's. Then there's the semi slick 595RS.

The current SS595's are damn cheap, nothing comes close in performance for the price point. i.e 235/45/17 ~$160-180 per corner. :D

Motor magazine did the test on the SS595's. Not the semi slicks.

I'm trying tp find out if a 245/40/17 on 8" +35 rim will fit under the front guards of a gtst. I don't really like the idea of playing with different aspect/size tyres. All though it would be nice to throw a set of 595RS 255/40/17 on rear 8" rims, they apparently fit 8" rims ok.

SLY33... Have you tried that exhaust manifold yet? :rofl:

http://www.federaltire.com/en/html/product...?DB=motosports#

Ok, 595RS is called a semi slick but it isnt like all the other semi slicks (RE55, A048, DZ02G etc) they have a much harder treadwear of 180 unlike the others.

I'm trying tp find out if a 245/40/17 on 8" +35 rim will fit under the front guards of a gtst. I don't really like the idea of playing with different aspect/size tyres. All though it would be nice to throw a set of 595RS 255/40/17 on rear 8" rims, they apparently fit 8" rims ok.

I wouldn't put a 255/40 on an 8" rim, absolute maximum of 245, preferably 235 or 225 though. 255/40 is nice on a 9" rim.

And I think 245/40R17 on 17x8+35 will fit. It should just clear the upright (I've had 235/40R18 on 18x8 +38 before) and there should be a decent amount of clearance to the guard, will be fine if they're lipped.

Edited by salad

Haha, yeah, look at the tread width, 232mm. Should be a 235!

It is a bit weird though as the Federal SS595 is a very wide tyre. 235/40R18 sits pretty much flush with the rim on a 18x9.

EDIT, just saw section width of 260mm. I spose I have seen 265/35R18 on 18x8, but that was very bulged out.

Thinking back a bit more, I've had 255/40 on a 17x8, and it was the SS595. Was quite bulgy but went on OK.

Edited by salad

Ok I've used these tyres. (Yes the RS version)

595rs.jpg

They are not a true semi-comp in the same catagory as tyres like the RE55, DG02Z, A048, R888 etc.

They are more in the came class as the Falken RT615's.

If you look at the UTQG rating the true R comps are all around the 40-60 mark where as these tyres I think are rated at 180 (615's are 200).

Having said that they were a damn nice tyre to use and I won the Autocross/Motokhana event at DECA in a 100% stock EVO 8MR with those tyres beating modified GT-R's using RE55's etc.

They will last 3-4 times longer than a real R comp but at the track they will be 3-5s per lap slower depending on the track.

These tyres are classed as a street tyre in the SAU VIC club championship - not an R comp tyre.

The 595SS versions are comparable to something like the Hankook 104's.

ss595.jpg

I ran these tyres last night around Barbagello Raceway, and I must admit I was very impressed. Managed to keep 600rwhp on the track, and then I was able to drive them home :nyaanyaa:

If your car isn't a dedicated track car then these seem like a very resonable option.

As another alternative, I am using the Hankook RS2 which is also a semi tyre. The price is alright and the dry grip is excellent but still slightly behind the RT615. When cruising other forums, its hard to find anything negative about the RS2s, especially on EvoM, NASIOC etc.

SLY33... Have you tried that exhaust manifold yet? :(

Hey Cubes, lol, yes the manifold!

As it happens im flying back into Aus on the Sun 25th this month, and the car goes into workshop the very next day. Im only down for a week, so depending on how quick the shop is, i will hopefully get it dynoed by the end of that week. Ill be sure to post up results when its done, hopefully i'll see a bit more than the 281rwkw previously.

cheers

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...