Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

my experience: nexen n3000: unbelievable grip cold or hot... and only about $130each traction rated at AA and also temp is rated at AA i think

another is khumo ecsta very similar.... $130 each fitted as well

these prices were for 215/45/17's

obviously 18's will be more pricey

As has been stated Falken RT615's are like the KU36's and Federal 595's

They are designed to be a high performance road tyre, not a semi slick.

Falken have two semi slicks, the RT215 and the RS-V04 which both have a lot more grip.

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As has been stated Falken RT615's are like the KU36's and Federal 595's

They are designed to be a high performance road tyre, not a semi slick.

Falken have two semi slicks, the RT215 and the RS-V04 which both have a lot more grip.

The RT615 replaces the RT215 IIRC... both are an S compound "semi"

The RT615 replaces the RT215 IIRC... both are an S compound "semi"

Not quite, the RT615 is really a good street tyre, the RT215 is a proper semi slick.

I know that Tempe Tyres still sell both, the RT 215 is a much softer compound with a lower tread wear rating and bigger tread blocks.

The RS-V04 is stickier again.

Not quite, the RT615 is really a good street tyre, the RT215 is a proper semi slick.

No, Ryan was right the first time. The RT615 supercedes the RT215.

I know that Tempe Tyres still sell both, the RT 215 is a much softer compound with a lower tread wear rating and bigger tread blocks.

The RT215s have a Treadwear of 180. The RT615s have a Treadwear of 200. It's not "much softer". And since the tyres have been discontinued for quite some time, the RT215s Tempe is selling will be old.

The RS-V04 is stickier again.

And also not road legal in Australia. I used to run a set, and it took me a few months to notice that they have no European nor US DOT markings on them.

They are also, to my knowledge, discontinued. Falken hasn't advertised them on their Japan nor US web sites for a few years.

No, Ryan was right the first time. The RT615 supercedes the RT215.

The RT215s have a Treadwear of 180. The RT615s have a Treadwear of 200. It's not "much softer". And since the tyres have been discontinued for quite some time, the RT215s Tempe is selling will be old.

And also not road legal in Australia. I used to run a set, and it took me a few months to notice that they have no European nor US DOT markings on them.

They are also, to my knowledge, discontinued. Falken hasn't advertised them on their Japan nor US web sites for a few years.

Thankyou.

I know the RT215 was seen to be a better weekend tyre than the RT625 but I am guessing the RT615 was made to be the way it is for a reason that suits Falken and possibly the market they are aiming it at.

The tyres I currently have on my car read: 225/40 R18 on the front, and 255/35 R18 on the rear.

The KU36 has the front size perfectly, but only 245/40 R18, or 265/35 R18 for the rear.

Once again, excuse my noobishness, I have been doing some reading but it is difficult to find decent information as most of what google finds are short tidbits of information given out by companies trying to sell to you.

Is there only one size of tyre that fits each size of rim, or can tyres be stretched/compressed or rolled differently so you have different sidewall height etc?

Also, if tyres can be stretched etc, it can be assumed that the readings on the tyres may not be the best for my rim anyway. Finding the width is any enough, but how do you work out what kind of sidewall you want?

Thanks again.

Edit: I just measured with a ruler, they're 10.5 inches on the back (265) and 9.5 (240) on the front. I think I'm answering my own questions here. So would my best option be the 245/40 R18 on the front and 265/35 R18 on the back? Thanks.

I ran the KU36 on my Supra, 245/40 front and 275/35 R18 rear. The rear gaurds needed slight lipping to clear them on my 9.5" rims - can't remember the offset. I was prety happy with them even on the track - they were surprisingly good actually.

You can't beat the KU36 for bang for buck as a combination street/track tyre. I also have them on my Legnum daily driver and they're wearing well on it.

Nice infos here but on a side note anyone has any recommendation if you factor in noise? I'm looking at getting new tyres for the missus' beelte. Been reading on the RE001 and apparently they're not very good on wet (dont know how the driver drives though). I'm thinking of KU31 or the Esta KU31? But which would have the best compromise for noise/wear(>30000km)/grip(wet/dry)? Looking at 215/45/17.

I'm currently having RE050A on mine and love it. The bit that turns me off is the price tag. But if all else fail, I might have to op for it.

Hi There!

This is Shanilee!

Im new in this site!

I hope I can have more friends here!

I'd consider these as well as the KU36s. Don't bother with RT615s; they cost more and I don't know if they perform noticably better.

Thanks!

Have a nice day to all!

Good Luck!...

Car Sale Hub

Boston Used Cars

Edited by shanilee
Nice infos here but on a side note anyone has any recommendation if you factor in noise? I'm looking at getting new tyres for the missus' beelte. Been reading on the RE001 and apparently they're not very good on wet (dont know how the driver drives though). I'm thinking of KU31 or the Esta KU31? But which would have the best compromise for noise/wear(>30000km)/grip(wet/dry)? Looking at 215/45/17.

I'm currently having RE050A on mine and love it. The bit that turns me off is the price tag. But if all else fail, I might have to op for it.

RE001 is an incredible tyre in the wet... Who told you they weren't? I bought them for that purpose.

I know the RT215 was seen to be a better weekend tyre than the RT625 but I am guessing the RT615 was made to be the way it is for a reason that suits Falken and possibly the market they are aiming it at.

I'm not sure what market they were aimed at.

My last 3 sets of tyres were:

RT215 (245 width rear) -> FK452 (285 width rear) -> RT615 (275 width rear).

The RT615s are comparatively rubbish as a street tyre. I don't think that there's that much more outright grip out of them than the FK452s (I haven't driven them hard for long enough to compare overheating points) but I remember how loose the car felt when I went from the RT215 to the FK452s, despite the noticably wider footprint.

To be fair, it could have been a specific batch of bad tyres though. A mate of mine got RT615s about the same time I did, and he replaced them recently. He said his new set are noticably grippier. I'm still reluctant to replace these RT615s with another set, given my current experiences, though.

I'm considering just putting KU36's on the front of my car for the time being, is this a bad idea?

Main reason is the front right tyre is pretty much unroadworthy, I'm low on funds and I'm headed to Deca soon. I figure I may as well shred the old tyres up at DECA and replace them shortly after.

Is there any complications I might encounter having high performance road tyres on the front and average tyres on the rear?

Thanks.

I'm considering just putting KU36's on the front of my car for the time being, is this a bad idea?

Main reason is the front right tyre is pretty much unroadworthy, I'm low on funds and I'm headed to Deca soon. I figure I may as well shred the old tyres up at DECA and replace them shortly after.

Is there any complications I might encounter having high performance road tyres on the front and average tyres on the rear?

Thanks.

oversteer

considering the rears will wear quicker anyway(most likely, based on most sports RWD car owners driving styles), it might work out okay. just do it IMO. better than having no turn in and having an accident due to bald front tyres.

oversteer

considering the rears will wear quicker anyway(most likely, based on most sports RWD car owners driving styles), it might work out okay. just do it IMO. better than having no turn in and having an accident due to bald front tyres.

Cheers mate, might actually combat the understeer I suffer from already!

  • 2 weeks later...
Nice infos here but on a side note anyone has any recommendation if you factor in noise? I'm looking at getting new tyres for the missus' beelte. Been reading on the RE001 and apparently they're not very good on wet (dont know how the driver drives though). I'm thinking of KU31 or the Esta KU31? But which would have the best compromise for noise/wear(>30000km)/grip(wet/dry)? Looking at 215/45/17.

I'm currently having RE050A on mine and love it. The bit that turns me off is the price tag. But if all else fail, I might have to op for it.

i got the ku31s on missus accord ..beautiful smooth & quiet tyre.. maybe a bit soft..but good

Nice infos here but on a side note anyone has any recommendation if you factor in noise? I'm looking at getting new tyres for the missus' beelte. Been reading on the RE001 and apparently they're not very good on wet (dont know how the driver drives though). I'm thinking of KU31 or the Esta KU31? But which would have the best compromise for noise/wear(>30000km)/grip(wet/dry)? Looking at 215/45/17.

I'm currently having RE050A on mine and love it. The bit that turns me off is the price tag. But if all else fail, I might have to op for it.

i got the ku31s on missus accord ..beautiful smooth & quiet tyre.. maybe a bit soft..but good

wouldnt bother with KU36's with just skidpan, NEED heat badly. the only other real bang for buck tyre i can think of is the Direzza Z1 Star Spec, but once again, really does better with heat (not as bad as the KU36 tho)

Edit: I just measured with a ruler, they're 10.5 inches on the back (265) and 9.5 (240) on the front. I think I'm answering my own questions here. So would my best option be the 245/40 R18 on the front and 265/35 R18 on the back? Thanks.

lip to lip, or bead seat to bead seat?

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

    • Yes that’s what im trying to decide. Should I do stock gtt box or enclosed or open pod. 
    • Also, I note OP is in Melbourne, which begs the question... are you aware of how illegal your car will be with a turbo, and intercooler and any sort of filter change? I don't know how you can get past the "2 intake mods" "rule" that seems to exist in Vic. Fully engineered might or might not get you there.
    • If you have a turbo... then the ducting holes I used to feed the pod are not available because your intercooler likely uses them. If you have an intercooler, your IAT's are going to be goverened by how good your intercooler setup is. I'm yet to really see anyone check IAT with a snorkel/boxed pod/proper CAI versus and unshielded pod. It would be interesting! But I suspect that the differences would not be so noticeable as if you were N/A as the intercooler is where the air is being cooled.. and out in front where the FMIC would be is a pretty good spot for it.. When I was turbo I pushed the stock GTT box as far as I could and made some pretty good power out of it, and noticed on the street I never made the same power/boost. Then I did a before and after run with a pod filter versus the box and picked up about 9PSI from the same boost duty cycle and about 50KW instantly. I never ran the stock box again, and recently removed it for my N/A setup. The box is restrictive to a degree - Even with the V8 setup I noticed I picked up power by removing the box completely, so punching holes from the bottom of it to get air from the passenger guard *helps* but the most effective one in my case was simply having the ducts, a pod, and no box around it. In my experience, *more* air was better than cold air. The air (with ducts) will be cooled off as you start moving, and especially if you start moving fast (a race track). It actually moves around quite a bit as you can see.  
    • Well you could certainly buy or build an enclosure for a pod in that corner of the bay. It is absolutely vital that there is a nice big opening to let cold air in to it from the front or underside, otherwise it will just pull air in around the edges from the bay, and if that air is hot, you gain nothing from enclosing the pod. There is lots of good evidence around (including on here, see posts by @Kinkstaah for example) showing that pods pulling hot air from the bay is only a problem when you're static or slow in traffic, and that as soon as you get the car up and moving the air being grabbed by the pod cools down. Although that will obviously vary from car to car, whether there is a flow of cold air to the pod or if it all has to come through the radiator area, etc etc. Obviously, the whole exercise requires as much thought as anything else does. Doing the lazy thing will often end up being the dumb thing. The stock GTT airbox has a cold air snorkel to feed it from over the radiator. Shows that Nissan were thinking. The GT airbox is upside down compared to the turbo one, yeah? Inlet at the bottom, AFM/exit on the lid? That might make it harder to route the turbo inlet pipe using the GT airbox than a turbo one. That would probably be the main reason I'd consider not using it, not that it is too small and restrictive. I'm looking at a photo of one now and the inlet opening seems nice and large. Also seems to have the same type of snorkel that the turbo one has. Maybe all that's required is to make a less restrictive snorkel/cold air inlet, perhaps by punching down through the guard like I did.
    • Also seen this as an option 
×
×
  • Create New...