Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i hit sandown for the first time on ku's the other day. times wernt too bad. the tyres seem to be getter better, 3-4 track days in they are

much better than the first couple, i have turn in grip now, ya. still feel em moving around after a couple of laps tho. which the 595rs dont.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Ty...50#entry5065250

Has anyone got any feedback on best camber to for use the KU36 on a R32 GTR

they won't need as much camber as stickier dedicated track tyres. and with their softer construction, they will be less sensitive to geometry changes as well. ie you won't get much benefit for running an extra degree. really, just good performance road car settings will be fine.

good price at this point in time

my rears lasted 6 months...i wonder why! :happy:

my fronts are still going but i am looking to replace shortly

only unsure comment i have about them is i have vibration in the fronts.

from what i can see it looks like every second inner block has worn a little lower than others and this is the vibration i am feeling.

not sure on the camber setup...but advised the mech for a street setup so dont believe it would be too aggressive

  • 2 weeks later...
I'm just after a road tyre replacement. I might do like 1 track day a year.

Are the Kumho KU36 suitable for this or are there cheaper tyres that will suit a daily driver?

The price point on the Kumho's seem reasonable.

I'm in the same boat mate. I'm pretty keen on trying the Ku36, but wondering if the Ku31 would be better suited to my application, and I've been quoted the same price for both. Anyone have any thoughts?

I paid $170 each for 235 45 17's.

Took the car for a squirt through the spur and really enjoyed the grip, handles like its on rails now compared to the old crappy tyres. Need to run 38 to 40 psi to feel right and stop the squirmy feeling. Very low noise levels and minimal tramming.

I found them good in the wet, although they were brand new so will only be better now they are scrubbed in.

Have to see how long they last now.

Option1Garage do them for a reasonable price delivered, but if you're in Sydney hit up Tempe tyres!

I've been running the XS KU36 for around 6 months now, they are an excellant tyre for their price. I do agree, they need to be warm before they're able to perform.

They dont have to be the KU36, KU31 will be ok if cheaper. They are only for pottering around on the street but if you can pm me the details for 2 x 265/40/17s (not sure if that size is available, maybe 255/40/17) and 2 x 245/40/17s or there abouts

Depending on price may end up going Federal simply because they have a 265 tyre (sorry OT)

OTR on Westal Rd in Clayton sell & fit them for pretty much the same price compared to getting them freighted from option1 garage in Queensland. They can also get heaps of other tyres and very reasonable prices so they are definitely worth a look if you are in Melbourne.

My experience is based on the 245/45/17's on my RB25 r32 with around 220rwkw.

I am about 5,000km into a set of KU36's that replaced some Bridgestone RE01-R's. The Bridgestone's definitely had better turn in due to stiffer sidewalls and didn't move around as much as the KU36's do, but as far as putting the power down in a straight line the KU36's are doing a better job (not sure if this is because RE01-R's were old and possibly hardened up after a few heat cycles). As far as a track tire, the grip of the KU36's fall off alot quicker when they get hot (and need to run 38 to 40psi to stop them squirming too much), probably only good for 2 to 3 laps tops, but for a daily driven car that has to soak up some bumps with the occasional spirited drive & track day in mind then I would highly recommend them.

They work fine in the wet once the shine is scrubbed off them and don't seem to wearing overly quickly. I would be comparing the KU36's to something like Adrenalin's, not semi's. Their construction is closer to a road tyre but the compound seems to be closer in softness to a semi.

Just my 2 cents.

I've been running KU-31's on my car for the last 3 years or so, and think they're great.

Reading the positive reviews you all seem to be giving the KU-36, as they're similar money to the -31, I'm considering changing to them at my next tyre change.

My concern is the tyre wear. Anyone have any experience on how the life of these, compare to the KU-31?

They dont have to be the KU36, KU31 will be ok if cheaper. They are only for pottering around on the street but if you can pm me the details for 2 x 265/40/17s (not sure if that size is available, maybe 255/40/17) and 2 x 245/40/17s or there abouts

Depending on price may end up going Federal simply because they have a 265 tyre (sorry OT)

Traction Tyres did a great price on them for me Roy... Shane will look after ya if you mention you're a Vic member :) By the time you buy them cheap for somewhere else like Option1 or OTR and get them fitted/balance, i think TT came out a shade cheaper... or maybe $10 more expensive. Much easier to deal all with them and support a supporter :)

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



  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...